[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3588-3590]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




             AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009


                 Community Orienting Policing Services

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I rise to join Senator Mikulski, the 
chairwoman of the Commerce, Justice, and Science, CJS, Appropriations 
Subcommittee, and Senator Klobuchar in a colloquy about the importance 
of the Community Orienting Policing Services, COPS, grant program. I 
would first like to thank my friend from Maryland for her tireless work 
and leadership on this bill. I know Senator Klobuchar and I and many 
others are very thankful that the Appropriations Committee included 
funding for the COPS Universal Hiring Program in this bill.
  It is important now more than ever that we support our State and 
local law enforcement agencies that are on the front lines in combating 
crime. With unemployment on the rise and tax revenues plummeting, the 
conditions are ripe for crime rates to climb again. States and 
municipalities are being forced to slash their budgets, including 
critical funding for police, who will need to cut their already 
depleted ranks even further without help. As crime escalates, there 
will be fewer officers and resources to protect our families and 
communities, unless we act now.
  Providing timely funding for the COPS Hiring Program will not only 
help to address vital crime prevention needs but will also have an 
immediate and positive impact on the economy by allowing State and 
local police forces to quickly fill vacancies and hire new officers and 
staff. In police hiring, nearly 100 percent of the money goes directly 
to job creation. These are good, middle-class jobs for middle-class 
people, and they can be filled immediately. These are often jobs for 
people who live in the hardest hit communities and will spend their 
money close to home.
  Eliminating the 25-percent nonfederal match requirement, as the House 
bill does, will ensure that funds get to State and local law 
enforcement fast, meaning that law enforcement officers can be hired 
fast, without putting a new burden on states and localities that are 
already strapped during this time of financial distress. The match 
requirement could cause strained States and localities to decline COPS 
funding they would otherwise take, meaning fewer jobs would be created.
  In its first hearing of the new Congress, the Senate Judiciary 
Committee received testimony from police chiefs and former Justice 
Department officials who explained that helping our local police during 
this economic downturn is needed now more than ever to keep America 
safe and keep our economy moving. Waiving the nonfederal match 
requirement in the economic recovery and reinvestment package will 
further ensure that police forces will be able to quickly refill their 
ranks and get more cops on the beat.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. I thank the Senator from Vermont working with me to 
restore funding for this important program. We have worked together in 
the fight to turn back the cuts made by the previous administration to 
Federal resources that assist State and local communities in fighting 
violent crime. I know all too well the importance of the COPS Hiring 
Program and share your concerns about the effect of the economic 
downturn on our neighborhoods. We need to make sure those on the blue 
line have a full team to combat increased crime in communities. My 
subcommittee recognizes that need, which is why we put $3.5 billion 
total for State and local law enforcement activities. This includes $1 
billion for COPS hiring grants, for which we waived the salary cap for 
hiring or rehiring career law enforcement officers and civilian public 
safety personnel.
  Ms. KLOBUCHAR. I thank Chairwoman Mikulski and the Senator from 
Vermont. As we work toward economic recovery, ensuring the safety of 
America's communities is a critical component to economic stability and 
growth. Local governments across the country are facing extraordinary 
budget shortfalls necessitating cutbacks in services, programs, and 
personnel. I have heard from police in my State how drastically the 
substantial decline in Federal funding for State and local law 
enforcement has affected them. The financial situation in our country 
is dire and requires us to do everything we can to help our struggling 
police forces so they can protect our neighborhoods and communities.
  Apart from the program's benefit to community safety, the COPS Hiring 
Program has obvious and important economic value. All of the funding 
goes directly to pay the salaries of officers hired to work in police 
departments across the country. Moreover, many neighborhoods in inner 
cities and rural towns throughout America that were once crime-ridden 
and depressed have flourished in the nineties and in this decade, 
creating businesses, increasing value, and powering local economies. 
Maintaining a strong community police presence can allow us to protect 
these economic gains.
  With the rising unemployment rate and the foreseeable increase in 
crime, we cannot afford the continuing depletion of the ranks of our 
State and local law enforcement officers, nor can we ask them to 
operate without the resources needed to do the job effectively. Waiving 
the match requirement, as the House has done, will ensure that all 
States and localities will be able to afford and accept the COPS 
funding which is so badly needed.
  No city or State has been spared from this recession. I know the 
chairwoman and the Senator from Vermont understand the importance of 
ensuring the COPS funding is as accessible as possible and have 
witnessed the need in their own States as well.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. The Senator from Minnesota is right that this is an 
issue in Maryland, as well as nationwide. As the economic recovery 
package moves to conference, we will work to ensure mechanisms are in 
place for this critical program to be quickly and effectively 
implemented and accessible to those in need of assistance.

[[Page 3589]]


  Mr. LEAHY. I thank Chairwoman Mikulski and Senator Klobuchar. I am 
hopeful that as the economic recovery and reinvestment plan moves 
forward that we may work together to see if this important issue can be 
addressed in conference.


