[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 10]
[Senate]
[Page 14431]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                        REQUEST FOR CONSULTATION

  Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my letter to 
Senator McConnell dated September 19, 2012, be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                      U.S. Senate,


                                   Committee on the Judiciary,

                               Washington, DC, September 19, 2012.
     Hon. Mitch McConnell,
     Senate Minority Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator McConnell: I am requesting I be consulted 
     before the Senate enters into any unanimous consent 
     agreements or time limitations regarding the Local Courthouse 
     Safety Act of 2012, S. 2076.
       While I support the motive behind this legislation and 
     believe ensuring the safety of state and local courthouses is 
     a noble goal, I believe the responsibility to address this 
     issue lies with the state and local governments. I do not 
     believe the federal government has the authority under the 
     Constitution to provide training for local and state law 
     enforcement or to provide security equipment to state and 
     local courthouses at the federal government's expense. 
     Further, I believe the training program this bill authorizes 
     duplicates existing federal training programs.
       First, S. 2076 authorizes the Director of the State Justice 
     Institute (SJI) to carry out ``a training and technical 
     assistance program designed to teach employees of State, 
     local, and tribal law enforcement agencies how to anticipate 
     and respond to violent encounters during the course of their 
     duties, including duties relating to security at State, 
     county, and trial courthouses.'' The purpose of SJI is to 
     further the development and adoption of improved judicial 
     administration in state courts in the United States, which is 
     not a federal responsibility under the Constitution. States 
     are responsible for the administration of their courts. 
     Adding an additional allowable purpose to SJI merely broadens 
     the unconstitutional reach of this agency. Further, even 
     though S. 2076 does not provide any additional funding for 
     SJI the agency could use the authorization of additional 
     responsibilities as a basis for requesting future 
     appropriations from Congress.
       Second, the SJI training program authorized in this bill 
     potentially duplicates existing federal training programs 
     available to state and local law enforcement. The following 
     programs already exist:
       1. U.S. Marshal Service's National Center for Judicial 
     Security, Office of Protective Intelligence; Shares threat 
     information with state and local law enforcement agencies and 
     provides training to state and local law enforcement officers 
     who provide courthouse security. Also, provides guidance and 
     support to district offices and Judicial Security Inspectors 
     (JSIs) conducting high threat proceedings and protective 
     responses.
       2. U.S. Marshal Service's National Center for Judicial 
     Security Fellowship Program; Provides a three-month training 
     program for state, local, and international ``court security 
     managers.''
       3. FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) division and Law 
     Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted (LEOKA) programs; 
     UCR and LEOKA collect data on law enforcement officers who 
     have been killed or assaulted in the line of duty. The FBI 
     then conducts LEOKA training programs for state and local law 
     enforcement personnel based on this data.
       4. FBI's Law Enforcement Training for Safety and Survival 
     (LETSS) program; Trains FBI, police officers, and 
     international law enforcement personnel in survival 
     techniques.
       5. FBI Field Police Training program; Includes firearm 
     training for state and local partners.
       6. FBI's Law Enforcement Executive Development Association 
     program; Trains heads of state and local law enforcement 
     agencies with between 50 and 500 personnel.
       7. Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training 
     (ALERRT) program; Trains officers in dealing with violent 
     situations, including those they face outside of buildings 
     and in urban settings. Includes core classes such as ``Basic 
     Active Shooter Level I and II,'' ``Terrorism Response 
     Tactics--Advanced Pistol,'' ``Combat Rifle,'' ``Combat 
     Pistol,'' ``Advanced Rifle Marksmanship,'' and ``DOD Sniped 
     Course.''
       8. Community Oriented Policing Services programs (COPS);
       9. Department of Homeland Security's Federal Law 
     Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) programs; and The 
     Survival Shooting Training Program (SSTP) under FLETC is an 
     eight and a half day training program that teaches law 
     enforcement officers (LEOs) ``how to employ several types of 
     weapon systems found in most police arsenals (the service 
     handgun, shotgun, submachine gun and rifle). The LEOs will 
     develop marksmanship skills as well as all pertinent gun 
     handling skills (drawing from the holster, reloads, immediate 
     action, movement and more) at a rapid yet controlled pace. 
     Ultimately, the SSTP prepares the LEOs to survive a deadly 
     force confrontation through competent decision making and 
     confident gun handling skills.'' The Reactive Shooting 
     Instructor Training Program (RSITP) under FLETC trains law 
     enforcement instructors in handling their firearms to survive 
     high-stress situations.
       10. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms' National 
     Firearms Examiner Academy programs. The training program 
     includes training that enables state and local law 
     enforcement officers to identify armed gunmen and increase 
     their ``margin of safety.''
       Finally, this bill gives state and local courthouses 
     priority in obtaining excess federal security equipment for 
     free from the Government Services Administration after a 
     short request period is given to federal agencies. The 
     courthouse would only pay the costs of transporting the 
     equipment. Equipment purchased by the federal government--and 
     thereby the American taxpayer--should be utilized by the 
     federal government if at all possible. If not, federal 
     agencies may have to purchase equipment they otherwise could 
     have obtained for free but for the state and local 
     governments taking it. Also, giving states and localities the 
     ability to obtain this equipment for free may lead to 
     situations where they acquire the equipment simply because it 
     is free, not because they truly need it.
       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 court 
     security. I firmly believe this issue is the responsibility 
     of the states and not the federal government. However, if 
     Congress does act in this area, 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.
       Congress must start making tough decisions rather than 
     continuing to kick the can down the road, leaving our 
     children and grandchildren to clean up the mess. 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 trillion. 
     That means over $50,000 in debt for each man, woman and child 
     in the United States. A year ago, the national debt was $14.3 
     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 $1.7 trillion or 
     11.8%. We cannot continue to support federal funding for 
     programs and initiatives that are not federal 
     responsibilities as dictated by our Constitution. Otherwise, 
     we will never get our fiscal house in order.
           Sincerely,
                                              Tom A. Coburn, M.D.,
     U.S. Senator.

                          ____________________