Skip to content
Fact
ba
.
se

Senate Floor: VIOLENT CRIME CONTROL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 1994

  • Joe Biden
    Person
  • Phil Gramm
    Person
  • Al D'Amato
    Person
  • Orrin G. Hatch
    Person
  • Dennis DeConcini
    Person
  • Byron Dorgan
    Person
  • Pete Domenici
    Person
  • Paul Simon
    Person
  • Slade Gorton
    Person
  • Alan Simpson
    Person
  • Not Labeled
    Person
  • Ted Stevens
    Person
Unknown

Phil Gramm

Unknown
Mr. President, I send a motion to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration. 6

Slightly Positive
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair would advise the Senator we have a motion pending. Unanimous consent is needed to set aside that motion. 8

Phil Gramm

Slightly Positive
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending motion be set aside temporarily. 10

Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. 12

Phil Gramm

Unknown
Mr. President, I send a motion to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration. 14

Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will state the motion. 16

Phil Gramm

Very Positive
Mr. President, for 6 years we have been trying to adopt a crime bill, and during that period we have passed some excellent bills in the Senate. We have passed some pretty good bills in the House. But what has happened to us every year is that when we have gotten to conference, when a few very senior Members of both Houses of Congress have sat down to work out the differences between the House bill and the Senate bill, what has happened is that we have ended up dropping the get-tough, grab-them-by-the-throat provisions, and we have often ended up with bills that look nothing like either the Senate bill or the House bill. 22

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
I think probably the most stark example of this was the crime bill in the last Congress. In 1991 we passed a very strong crime bill in the Senate. They passed a fairly strong crime bill in the House. But, yet, when we went to conference to work out the difference between the two bills, systematically all of the tough provisions were dropped. For example, whereas we had changed the habeas corpus statute to make it easier to carry out the death penalty, that provision was dropped, and in its place 23 Supreme Court decisions which over the previous two decades had strengthened law enforcement, were overturned. And a bill was produced which the Association of State Attorneys General, an association made up of both Democrats and Republicans, called a "pro- criminal bill". 23

Phil Gramm

Unknown
As a result, many Members of the Senate voted against the bill, many Members of the House voted against it, and, ultimately, President Bush vetoed it. 24

Phil Gramm

Somewhat Negative
We are now going back to conference with another crime bill. I do not support every provision of the Senate bill. There are some provisions of the Senate bill that I strongly oppose. But, overall, it is an excellent bill. The House has passed what I believe is a fairly good crime bill. They were not allowed to vote on many provisions of the Senate bill because of their restricted rules, and because the decision was made by the Democratic leadership to prevent those votes from occurring. 25

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
But, basically, we have two versions of the crime bill now going to conference. There are some things that were different in 1992. In 1992, there were still Members of Congress who were willing to stand up and say that they opposed mandatory minimum sentencing. There were still Members of Congress in 1992 who were willing to stand up and say that putting people in prisons for long periods of time was not effective. 26

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
What has happened since 1992 is that public opinion has coalesced, and as a result there are only a very few Members of Congress who are willing to stand up and say the things that they were willing to say 2 years ago when we considered the crime bill. 27

Phil Gramm

Very Positive
I am not convinced, however, Mr. President, that all of those people have changed their minds and hearts. I am very much concerned that when we go to conference with the House there will be real pressure and a real effort undertaken to gut the crime bill, to drop the funding mechanism so that we simply have a hollow authorization bill which makes a lot of promises, none of which we can fulfill. I am concerned that our minimum mandatory sentencing provisions will be dropped. As a result, I think it is important for Members to go on record now in instructing our conferees as to what we want to achieve in this conference. 28

Phil Gramm

Unknown
Basically, what I have done for the sake of saving the time of the Senate is, I have combined several items into a motion to instruct the conferees. 29

Phil Gramm

Very Positive
Under the Senate rules, this motion to instruct can be divided. If any of my colleagues would like to see it divided, and see its elements voted on separately, I would be very happy to have the motion divided and to have them voted on separately. I would say to my colleagues that I have combined these provisions into one motion for the purpose of trying to save some time for some of our Senators, who I know are meeting with our Canadian colleagues in a very important meeting. 30

Phil Gramm

Unknown
What I have done is, I have taken several provisions and included them in one. But I wanted to let our colleagues know that if any Member of the Senate wants to divide the instructions and force a separate vote on them, that not only do they have the right to do it, but that I do not object to it. 31

Phil Gramm

Very Positive
What have I tried to instruct the conferees to do? I have tried to focus on a series of issues. I am the cosponsor of other instructions that will be offered. The combination of all of these instructions produces a firm commitment to the Senate bill, to real funding based on a real procedure, to build prisons, to institute mandatory minimum sentencing, and basically is a commitment to get tough. 32

