[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 17734-17736]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                        HATE CRIMES LEGISLATION

  Mr. SMITH. Will the Senator yield for a question?
  Mr. KENNEDY. Yes.
  Mr. SMITH. I ask the Senator, on the other issue he raised, to put a 
bipartisan cast to the conversation, is it not true that the Senator 
and I are the cosponsors----
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mr. KENNEDY. If I could have 30 more seconds on this. I ask unanimous 
consent for an additional 30 seconds.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. KENNEDY. I see my friend and colleague, Senator Smith, who 
hopefully will address another issue of hate crimes legislation, for 
which we have had support and we are also very hopeful of getting a 
vote on as well.
  I see my friend and colleague from New Jersey, Senator Corzine, and 
my friend and colleague from Louisiana, as well. I understand my time 
on morning business has expired.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. SMITH. I will not be long. I was mindful Senator Kennedy was 
speaking to the issue of hate crimes. I was going to ask him the 
question that I think he would agree with. We acknowledge at a surface 
level the argument could be made that hate crimes do not belong on a 
State Department authorization bill. That is the case at a surface 
level, but it is also true that our foreign policy should reflect the 
values of the American people. The values of the American people say 
the war on terrorism is waged not just abroad but here at home.
  Our country is plagued with hate crimes. Some people will say all 
crimes are hateful, but what Senator Kennedy and I are focusing on are 
those crimes which target a community of vulnerable people--whether 
race, religion, gender, disabled, and additionally those whose sexual 
orientation is different from the majority.
  It is an incredible tragedy that the Federal Government has not been 
allowed to participate in the hate crimes prosecution in places where 
sometimes local police departments are overwhelmed by national media, 
or places where the prosecutions do not occur as they ought to.
  Senator Kennedy and I are proposing as part of this bill we take up 
the issue of hate crimes. This institution has passed this issue before 
by large majorities. We ought to do so again.
  Many in this country have strong feelings on the issue of gay and 
lesbian rights--some for, some against--but it is my position that we 
all ought to be opposed to hate crimes and be prepared to do something 
about it. I will never forget the enormous tragedy of the murder of 
Matthew Shepherd and the impact that had on me when I considered the 
Federal Government was not

[[Page 17735]]

