[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 103 (Thursday, July 18, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5795-S5796]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CONSULTATION REQUEST
Mr. COBURN. Madam President, I ask consent that the following letter
be placed in the Congressional Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC, July 18, 2013.
Hon. Mitch McConnell,
Senate Minority Leader, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator McConnell: I request that I be consulted
before the Senate enters into any unanimous consent
agreements or time limitations regarding S. 162, the Justice
and Mental Health Collaboration Act of 2013.
I support the goals of this legislation and believe
incarcerated offenders suffering from mental illness should
have access to treatment. However, I believe the
responsibility to address this issue, as it relates to
inmates in state and local prisons and jails, lies with the
state and local governments that manage these correctional
systems. Furthermore, while I do not believe this issue is
the responsibility of the federal government; if Congress
does act, we can and must do so in a fiscally responsible
manner. My concerns are included in, but not limited to,
those outlined in this letter.
While this bill is well-intentioned, it authorizes $40
million per year for five years, costing the American people
at least $200 million dollars without corresponding offsets.
Furthermore, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has not
yet scored the legislation. This bill authorizes new
permissible purposes for the existing grant program
including, among others, funding for veterans' treatment
courts, correctional facility programs, and state and local
law enforcement academy training. Expansion of services
through additional permissible purposes or new grant
programs, however, requires the Department of Justice (DOJ)
to carry out additional responsibilities. Thus, even if the
legislation may be implemented by existing DOJ staff, it is
not free of future administrative expenses or costs the CBO
may identify that would result in a score beyond the bill's
stated funding authorization.
It is irresponsible for Congress to jeopardize the future
standard of living of our children by borrowing from future
generations. The U.S. national debt is now over $16.7
trillion. That means almost $53,000 in debt for each man,
woman and child in the United States. A year ago, the
national debt was $15.9 trillion. Despite pledges to control
spending, Washington adds billions to the national debt every
single day. In just one year, our national debt has grown by
$800 billion or 5%.
In addition to these fiscal concerns, there are several
problems specific to this legislation. First, while I
recognize both our federal and state criminal justice systems
must accommodate mentally ill offenders, which is a difficult
and costly task, it is not the responsibility of the federal
government to provide funding to treat this population of
offenders within state and local prison systems.
In fact, states face a much larger challenge than the
federal government, as they incarcerate the vast majority of
inmates in this country. According to the Department of
Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), of the 1.59
million total inmate population in 2011, 1.38 million are
incarcerated in state facilities compared to 216,362 in the
federal system. As a result, states also care for the largest
population of mentally ill offenders. The most recent BJS
data notes 56 percent of state inmates and 64 percent of jail
inmates displayed a mental health problem compared with 45
percent of federal inmates. Furthermore, BJS found only 8.9%
of federal inmates displayed both a history and symptoms of
mental health problems, while over 17% of state and local
inmates experienced those problems. Thus, although states
have an awesome responsibility in this area, they also have a
great opportunity to lead by way of experience and example.
Many have done so by developing and funding their own
innovative ideas to enhance programs for and treatment of
mentally ill inmates.
In September 2009, the Senate Judiciary Committee,
Subcommittee on Human Rights held a hearing entitled, ``Human
Rights at Home: Mental Illness in U.S. Prisons and Jails,''
in which we heard testimony from representatives of two state
prison systems and a state court judge who outlined the
different challenges faced by their states. These states and
others have taken action to address their mentally ill prison
populations, but often each tackles the problem with a
different approach. For example, from 2003-2007, New York
legislators and governors engaged in a battle over reforming
the slate's policies on this issue, and in 2007, Oklahoma
established a program to provide inmates with serious mental
illness a comprehensive plan for release, including access to
support services and medication. The program set up two
intensive care coordination teams in Oklahoma City and Tulsa
to help state inmates close to release obtain access to
community mental health centers, among other services.
There is significant diversity within the inmate population
both among states and between state and federal prison
systems, Oklahoma and New York incarcerate different types of
inmates with different mental
[[Page S5796]]
health needs. Indeed, each addressed the problem with diverse
solutions--New York focused on in-prison treatment
alternatives, while Oklahoma chose to provide post-
incarceration support services. Thus, the one-size-fits-all
approach to treating mentally ill state and local inmates
outlined in this legislation also fails to address the
variety of state needs.
Second, Congress should focus instead on its duty to
federal inmates within the DOJ Bureau of Prisons (BOP). Over
the last several years, BOP costs have significantly
increased such that its budget is poised to surpass the
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as the largest
percentage of the entire DOJ budget. In its FY 2014 budget
submission, the DOJ requested approximately $6.9 billion for
the federal BOP, an increase of $295.1 million over FY 2012.
As a result, the BOP represents 25 percent of the entire DOJ
budget ($27.6 billion), with the FBI barely ahead at $8.44
billion, representing 30.5 percent of the DOJ budget.
Congress must live up to its responsibility to conduct
oversight and set an example to the states by ensuring the
BOP's massive budget appropriately allocates taxpayer dollars
for all of its programs, including services for mentally ill
offenders who are truly in need of treatment.
However, S. 162 ignores the problems within the federal
BOP. The bill funds the Adult and Juvenile Collaboration
Program grant for state and local governments to use federal
dollars to support treatment and services for state and local
inmates who are mentally ill. It also expands this grant
program to allow funds to be used for services for veterans
treatment courts, training for employees of state and local
correctional facilities to respond to incidents involving
mentally ill inmates, and support for state and local law
enforcement orientation programs, continuing education and
academy curricula. By failing to address the challenges faced
by mentally ill inmates within the federal BOP, Congress
exacerbates its misplaced spending priorities.
Finally, I do not believe the federal government has the
authority under the Constitution to provide federal funds to
state and local governments to provide services to state and
local inmates with mental health problems or provide training
to state and local law enforcement officers. Article I,
Section 8 of the Constitution enumerates the limited powers
of Congress, and nowhere are we tasked with funding or
becoming involved with state and local corrections issues.
There is no question those who suffer from mental illness
should be treated appropriately while incarcerated. However,
I believe this issue, as it pertains to state and local
inmates, is the responsibility of the states and not the
federal government. Despite these Constitutional limitations,
if Congress does act in this area, like most American
individuals and companies must do with their own resources,
we should evaluate current programs, determine any needs that
may exist, and prioritize those needs for funding by cutting
from the federal budget programs fraught with waste, fraud,
abuse, and duplication.
Sincerely,
Tom A. Coburn, M.D.,
U.S. Senator.
____________________