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
Our bleeding Nation demands that we have action on crime. If this year, after all this debate, after all the public input, after all the statements by the President, if we do not produce a strong crime bill I think it is going to be an indictment of the democratic process itself. 33

Phil Gramm

Positive
So I do not want that to happen. That is why I have offered this motion to instruct. But before going through this motion to instruct, I want to make several points clear. 34

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
First of all, if we produce a bad crime bill, a crime bill that funds all these new social programs but does not make a commitment to put violent criminals in prison, I am going to strongly oppose it. 35

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
Second, if we produce a mediocre crime bill that drops the get-tough provisions, it would be my intention to come right back and introduce those tough provisions again, and seek a vote in the Senate on the same day that we vote on the conference report. 36

Phil Gramm

Negative
If anybody thinks that this Congress is going to adjourn without adopting new mandatory minimum sentencing, and truth in sentencing, I want them to know that I strongly disagree, and I believe the majority of the Members of Congress are going to disagree. 37

Phil Gramm

Very Positive
So I am trying to make a simple statement, like the Fram oil filter ad: That one way or another, now or later, we are going to get this job done. I pray and hope that our conferees will get it done now. 38

Phil Gramm

Unknown
Now what does this motion to instruct do? 39

Phil Gramm

Very Positive
First of all, it asks our conferees to stay with the funding mechanism that Senator Byrd offered. I was a cosponsor of it. It was a broadly supported, bipartisan effort that set in the law reductions in the size of the Federal bureaucracy and has an enforcement mechanism based on freezing the level of hiring in executive departments when we find that they are breaching the new limits on the total level of Federal employment. The net result is that by paring back the bureaucracy, we can save $22 billion that can go into our anti-crime trust fund. 40

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
So the first part of this motion is to instruct our conferees to stay with our funding mechanism. There is no such mechanism in the House bill. The House bill spends far more money than we do, but it provides no way to pay for one nickel of that spending. As a result, it is all hollow promises which have no impact on the street, where violent crime is occurring. 41

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
So the first thing I want our conferees to do is stay with our funding mechanism. It was endorsed earlier in the House and has been adopted three times in the Senate. Every time we have gotten down to the goal line, trying to make it the law of the land, it ended up being killed. I do not want it to die this time. Without it, there are no prisons, no additional police officers on the street, and no effective crime bill. We cannot put people in jails we do not have. I would like to stop building motels and calling them jails. 42

Phil Gramm

Leans Positive
The point is: Without a commitment to pay for these programs, we are simply making empty promises. 43

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
The second part of the instruction has to do with minimum mandatory sentencing. There are three parts to it. I agreed, in the spirit of compromise, with the Clinton administration and with people representing their views here in the Senate, to grant a small amount of flexibility on mandatory minimum sentencing, but only in the cases where someone has no prior criminal record, where they were not carrying a gun, where they were not engaged in an act of violence, and where they were not financing drug sales. I am not for this provision, but in trying to work to come together on a crime bill that could be adopted on a bipartisan basis, I accepted this compromise. But it is very limited and it is very focused. 44

Phil Gramm

Somewhat Negative
What the House has done is adopt the President's original position, which would have repeat offenders, by the thousands, put back on the streets. The Senate provision is as far as I am willing to go. It is a compromise that we worked out on a bipartisan basis. The House provision is retroactive, and it allows people that already have had a criminal conviction to be exempt from mandatory minimum sentencing, and I think it flies in the face of what the American people want done. 45

Phil Gramm

Neutral
I am asking our conferees to stay with our provision with regard to exemptions for mandatory minimum sentencing. 46

Phil Gramm

Slightly Negative
The next provision of mandatory minimum sentences has to do with selling drugs to a minor. We have adopted in our bill this year -- and every time we voted on a crime bill for the last 6 years -- an amendment that requires 10 years in prison, without parole, for adults who sell drugs to a minor, or who use a minor in drug trafficking. Really, the second item is of equal importance, because what is happening is that drug distributors know that minors are not being put in jail, so they are using minors to deliver drugs. They are putting minors in great danger. They are doing great damage to these young people by getting them involved in the drug industry at such an early age. 47

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
I want these people to know that when we apprehend them -- adults selling drugs to minors, or using minors in drug felonies -- they are going to prison for 10 years, without parole, no matter how soft- hearted the Federal judge may be, or no matter how they think society has done them wrong, or no matter who their daddy is. And a repeat offense is life imprisonment. 48