              victims' compensation and assistance grants

  Mr. President, I wish to join Senator Mikulski, the chairwoman of the 
Commerce, Justice, and Science, CJS, Appropriations Subcommittee, in a 
colloquy about the importance of including additional funding to States 
for victims' compensation and assistance in the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009. I would first like to thank my friend from 
Maryland, who has worked so hard for the success of this bill. I 
commend her for fighting to include and maintain vital funding to 
support some of the most vulnerable Americans today, who need our help.
  During the past year, victim service professionals have seen a clear 
increase in victimization and victim need. The National Crime Victim 
Helpline has experienced a 25-percent increase in calls, as job losses 
and economic stress translate into increased violence in the home and 
in our communities. The shortage of affordable housing and rising 
unemployment are causing victims to require longer stays in emergency 
shelters. The increasing unemployment rate also means victims are less 
likely to have insurance to cover their crime-related expenses. In 
addition to significant State and county budget cuts, corporate and 
individual donations are decreasing. Across the board, victim service 
providers are strapped for funding.
  As the Senate considers extraordinary legislation to address the 
current economic crisis, I believe it is imperative for the record to 
reflect the intent behind the provisions included in this legislation. 
To ensure that there is no doubt about what we intended, I ask my 
friend from Maryland whether it is her understanding that the funding 
included for State victims' compensation and assistance programs would 
be in addition to any funding states receive from their annual Victims 
of Crime Act, VOCA, Grants in the 2009 and 2010 appropriations bills?
  Ms. MIKULSKI. I would say to the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, 
that is what we intend.
  Mr. LEAHY. I thank the Senator. It is not the Senate's intent to 
deduct the funding for victims compensation included in the economic 
recovery package from the grant money they would receive from regular 
VOCA formula grants. Through this bill, we intend to provide extra 
funding for compensation programs, to pay more costs for victims' 
recovery.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. That is correct as well. The funding I included in the 
CJS portion of economic recovery package for crime victim compensation 
programs will be in addition to their annual VOCA grants, and will not 
be deducted from their annual VOCA grants.
  Mr. LEAHY. I thank the chairwoman of the CJS Appropriations 
Subcommittee, Senator Mikulski, for engaging in this colloquy. And I 
thank her for working with me to include victim services in the 
economic recovery legislation, which will help ensure that those 
already victimized by crime are not also victims of our economic 
crisis.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I commend this body for including 
provisions in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 to 
energize the fledgling green economy. While I am concerned by the 
enormous cost of this bill and lack of offsets, I recognize the need 
for urgent action as we strive to keep and create jobs for those who 
are suffering because of our failing economy.
  Earlier this year, I introduced the Community Revitalization Energy 
Conservation Act, S. 222, as part of my E4 Initiative aimed at fueling 
job creation and spurring economic development. I am very pleased that 
so much of what I proposed in this bill has been included in the 
economic recovery package. The economic recovery legislation passed by 
the Senate includes an increase for the bond limit for the Qualified 
Energy Conservation Bond program from $800 million to $3.2 billion, 
more than a 300 percent increase. While I proposed increasing the 
program to $3.6 billion, I thank the chairman of the Finance Committee 
for including such a significant increase.
  The second component of my Community Revitalization Energy 
Conservation Act would boost job growth and help businesses and 
homeowners go green by expanding the types of projects that are 
eligible for the Qualified Energy Conservation Bond program, which was 
established by Congress last fall. I am pleased the Senate adopted my 
amendment making this change as part of the economic recovery package.
  Business and labor leaders and others in Wisconsin have told me about 
the tremendous potential for energy efficiency retrofits to generate 
more green-collar jobs. And already, Wisconsin communities are 
beginning to pursue these improvements. My amendment will allow 
Wisconsin to launch programs--modeled after Milwaukee's proposed Me2 
program--throughout the State by utilizing the tax credit bonds 
allocated to Wisconsin under the Qualified Energy Conservation Bond 
program.
  My amendment specifically ensures that States and local governments 
can increase the number of building retrofits by eliminating 
significant financial barriers facing homeowners and businesses 
interested in making energy efficiency and conservation improvements. 
It does this by allowing energy efficiency projects to be performed as 
part of a ``green community program'' using grants, loans, or other 
repayment mechanisms, such as periodic fees included on a utility bill 
or municipal bill. By using utilities as intermediaries, States and 
localities can ensure homeowners and businesses do not incur upfront 
costs and can gradually pay back the costs of the energy efficiency 
retrofits through their electricity or water bills at a rate that 
reflects energy savings. For example, if a monthly energy bill before 
energy efficiency improvements is $150 and with improvements the energy 
costs are down to $110, then at most a homeowner or business would pay 
$40 monthly towards paying off the costs of the energy efficiency 
building retrofits.
  Presently, buildings account for 40 percent of total U.S. energy 
consumption and 70 percent of U.S. electricity consumption so there are 
significant gains to be made with energy efficiency. Projects that 
could qualify for the funding include heat-saving measures like 
insulation, electricity-saving measures like lighting and appliances, 
water-saving measures like low-flow shower heads and toilets, renewable 
energy generating devices like photovoltaic solar installations, storm 
water management like rain barrels, or other measures that also result 
in reduced energy use.
  My amendment will allow Qualified Energy Conservation Bonds to 
support these partnerships among cities, utilities, homeowners, and 
businesses to make energy efficiency improvements within more people's 
reach and put Americans to work.
  I thank Senator Debbie Stabenow for cosponsoring this amendment, and 
I appreciate the endorsements from the Air Conditioning Contractors of 
America, American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, Apollo 
Alliance, National Electrical Contractors Association, National SAVE 
Energy Coalition, and the Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors-National 
Association.
  I am pleased my provision was included, offering another opportunity 
to help jumpstart the green economy and bring relief to our citizens as 
we reinvest in America. I intend to work with conferees to ensure the 
provision is retained and look forward to its enactment as part of 
economic recovery legislation.
  I am also pleased that funding was included for several other energy 
programs that I sought funding for including the Energy Efficiency and 
Conservation Block Grant Program and the Weatherization Assistance 
Program, both of which can quickly generate jobs and generate lasting 
energy savings.

[[Page 3590]]



                          ____________________