[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 115 (Monday, July 14, 2008)]
[House]
[Pages H6445-H6446]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
Senate bill (S. 231) to authorize the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice
Assistance Grant Program at fiscal year 2006 levels through 2012.
The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
The text of the Senate bill is as follows:
S. 231
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF GRANTS.
Section 508 of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and
Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3758) is amended by
striking ``for fiscal year 2006'' through the period and
inserting ``for each of the fiscal years 2006 through
2012.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Schiff) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
General Leave
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant, or Byrne/JAG Program, is
named after Edward Byrne, a New York City police officer killed by a
violent drug gang 20 years ago.
The Byrne/JAG Program is the only source of Federal funding for
multi-jurisdictional efforts to prevent and fight crime. The funding is
used by States and local governments to support a broad range of
activities to prevent and control crime and to improve the criminal
justice system.
Specific uses include law enforcement, prosecution, and court
programs; crime prevention and education programs; community-based
programs; drug treatment, planning, and evaluation efforts; and crime
victim and witness programs.
Simply put, this program enables States to employ all aspects of
fighting crime, rather than simply using the so-called ``get tough''
approach limited to making more arrests and making sentences longer.
Nationwide, the program has resulted in major innovations in crime
control, including drug courts, gang prevention strategies, and
prisoner reentry programs, all of which provide proven and highly
effective crime prevention.
In turn, these innovations demonstrate that the best crime policy
incorporates programs that help at-risk youth avoid criminal behavior
and that prepare prisoners for reentry into society so they have
meaningful and productive alternatives to crime when they return home.
S. 231 would simply reauthorize the Byrne/JAG Program at its current
funding level, which is $1.095 billion, through 2012. The House passed
substantially identical legislation by voice vote last month. Passing
the Senate version will enable us to send this important bill to the
President.
I urge my colleagues to support this measure.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise in support of S. 231, a bill to reauthorize the Edward Byrne
Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program through fiscal year 2012.
This bill continues to fund the Department of Justice Byrne/JAG Grant
Program at the fiscal year 2006 level. The House passed companion
legislation, H.R. 3546, just a few weeks ago.
The Byrne/JAG Program provides assistance to State and local law
enforcement officials. These grants support a wide range of law
enforcement activities to prevent and control crime and improve the
criminal justice system. Byrne/JAG grants may be used to help pay for
personnel, overtime, or equipment. Funds are also used for statewide
initiatives, technical assistance, and training.
In June the FBI released its 2007 Unified Crime Report detailing the
statistics for violent crime nationwide. The rate for violent crimes,
including robbery, sexual assault, and murder, decreased nationally.
However, the report also showed that the rate of violent crime
increased in some communities across the country.
Our Nation's law enforcement officials are dedicated to preventing
crime and keeping our communities safe, and their efforts should be
applauded. Congress plays an important role in supporting State and
local law enforcement officials by continuing to reauthorize programs
like this at appropriate levels.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. LOEBSACK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of
reauthorization of the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant
program. As a cosponsor of the House version of this bill, I am pleased
that this legislation will reauthorize a program that is vital not only
to my District, but to Iowa, and States across the country.
Byrne JAG is one of our country's most effective law enforcement
tools. It is the only source of federal funding for multi-
jurisdictional efforts to prevent, fight, and prosecute drug-related
and violent crime. The program funds drug treatment; keeps our
communities safe by increasing the number of officers on the street;
and gives local law enforcement officers the tools they need to shut
down the production and distribution of illegal drugs.
With the help of Byrne JAG funding, State and local law enforcement
officers across the country have made tremendous strides in combating
illegal drugs. A recent study found that Byrne JAG funded programs have
led to 220,000 arrests, the seizure of 54,000 weapons; the destruction
of 5.5 million grams of methamphetamine, and the elimination of almost
9,000 methamphetamine labs.
In Iowa, reported methamphetamine labs have dropped 90 percent since
their peak in 2004. Meanwhile, meth treatment admissions have increased
and Iowa now has the third highest rate of meth treatment in the
country. Child abuse due to meth labs is in decline, and three recent
Iowa Youth Surveys have shown steady decline in substance use among
6th, 8th, and 11th grade students.
What these statistics make clear is that Byrne JAG is proven,
effective, and critical to public safety. This reauthorization lays the
groundwork for robust funding for Byrne JAG through 2012, and I urge my
colleagues to not only support adoption of the bill but to also support
full funding for the program in this and coming years.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of S.
231 to reauthorize the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant,
Byrne-JAG, Program at fiscal year 2006 levels through 2012. The Byrne-
JAG monies are supposed to be used to make America a safer place. I
support the reauthorization, and I would urge my colleagues to do
likewise.
Why Byrne-JAG is Necessary
Byrne-JAG allows States and local governments to support a broad
range of activities to prevent and control crime and to improve the
criminal justice system, which States and local governments have come
to rely on to ensure public safety. They support: law enforcement,
prosecution and court programs, prevention and education, corrections
and community programs, drug treatment, planning, evaluation,
technology improvement programs, and crime victim and witness programs,
other than compensation. In short, they are an indispensable resource
that States use to combat crime.
Recent Cuts in Byrne JAG Funding
Unfortunately, in fiscal year 2008 the Byrne-JAG program was cut by
two-thirds. Although Congress authorized over $1 billion, only $520
million were appropriated for fiscal year 2007. The appropriation was
then drastically reduced to $170.4 million in fiscal year 2008, and the
President has proposed further cuts for the fiscal year 2009 budget.