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
The final provision in mandatory minimum sentencing that I have in this instruction to conferees is 10 years in prison, without parole, for individuals possessing a firearm during the commission of a drug felony or other crime; 20 years imprisonment for discharging the firearm; and life imprisonment, without parole, for killing somebody with a firearm during the commission of such a crime. Of course, we have the death penalty in aggravated cases. 49

Phil Gramm

Very Positive
As I said in the beginning, these are the items that I believe we need to instruct conferees on. This motion is divisible. If someone wants a separate vote on one part of it, I will be happy to have the separate vote, simply as a courtesy to my colleagues. None of these items are controversial, in my opinion. My guess is that we have 75 votes for any one of them, and rather than vote on them separately, I will be happy to vote on them together. But I have no objection whatsoever to having them separated out if someone wants a vote. 50

Phil Gramm

Very Positive
So this is a straightforward motion to instruct. I hope it will be supported. I think it is important. I want a strong anti-crime bill. I do not want all of our effort to be derailed. I hope my colleagues -- especially those on the other side of the aisle -- will know that my effort in this motion to instruct is to strengthen our conferees. I am worried that, with 62 conferees in the House from 11 different committees, we are in for a tough, prolonged conference. 51

Phil Gramm

Neutral
I think it is very important to be clear up front that we in the Senate are not going to put up with a mediocre crime bill. 52

Phil Gramm

Unknown
I yield the floor. 53

Phil Gramm

Unknown
Mr. SIMON addressed the Chair. 54

Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois [Mr. Simon], is recognized. 56

Paul Simon

Positive
Mr. President, this is wrong for two reasons, and I hope the motion by my friend from Texas will be defeated. 58

Paul Simon

Very Negative
It is wrong, first of all, because except for very rare instances, we should not instruct conferees. Conferees ought to be able to sit down and work out agreements, practical agreements. I have to say that my record is not pure on that. Occasionally, I have voted for instructing conferees, but rarely have I done it, because as a legislative procedure, it is wrong. 59

Paul Simon

Somewhat Positive
Second, this is wrong in substance. He said we have to have a commitment to get tough on crime. You bet. We also have to have a commitment to get smart on crime. If we followed the philosophy of my friend from Texas, we would have the most crime-free society in the world today. 60

Paul Simon

Very Negative
In 1970, we had 134 people per 100,000 in our prisons, in jails. Now we have 510. What happened to the crime rate in that period? Every person in this gallery, every person in the Senate, every citizen of America knows what happened to the crime rate. It has escalated; 510 per 100,000. Do you know who is second? South Africa, with 311; Venezuela is third, with 157; Canada has 109; the Netherlands has 41. If putting people in prison stopped crime, we would be a crime-free society, indeed. But we had better recognize that is not solving our problems. 61

Paul Simon

Very Negative
Who are the people going to prison? Well, 82 percent are high-school dropouts. What if, in the State of California -- which is in the near future going to spend $10 billion on new prisons -- they spent half that amount on prisons and spent half of it to improve the educational product? Would we be doing more to cut back on crime? 62

Paul Simon

Unknown
I believe we would. I believe any rational study suggests that. It just does not make sense. 63

Paul Simon

Neutral
Drugs and alcohol are involved in a huge amount of crime. And what do we do? Well, we have had a drug program that up until this administration came in was all for locking people up, and too often people learned how to use drugs in prisons, instead of spending money on treatment and education. 64

Paul Simon

Very Negative
The majority of people in our prisons today were unemployed when they were arrested. You show me an area of high unemployment, and I will show you an area of high crime. Let us do something about getting jobs in rural poor areas and inner-city areas, and you are going to do something about crime. 65

Paul Simon

Very Negative
I read the Los Angeles Times op-ed piece by a Catholic priest. I cannot remember his name just offhand. He looked at our crime bill. He is an assistant chaplain of the State prison in California. He asked a class of 40 people in that prison, experts on crime, if you will, what we ought to be doing to cut back on crime. They came up with hardly any of the answers that we have. Their No. 1 suggestion was get jobs for people. And one of their suggestions was reduce the amount of guns in our society. We are doing something about that. 66

Paul Simon

Slightly Negative
But what if instead of $22 billion for more prisons, and things like that, we had a real jobs program for people? What if we really did something about education in our society where we have poor schools? Sweden, which does not have the income disparities that we have, spent 2 to 3 times as much in poor areas for those attending school as in the wealthier areas. We do just the opposite. Does it make sense? It does not make sense. 67

