[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 162 (Thursday, November 14, 2013)]
[House]
[Pages H7095-H7097]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           SECOND CHANCE ACT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 3, 2013, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I am going to change the 
tenor a little bit and do a little switching, although I must confess 
that there is not much more important in this country than trying to 
make sure that citizens have access to quality, comprehensive health 
care. And I think that we are much closer to that than we have ever 
been and look forward to it actually happening.
  As I was listening, I was reminded of something that my father used 
to tell us, that if you keep telling yourself the same thing over and 
over and over and over again, you will eventually get to the point 
where you believe it.
  Being here to do a Special Order, though, reminds me of my good 
friend, Representative Major Owens, who was famous for doing Special 
Orders. I remember when I first came here that you could see 
Representative Major Owens on the floor late at night, by himself, 
talking about education and the need to make sure it happened. And I 
guess the fact that he was a trained librarian may have had something 
to do with that.
  So I wanted to just take a moment and pay tribute to Representative 
Major Owens for the tremendous work that he did on education, and 
especially the work that he did that led to the creation of something 
called PBIs, predominantly black institutions, as a part of the Higher 
Education Act.
  So, Major, many, many students will remember your contribution to the 
development of what we know as these 75 or so institutions across the 
country that are called predominantly black institutions, and who now 
receive special consideration for funds because of that designation.
  I also, before I delve into my subject, want to express condolences 
to the family of Commissioner Devera Beverly, who passed away earlier 
this week and is known as probably the most profound advocate for 
public housing and public housing residents in the city of Chicago and, 
perhaps, throughout the Nation, because she has spent more than 30 
years advocating for this population group and was a founding member of 
the Public Housing Museum, which is well on its way to being developed.
  So we express condolences to the family, friends and associates of 
Commissioner Devera Beverly, who lived in the Abla Homes in Chicago. 
That is A-B-L-A, Abla Homes. But she was a public housing resident who 
advocated to the point of being selected by the mayor of the city of 
Chicago to be a commissioner of the Chicago Housing Authority. So we 
salute you, Ms. Devera Beverly.
  Now I want to talk about something that is near and dear to my heart, 
but it is also near and dear to the hearts of many, and it is also part 
of a crisis that actually exists in our country.
  Our country is known for many things, as it should be. It is one of 
the, and perhaps the, wealthiest country on the face of the Earth. It 
is one of the most technologically proficient countries in the world 
today. It is one of the most highly educated countries.
  But it also is the country that has the distinction of having more 
people incarcerated, both per capita and in actual numbers, than any 
other country on the face of the Earth. More than 2.3 million people 
sit, tonight, in our prisons throughout America.
  About 750,000 of those come home every year; and you know, of all the 
individuals who are incarcerated, most of them will come home, or they 
will go somewhere. There are numbers of individuals who do, in fact, 
die in prison. They are lifers, and in many instances they are 
individuals who have committed horrible crimes, sadistic crimes, crimes 
that suggest they should never be let out on their own.
  But most individuals will return home, or they will return to some 
community; and when they do, what happens to and with them will often 
determine whether or not they remain on the outside, or how soon they 
will return to the inside.
  There are some things that we know about this population. We know 
that if they do not receive any help, many of them, about two-thirds, 
within a 3-year

[[Page H7096]]

period of time will have done what we call recidivate, which means that 
they will have committed some offense for which they could be 
rearrested and re-incarcerated.
  And about 50 percent of them, within 3 years, if nothing happens to 
or with them, if they don't get any help, will be back in jail or 
prison, costing the public money, living and being cared for at 
taxpayer expense. In some instances, these costs have become so high, 
until some States are just looking for ways that they can release them, 
some of them, because in some instances they are spending as much money 
for corrections as they are spending for education, and that is an 
awful lot of money.

  But there is an alternative, and that alternative is called the 
Second Chance Act, and that is what I am going to spend some time 
talking about. As a matter of fact, it was passed into law 5 years ago, 
signed by President Bush, so it is not a Democratic piece of action. It 
is not a Republican. It is a joint legislative initiative that had 
bipartisan, bicameral support, Democrats and Republicans, House and 
Senate passed.
  The interesting thing about it is that all of the reports that we 
have seen, and there have been a number of them, Justice Center has put 
out a report called ``Re-Entry Matters.'' Other groups have issued 
reports, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.
  And the reports that I have seen all suggest that, while it has not 
been a panacea, meaning that it certainly has not been able to solve 
all of the problems or diminish all of the issues surrounding this 
need, it has, in fact, been very helpful, and there are States who are 
reporting reductions in recidivism.
  Recidivism is one of the factors which contributes to keeping the 
numbers of people incarcerated as high as it is because, for many of 
them, they are constantly in and out; and it becomes a cycle of going 
in and a cycle of getting out and going in again.
  But what helps them is when there are programmatic approaches, 
evidence-based, that actually help them; and we have had about 600 such 
programs and grants that have been funded under the Second Chance Act. 
Of course, it has not been as much money or as much funding as would be 
needed, but 600 groups across the Nation, 600 institutions, 600 
research groups, all working towards finding a solution and finding 
help, has made a difference.
  It is time now to re-introduce this legislation, and I am pleased and 
delighted that on yesterday, in both the House and the Senate, very 
senior level and prestigious Members of both bodies have introduced, 
and we have seen the re-introduction of the Second Chance Act.
  In the Senate, Senator Leahy, chairman of the Judiciary, Senator Rob 
Portman, Democrat, Republican; in the House, Representative Jim 
Sensenbrenner, former chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Republican, 
myself, Democrat. And so we have Democrats and Republicans on this 
issue.
  There are a lot of things that we are not necessarily agreeing upon 
right now in Congress. There is a tremendous amount of disagreement, 
enough that actually shut down the government. But on this issue there 
appears to be the emergence of tremendous agreement, which makes all of 
us optimistic that something significant and even more significant can 
be done.
  So I want to highlight some of the organizations and groups that have 
been actively engaged and seriously involved, groups like the 
Leadership Conference for Civil and Human Rights, groups like the 
Justice Center, from the Council of State Governments, groups who have 
worked fastidiously to demonstrate that people can be helped.