permitted to help the Laramie police department that was overwhelmed by 
national media; the Federal Government had to be silent because we had 
no statutory authority--not to take over State or local effort--to help 
them in this effort. As a moral principle the Federal Government ought 
to show up in the prosecution and pursuit of those who commit hate 
crimes. These are happening far too often.
  Sometimes those on my side will say: This is not consistent with a 
family value. There is nothing about hate crimes that represents a 
legitimate family value. Some of the things that are held up as family 
values are phony values. Marriage is one of those that is a very real 
family value. We ought to have a debate on that, too. But when it comes 
to hate crimes, public protection for all of our citizens, we need to 
act.
  Senator Kennedy and I have both said to the managers of this bill we 
would rather not bring it up on this bill. It is a fact this 
authorization is probably one of the few that will make it through in 
the balance of this session of Congress. We do not think this should 
wait any longer. We think terrorism abroad, our foreign policy opposing 
terrorism, ought to be reflected by the values of the American people 
who oppose terrorism at home. Hate crimes are a very real form of 
terrorism. We ought to do something about it. The Federal Government 
ought to show up to work and we ought to come together around a real 
family value which is the opposition to hate crimes.
  I have said before, if you want to talk to me about sin, come with me 
to church. If you want to talk with me about public policy for all of 
us sinners, let's go to the Senate and make sure we provide protection 
for all of America's children. Hate crimes is the vehicle.
  The majority leader is working with Senator Kennedy and I to get us 
the opportunity before the August recess to have a period of debate--it 
need not be long--and a straight up-or-down vote so we can get this 
moving in the process, consistent with America's values abroad so we 
are consistent at home fighting terrorism.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I commend my friend from Oregon who has 
been steadfast in his support on the hate crimes legislation and has 
really provided extraordinary leadership both in the Senate and 
nationally in helping us to get to the point where we will have a real 
opportunity to take action. His involvement and work has been 
enormously important and added a very significant dimension to the 
movement of the legislation.
  Senator Smith has just stated very eloquently the fundamental reasons 
for this legislation and has also talked about why this is related to 
the current measure before the Senate, the State Department 
authorization.
  The challenge we are facing around the world in terms of terrorism 
and violence is rooted in hatred and bigotry. The same kind of hatred 
and bigotry are rooted in these crimes of hate. You do not go very far 
between potential terrorists and potential perpetrators of hate crimes. 
They are brothers and sisters--maybe in different locations physically, 
but they are very much against everything this Nation stands for and 
believes in.
  As the Senator has pointed out, hate crimes are so particularly 
objectionable and heinous because they focus on a particular class of 
people. The reason and the motivation for that is bigotry and hate. The 
idea that the Federal Government is not putting the full force of its 
support in rooting out and assaulting these crimes has been a great 
failure.
  The good Senator from Oregon and I believe very deeply that we as a 
society and as a nation ought to be using the full resources of the 
Federal Government to attack heinous crimes.
  Briefly, this chart shows the FBI hate crime statistics, showing the 
ever-increasing total incidence of hate crimes taking place in the 
United States. My next chart demonstrates the FBI hate crimes based on 
sexual orientation, showing the dramatic escalation and increase in 
hate crimes based on sexual orientation. The terrible tragedy of Mr. 
Shepherd in Wyoming still resonates in the minds of all Americans, as 
well as the other hate crimes that have taken place in our Nation.
  We have seen since September 11 the dramatic increase in hate crimes 
against Muslims; hate crimes against American Arabs have escalated 
dramatically.
  We believe, not unlike the outcome we saw when we brought to bear the 
full resources of the Federal Government in fighting the church 
burnings primarily in the South 8 to 10 years ago, once we pass 
legislation in the House and in the Senate to bring the FBI into these 
investigations, they virtually halt. People in these local communities 
who were involved in these church burnings knew this country was 
serious about church burnings. That had a dramatic impact.
  Senator Smith and I believe we should bring the full resources of the 
Federal Government to focus on these hate crimes--whether it is on the 
basis of sexual orientation, gender, religiously motivated, anti-
Semitic, the whole range of different activities resulting in hatred 
against groups in our society.
  Even Attorney General Ashcroft has said criminal acts of hate run 
counter to what is best in America, our belief in the quality of 
freedom.
  This is not a Democratic issue; it is not a Republican issue; it is 
an American issue. I am very hopeful we can get an opportunity to take 
action. I think it is completely consistent with the overall 
objectives, in the highest form and sense, of the State Department 
authorization and is something that needs to be done.
  I again thank my friend from Oregon for all of good work and 
leadership.
  Mr. SMITH. Will the Senator yield for a question?
  Mr. KENNEDY. Yes.
  Mr. SMITH. Senator Kennedy has heard opponents of this legislation 
suggest all crime is hateful and this is unnecessary. But isn't it a 
fact that for 30 years America has had a hate crimes law, most States 
have hate crime laws? These have been vetted constitutionally, and even 
William Rehnquist, the Chief Justice, one of the great conservatives 
who ever served on the Court, was the author of the opinion that said 
hate crime laws are constitutional because crime always consists of 
elements, and hatred is one of the motives of determining whether this 
fits in the category of a hate crime. Aren't they constitutional? And 
isn't it a great moral principle for America to say, in terms of new 
categories of Americans who are demonstrably more vulnerable, that they 
should now be included in these very old statutes of the United States?
  Mr. KENNEDY. The Senator is exactly correct in reminding the Senate 
about the holding of the Supreme Court, the holding 6 to 3, a very 
powerful statement by the Supreme Court in terms of the support for 
this legislation.
  As the Senator has pointed out, we have had hate crimes but we have 
had limitations and restrictions, particularly with regard to Federal 
hate crimes, which has limited the ability of the Federal Government to 
involve itself unless the actual hate crime occurred on Federal 
property. Therefore, the Federal Government has been unable, really, to 
become involved the way it should.
  But, on the broader point about aren't all crimes basically hate 
crimes, the Senator has stated very clearly that every crime is tragic 
and harmful in its consequences but not all crime is based on hate. 
Hate crimes are based on bigotry and prejudice, and hate crimes occur 
when a perpetrator selects a victim because of who the victim is. Like 
acts of terrorism, the hate crimes have an impact far greater than the 
impact on individuals and their families. They are crimes against 
entire communities, the entire Nation, against the fundamental ideals 
of liberty and justice for all, on which this country was founded.
  That is why it is so important we take action.
  Mr. President, although there was a significant overall reduction in 
violent

[[Page 17736]]