Paul Simon

Very Positive
Then the second thing that is part of the Gramm proposal is mandatory minimums. Let me say this to the credit of my friend from Texas, and I have observed this in the Judiciary Committee, when the Republicans were in power he saw to it that the nominees that came from him were much above average, and I give him credit for that. I voted for his nominees even when they were controversial. I voted for his nominees. But I think he ought to be listening to a fellow named Plato who wrote a long time ago. He said: Make sure you appoint good judges, and then leave the sentencing to the judges. 68

Paul Simon

Very Negative
My guess is, and I have not talked to any of those nominees of Phil Gramm, those judges would say that one of the worst things we have done is impose all these mandatory minimums. We cannot tell the kind of situations that you run into. Federal judges are just overwhelmingly opposed to mandatory minimums. 69

Paul Simon

Neutral
Our present policies just do not make sense. We are compounding the problems where there are a lot of good things in this crime bill, but I confess I was one of four who voted against it because we are building on myths. 70

Paul Simon

Somewhat Negative
My staff just this morning brought this to my attention, and I have to tell you I have not read it. The Cato Institute, which is not a liberal operation, has in their publication called Policy Analysis this, and the heading on the story is this: "Prison Blues. How America's foolish sentencing policies endanger public safety." The Gramm motion wants to build and compound the problems that we have with mandatory minimums. 71

Paul Simon

Very Negative
The House legislation does not do away with mandatory minimums. I would vote to do away with them tomorrow. Should people who are guilty of crimes of violence spend time in prison, and should we protect society? Absolutely. Sixty percent of those in Federal prisons today have not been involved in crimes of violence. We are wasting $20,000 a year to pay for each of them. 72

Paul Simon

Very Positive
I think we have to be more creative. I think we have to look at other countries. I think we have to do a better job. 73

Paul Simon

Negative
The Gramm motion just builds on our present folly, and compounds the present folly, and I think should be defeated. 74

Paul Simon

Unknown
I yield the floor, Mr. President. 75

Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the Senator from Texas. 77

Phil Gramm

Unknown
Mr. President, there is not any Member of the Senate that I have a higher regard for than the Senator from Illinois. This is a case where we differ really for two reasons, I think. 79

Phil Gramm

Unknown
First, I think we have a different assessment of the facts; and second, I think we basically have a different theory and conception of human behavior. 80

Phil Gramm

Somewhat Positive
What I would like to try to do is just respond to the points that the Senator raised and then at least for my part, unless some other point is raised, to conclude the debate. 81

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
First of all, I would take some issue with the thesis that there is no established relationship between crime and punishment. In fact, if you look at the trend lines, I would argue that you can make a case that in the 1960's and the 1970's we dramatically reduced the amount of time that people were spending in prison for committing violent crimes. When you consider such factors as probability of apprehension, probability of indictment, the probability of conviction, and then how much time in prison you served if you actually were convicted, I would argue that the expected cost in prison time for committing crime in America fell dramatically in the 1960's and the 1970's, and in the early 1980's we started to reserve that. As we started to reserve that, the trend started to change. 82

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
Second, I wish we knew the root causes of crime. There is no doubt about the fact that a welfare system that creates hopelessness and dependence, that is a fertile area for child abuse, is a clear breeder of this problem. 83

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
We are spending $301 billion a year trying to deal with those kinds of problems, and I want to find root causes. I am not positive that we have truly identified them. I do not buy the thesis that the reason people are criminals is because they are poor or because they cannot read. 84

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
When I was growing up, I had uncles who did not read, I had lots of kinfolk who were poor. As far as I know none of them ever robbed anybody or ever beat up anybody or ever committed a crime or ever went to jail. 85

Paul Simon

Unknown
Mr. President, will my colleague yield? 87

Phil Gramm

Very Positive
I am happy to yield. 89

Paul Simon

Very Negative
Having said that, I think the Senator has to admit that there is some relationship to the fact that 82 percent of the people in prison are high school dropouts. That is totally at variance with the general population. So there is some relationship between their education and their being in prison, that they have found fewer options out there. 91

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
If I might respond, I am certainly in favor of reducing high school dropout rates. Whether people drop out of high school or whether they do not, they have to be held accountable for their actions. While I do not know how to solve every part of the crime problem, there is one part of it that is very much on my mind and in my heart and I know how to solve it. That is we do not have to get up every morning and open the newspaper and read about some violent predator criminal who had been convicted 5 or 6 times for terrible crimes and he or she is back out on the street and has killed someone's child. We do not have to live with that. 93

Phil Gramm

Positive
What my provisions are trying to do is to assure that when people are convicted of these crimes, when they get these long sentences they actually serve the sentences. 94