                              {time}  1730

  What is it that individuals actually need when they are released from 
jail or prison? Well, they certainly need more than $20 and a bus 
ticket. Many of them have no place at all to go. But if they can find 
somebody waiting in some community who says, We are going to help you 
get reestablished. We are going to help you find a place to live, a 
place that you can call your own. Or if you have got a drug problem, we 
are going to find you a source of treatment. Or maybe, if you are in 
need of anger management help, we are going to find someone who can 
provide that.
  Perhaps you don't have much in the way of formal education and skill, 
so maybe we will direct you to a GED program, or maybe we will direct 
you to a vocational or technical training program so that you can 
develop the skill that you need in order to find a job or secure 
employment. Or maybe if you have got some emotional, psychological, or 
just self-esteem problems, we could direct you to a program that will 
help you overcome these deficiencies.
  And I can tell you that, if these individuals can find a job, a place 
to work, a place where they know that they can fit and make a 
contribution, many of them will never, ever see the inside of a jail or 
prison again because they have evolved into a person who knows that 
they have self-worth, self-esteem, that they can take care of 
themselves. They can earn what they need, and they can make a 
contribution.
  But I will tell you, there are many barriers that often prohibit and 
prevent individuals from finding their rightful place or being able to 
successfully reenter society as a contributing member. For example, you 
may not be able to live in public housing if you have a felony 
conviction. You could just very well be barred. Well, who needs public 
housing more than individuals who can't find a job?
  There are many entities within our society that say to an individual 
with a record, We don't hire people with records, meaning, if you have 
been convicted of a felony, there is no point to making an application 
even if we have ``help wanted'' signs posted. Fortunately, there are 
some businesses and some companies who are beginning to ease up a 
little bit and see the futility of that kind of policy because, if 
these individuals are never able to find a job, they will be a cost to 
the public for the rest of their natural lives. Somebody's tax dollars 
will have to go to support them in one way or another.
  So some State legislatures are beginning to look at some of the 
licensing requirements that their States have and say, Maybe you can't 
get a license to be a barber or a beautician or a cosmetologist, yet 
you are able to get trained while incarcerated; and now that you have 
been trained, you cannot work in that profession. Of course that does 
not appear to be very logical, and so some States are beginning to 
review their policies as it relates to certain kinds of licensure 
requirements and whether or not individuals can get what might be 
called a waiver or whether they can demonstrate that not only do they 
have the training and expertise to do the job, but they also have the 
character which will allow them to do it well. So a little bit of 
progress is being made in that direction. There are some instances 
where housing authorities are beginning to look to see whether or not 
there might be some way.
  And I don't think anybody is suggesting when they are being asked to 
provide opportunities, certainly you wouldn't necessarily put a child 
molester in a day care center. Many of the programs and many of the 
individuals who try to help erase some of the barriers, they already 
know that, and that is not the kind of thing that they advocate; but 
they do believe that people should be given a chance, an opportunity, a 
chance to demonstrate that they want to be good citizens, that they 
want to work, that they want to contribute.
  So I am asking my colleagues both in the House and the Senate to look 
at the invitation letters that they have received to become cosponsors 
of this legislation. It is not asking for as much money as it needs. 
$100 million is money, but it does not break the bank. That is the 
appropriation asked.
  I think one of the things that we look at is what it has spawned and 
what it has sparked, not just how much Federal money has gone into it, 
not just how many Federal dollars. But it has spawned response and 
reaction from State, local, and county governments who have established 
their own second chance programs, who have put together their own 
second chance initiatives.
  I certainly want to commend Governor Patrick Quinn of the State of 
Illinois, my Governor, who, by the way, happens to live in my 
congressional district and is my constituent, for the State of 
Illinois' response to this problem.

[[Page H7097]]

  And I also want to commend and congratulate the president of the Cook 
County government, the county board, which, of course, is larger than 
more than 25 States in the Nation. The county of Cook is a very large 
county, with more than 5 million people in it. I want to commend County 
President Toni Preckwinkle for how the county government is trying to 
respond to this need.
  And I especially want to commend the sheriff of our county who has 
more than 13,000 people in his jail. He recognizes that many of them 
ought not be there because they have got mental health problems and 
mental health issues, and he is seeking and searching and looking for 
ways to change that.
  I want to commend the mayor of the city of Chicago, our former 
colleague, Rahm Emanuel, because he has established a number of 
programs with city agencies and with city government where they are set 
aside specifically for individuals who have records, individuals who 
have been incarcerated, individuals who need a second chance with both 
the city of Chicago, itself, and the Chicago Transit Authority.
  So there are bits and pieces of progress being made, and I commend 
all of those who are helping to make it. But my final ask is for my 
colleagues in both the House and the Senate to join in this effort, 
sign on to the Second Chance Act, help us to get it renewed, help us to 
get it reauthorized, to get it refunded, and get it seriously 
implemented throughout the United States of America so that these 
individuals will know that our country does, in fact, believe in a 
second chance.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________