crimes during the 1990's, the number of hate crimes continued to grow. 
As this chart shows, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, 
9,730 hate crimes were reported in the United States in 2001. That's 
over 26 hate crimes a day, every day.
  More than 83,000 hate crimes have been reported since 1991. According 
to the F.B.I., even though overall crime increased by only 2.1 percent 
from 2000 to 2001, the number of reported hate crimes increased 
dramatically--by more than 20 percent.
  Sadly, these F.B.I. statistics only show part of the problem. A 
recent Justice Department report confirmed that many hate crimes go 
unreported. Another report by the Southern Poverty Law Center, a 
nonprofit organization that monitors hate groups and extremist 
activity, estimated that the real number of hate crimes committed in 
the United States each year is closer to 50,000.
  Hate crimes based on sexual orientation continue to be a serious 
danger, constituting 14 percent of all hate crimes reported. As you can 
see on this next chart, hate crimes based on sexual orientation are 
increasing at an alarming rate. Hate crimes based on sexual orientation 
increased by 7.2 percent from 2000 to 2001, with nearly 1,400 reported 
for the year.
  Each person's life is valuable, and even one life lost is too many. 
It is not the frequency of hate crimes alone that makes these acts of 
violence so serious. It is the terror and intimidation they inflict on 
the victims, their families, their communities, and, in some cases, the 
entire nation.
  The need for an effective national response to the problem of hate 
crimes is as compelling as it has ever been. As is clearly demonstrated 
in this chart, hate crimes against Arabs and Muslims rose dramatically 
in 2001, after the terrorist attacks of September 11th. These hate 
crimes included murder, beatings, arson, attacks on mosques, shootings, 
and other assaults. In 2001, anti-Islamic incidents were the second 
highest-reported type of hate crimes based on religion--second only to 
anti-Jewish hate crimes. Los Angeles and Chicago reported a massive 
increase in the number of anti-Arab and anti-Muslim crimes after 9/11.
  Over 550 hate crimes were committed against Muslims in 2001--that is 
fifteen times more than in 2000, and almost six times more than 1998, 
1999, and 2000 combined. Almost 900 hate crimes against Arab-Americans, 
or those perceived to be Arab-American, took place in 2001--eight times 
the number in 2000.
  The backlash following the September 11th attacks has been shameful. 
Congress cannot sit silent while this hatred spreads. It is long past 
time for us to do more to end hate motivated-violence.
  The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act will strengthen the ability 
of Federal, State, and local governments to investigate and prosecute 
these vicious and senseless crimes. Our legislation is supported by 
over 175 law enforcement, civil rights, civic, and religious 
organizations.
  The current Federal law on hate crimes was passed soon after the 
assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Today, however, it is as 
generation out of date. It has two significant deficiencies. It does 
not cover hate crimes based on sexual orientation, gender, or 
disability. And even in cases of hate crimes based on race, religion, 
or ethnic background, it contains excessive restrictions requiring 
proof that the victims were attacked because they were engaged in 
certain ``federally protected activities.''
  This ``federally protected activity'' requirement is outdated, 
unwise, and unnecessary. There is no reason why the Justice Department 
should have to prove that someone was engaging in a ``federally 
protected activity'' before a case can be brought. This requirement 
severely limits the ability of the Justice Department to respond to 
hate crimes against Catholics, Jews, Muslims, and other religious 
groups. And it hamstrings the Department in its effort to respond to 
hate crimes motivated by the victim's race or ethnic background.
  Our bill is designed to close these substantial loopholes. It has six 
principal provisions:
  No. 1, it removes the ``federally protected activity'' barrier.
  No. 2, it adds sexual orientation, gender and disability to the 
existing categories of race, color, religion, and national origin.
  No. 3, it protects State interests with a strict certification 
procedure that requires the Federal Government to consult with local 
officials before bringing a Federal case.
  No. 4, it offers Federal assistance to State and local law 
enforcement officials to investigate and prosecute hate crimes in any 
of the Federal categories.
  No. 5, it offers training grants for local law enforcement.
  No. 6, it amends the Federal Hate Crime Statistics Act to add gender 
to the existing categories of race, religion, ethnic background, sexual 
orientation, and disability.
  These much needed changes in current law will help ensure that the 
Department of Justice has what it needs to combat the growing problem 
of hate-motivated violence more effectively.
  Nothing in the bill protects or punishes speech, expression, or 
association in any way--even ``hate speech.'' It addresses only violent 
actions that result in death or injury. The Supreme Court has ruled 
repeatedly--and as recently as this year, in the cross-burning decision 
Virginia v. Black--that a hate crimes statute that considers bias 
motivation directly connected to a defendant's criminal conduct does 
not violate the First Amendment. No one has a First Amendment right to 
commit a crime.
  A strong Federal role in prosecuting hate crimes is essential, 
because crimes have an impact far greater than their impact on 
individual victims. Nevertheless, our bill fully respects the primary 
role of State and local law enforcement in responding to violent crime. 
The vast majority of hate crimes will continue to be prosecuted at the 
State and local level. The bill authorizes the Justice Department to 
assist State and local authorities in hate crimes cases, but it 
authorizes Federal prosecutions only when a State does not have 
jurisdiction, or when it asks the Federal Government to take 
jurisdiction, or when it fails to act against hate-motivated violence. 
In other words, the bill establishes an appropriate back-up for State 
and local law enforcement, to deal with hate crimes where states 
request assistance, or cases that would not otherwise be effectively 
investigated and prosecuted.
  Working cooperatively, State, local and Federal law enforcement 
officials have the best chance to bring the perpetrators of hate crimes 
to justice. Federal resources and expertise in the identification and 
proof of hate crimes can provide invaluable assistance to State and 
local authorities without undermining the traditional rule of States in 
prosecuting crimes. As Attorney General Ashcroft has said of current 
law, ``Cooperation between federal agents and local law enforcement 
officers and between Justice Department prosecutors and local 
prosecutors has been outstanding.'' And it will continue to be so, and 
be even more effective, when this legislation is enacted into law.
  Now is the time for Congress to speak with one voice and insist that 
all Americans will be guaranteed the equal protection of the laws. Now 
is the time to make combating hate crimes a high national priority. The 
Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act is a needed response to a serious 
problem that continues to plague the nation. I urge my colleagues to 
support it.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.

                          ____________________