[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 10]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 13596]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



            CONSEQUENCES FOR JUVENILE OFFENDERS ACT OF 1999

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                         HON. GREGORY W. MEEKS

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, June 17, 1999

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1501) to 
     provide grants to ensure increased accountability for 
     juvenile offenders:

  Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I am very disappointed that many 
of my colleagues voted for the McCollum amendment yesterday. However, 
we can right this wrong by supporting the Conyers-Scott substitute.
  This substitute is fundamentally right because juvenile delinquents 
will not be jailed with adult criminals. In fact, when you compare New 
York youth who were prosecuted in adult court with youth with similar 
charges and prior records in New Jersey who were prosecuted in juvenile 
court--convictions were no more likely in adult court, punishment was 
imposed less swiftly, incarceration was less likely, and sentences were 
nearly identical.
  This substitute is fundamentally right because it requires states to 
address the issue of minority confinement. Minority children are \1/3\ 
of the youth population, but \2/3\ of the children in long-term 
facilities. Studies indicate that minority youth receive tougher 
sentences and are more likely to be put in jail than non-minority youth 
for the same offenses.
  The substitute is fundamentally right because it would place 20,000 
crisis prevention counselors in schools and fund crisis prevention 
programs--which brings me to an issue that goes hand-in-hand with 
juvenile justice--the need for educational programs to make sure our 
children are not getting involved in criminal behavior in the first 
place.
  Research has demonstrated that aggressive prevention programs and 
alternatives to incarceration are most effective in reducing crime.
  In fact, when asked to rank the long-term effectiveness of possible 
crime fighting approaches, a majority of police chiefs picked 
``increasing investments in programs that help all children and youth 
get a good start'' as ``most effective''--nearly four times as often as 
``trying juveniles as adults.''
  Children in the Big Brothers/Big Sisters mentoring programs showed 
that children participating in the program were 46% less likely to 
initiate drug use.
  Cincinnati's violence prevention programs resulted in a 24% drop in 
crime.
  A similar gang-reduction program in Ft. Worth, Texas, resulted in a 
26% drop in gang-related crime.
  We need to fight crime by putting more monies into education and 
crime prevention programs like the ones I mentioned and--after-school 
programs.
  The majority of juvenile crimes take place between 3 pm to 6 pm. We 
need to have enough educational activities after-school to keep our 
youth mentally busy.
  We need more after-school jobs for our youth. I would like to see the 
President and Congress develop AmeriCorps' programs for high school 
students throughout the year.
  We need to invest in our youth's present so they can have a bright 
future--without ever facing the juvenile justice system.

                          ____________________