Past Problems with Byrne JAG
The trend to reduce the grant funding may result, in part, from
instances where Byrne-JAG funding has been abused. For example, in 1999
Byrne-JAG funding was used in the infamous Tulia outrage in which a
rogue police narcotics officer in Texas set up dozens of people, most
of them African-American, in false cocaine trafficking charges. In
other instances, jurisdictions used the funding to fund task forces
focused solely on ineffective, low-level drug arrests, which has put
the task force concept-and the diminished standards of drug enforcement
that it has come to represent--in the national spotlight.
[[Page H6446]]
The most well-known Byrne-funded scandal occurred in Tulia, Texas
where dozens of African-American residents, representing 16 percent of
the town's black population, were arrested, prosecuted and sentenced to
decades in prison, even though the only evidence against them was the
uncorroborated testimony of one white undercover officer with a history
of lying and racism. The undercover officer worked alone, and had no
audiotapes, video surveillance, or eyewitnesses to collaborate his
allegations. Suspicions eventually arose after two of the accused
defendants were able to produce firm evidence showing they were out-of-
State or at work at the time of the alleged drug buys. Texas Governor
Rick Perry eventually pardoned the Tulia defendants, after four years
of imprisonment, but these kinds of scandals continue to plague the
Byrne grant program.
These scandals are not the result of a few ``bad apples'' in law
enforcement; they are the result of a fundamentally flawed bureaucracy
that is prone to corruption by its very structure. Byrne-funded
regional anti-drug task forces are Federally funded, State managed, and
locally staffed, which means they do not really have to answer to
anyone. In fact, their ability to perpetuate themselves through asset
forfeiture and Federal funding makes them unaccountable to local
taxpayers and governing bodies.
The scandals are more widespread than just a few instances. A 2002
report by the ACLU of Texas identified 17 scandals involving Byrne-
funded anti-drug task forces in Texas, including cases of falsifying
government records, witness tampering, fabricating evidence, stealing
drugs from evidence lockers, selling drugs to children, large-scale
racial profiling, sexual harassment, and other abuses of official
capacity.
Texas is not the only State that has suffered from Byrne-funded law
enforcement scandals. Scandals in other States have included the misuse
of millions of dollars in Federal grant money in Kentucky and
Massachusetts, false convictions based upon police perjury in Missouri,
and making deals with drug offenders to drop or lower their charges in
exchange for money or vehicles in Alabama, Arkansas, Massachusetts, New
York, Ohio, and Wisconsin. A 2001 study by the Government
Accountability Office found that the Federal Government fails to
adequately monitor the grant program and hold grantees accountable.
Amendment Considered But Not Offered
Because of these abuses, I would have offered an amendment when this
bill was considered at the Full Judiciary Committee markup. My
amendment would have addressed the responsible use of Byrne-JAG monies.
Specifically, my amendment would have required that a State that
receives Byrne-JAG money should collect data for the most recent year
for which such funds were allocated to such State, with respect to:
(1) The racial distribution of criminal charges made during that
year;
(2) the nature of the criminal law specified in the charges made; and
(3) the city of law enforcement jurisdiction in which the charges
were made.
My amendment would have required a condition of receiving funds that
the State should submit to the Attorney General the data collected by
not later than one year after the date the State received funds.
Lastly, the report should be posted on the Bureau of Justice Statistics
website and submitted to the Attorney General.
My amendment is good because arrests will be transparent and the
light of day and public airing of any problems will be the greatest
disinfectant. My amendment is an attempt to make law enforcement more
responsible, more accountable, and more just in their dealings with
persons of all races and backgrounds. My amendment is but a small price
to pay to rid the Nation of scandals and disasters that occurred in
Tulia, Texas and elsewhere.
My amendment, which I would have offered, would provide oversight and
accountability. It is not burdensome. It will not prevent the States
from collecting and funding programs under the Byrne Grant program. My
amendment does, however, shed light on any maladies that might exist in
the system. Once we see the problems, we can fix them. My amendment is
responsible and aims to make the Byrne-Grant program a better program
by ensuring that the funding is used appropriately and is used with
oversight.
No More Tulias
While I support the Byrne-JAG reauthorization, I would also urge my
colleagues to also support my bill, H.R. 253, No More Tulias: Drug Law
Enforcement Evidentiary Standards Improvement Act of 2007. This bill
also enhances accountability with respect to the use of Byrne-JAG
monies.
First, it prohibits a State from receiving for a fiscal year any drug
control and system improvement (Byrne) grant funds, or any other amount
from any other law enforcement assistance program of the Department
of Justice, unless the State does not fund any antidrug task forces for
that fiscal year or the State has in effect laws that ensure that: (1)
a person is not convicted of a drug offense unless the facts that a
drug offense was committed and that the person committed that offense
are supported by evidence other than the eyewitness testimony of a law
enforcement officer or individuals acting on an officer's behalf; and
(2) an officer does not participate in a antidrug task force unless
that officer's honesty and integrity is evaluated and found to be at an
appropriately high level.
Second, H.R. 253, No More Tulias, requires that states receiving
Federal funds under the No More Tulias Act to collect data on the
racial distribution of drug charges, the nature of the criminal law
specified in the charges, and the jurisdictions in which such charges
are made. I urge my colleagues to support my No More Tulias Act so that
we can quickly bring the bill to markup.
I also urge my colleagues to support Byrne-JAG.
Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SCHIFF. Mr. Speaker, I join my colleague in urging passage of the
legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the Senate bill, S. 231.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the Senate bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________