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
Our colleague from Florida, Senator Mack, presented the other day in the crime debate an example of where Florida had struggled with this problem. The case he pointed out was a professional criminal who had committed some 60 violent crimes who had been convicted of 7 major felonies, who was out of prison on an early release program, who went to a quiet neighborhood, broke into a home, beat up a pregnant woman, and stole her car. They apprehended him, thank God, and they put him in jail, and they gave him life imprisonment, but 6 months later he is up for parole. That makes the criminal justice system the laughing stock of the Nation. 95

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
So my point is I do not know how to solve each part of the problem, but there is part of it I know how to solve. I know that when people are on the other side of the bars, that if you are on this side of the bars they cannot do you any harm. I want to be certain that when people commit these violent crimes and they are apprehended and sent to jail, that they stay in prison for a long period of time, and that society is protected. There are a lot of people in prison. The problem is that they are in and out of prison. 96

Phil Gramm

Slightly Negative
I do not know how many people commit crimes because they do not believe they are going to do the time that they are sentenced to and how many might be deterred if they believed that they really were going to spend a long time in prison. 97

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
My law enforcement officials tell me in Texas that when they apprehend somebody for a drug violation, say, and that criminal finds out -- when they believe they are going to be sentenced in the State system, where they will serve a very small fraction of their sentence, they do not take the process very seriously. But when they find out that they have sold the drugs close to a school or that they violated some other Federal law and they are going to Federal prison where there is no parole, suddenly they take the process very, very seriously. 98

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
So what I want to do is to be certain that if we say there ought to be 10 years in prison for selling drugs to a child, that people know, no matter what the circumstances are, that they are going to serve the 10 years in prison. I believe that will mean fewer people in prison, not more people, because I think we will deter the crime. 99

Phil Gramm

Very Positive
Finally, let me say in terms of judges -- and I appreciate my colleague's kind comment. I think most Members of the Senate work hard in trying to appoint good judges. But as I have looked at data from the sentencing commission, what I have found is that when judges have discretion, the sentences that are being handed out are not substantially different from the minimums that are required. 100

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
If someone has committed a drug felony and they had a gun, and I look at the sentencing commission data, I do not find that use of the gun results in more jail time for these people. I find, around the country, tremendous variability in sentences. 101

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
So what I am trying to do in these provisions is to simply eliminate the uncertainty by saying that if you are convicted of these crimes -- for example, possessing a firearm during the commission of a violent crime or drug felony -- that you know you are going to get 10 years in prison and you are going to serve every day of it. If you discharge the firearm, you are going to get 20 years. If you kill somebody, you are going to spend your life in prison or you are going to be put to death. That is something people could understand. 102

Phil Gramm

Very Negative
Since I do not want people to carry firearms, I do not want them to discharge a firearm trying to shoot people, and I do not want them to kill people, I want them to know with certainty what the penalty is going to be. And the same with these other provisions. 103

Phil Gramm

Very Positive
So I think this is a straightforward motion. It simply supports the bill that we adopted overwhelmingly. I hope my colleagues will accept it. 104

Phil Gramm

Unknown
Mr. BIDEN addressed the Chair. 105

Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware. 107

Joe Biden

Very Positive
Mr. President, I do not want to take a lot of the Senate's time, because we had an opportunity in November to debate. As my friend from Texas pointed out, we voted on a lot of this stuff a number of times. But I would like to make a few comments. 109

Joe Biden

Very Negative
As usual, I find myself somewhere between the Senator from Texas and the Senator from Illinois on these issues. I do think there is a relationship between punishment and crime. I do think there is a correlation. I do not think that poverty dictates criminal behavior. Although I will acknowledge that, statistically, there is a higher rate, that may be because they cannot afford good lawyers. And it may be as complicated as they are in a very different circumstance that caused them to do that. 110

Joe Biden

Slightly Positive
For example, it is true that 85 percent of the people in State prison systems are high school dropouts. But the truth also is that the vast majority of high school dropouts never commit a crime. So I do not want to get too overwrought by the statistics, except to make three or four basic points. 111

Joe Biden

Very Negative
First, all of the examples my friend from Texas has mentioned and others -- Democrats and Republicans alike -- about the person who commits a heinous crime after having been convicted and sentenced in a previous crime, having served only a small part of their time and having been let out, they are all State prisoners. They are not Federal prisoners. 112

Joe Biden

Very Negative
I am sure there is a Federal prisoner who has served his or her time and gotten out and committed a heinous crime. But I have yet to hear one example on the floor of the U.S. Senate since I authored, with one other person, a bill that became known as the sentencing commission. 113

Joe Biden

Unknown
I am the guy who originally -- with Senator McClellan and Senator Kennedy, way back then, and with others in the 1970's -- wrote that bill. And it works. 114

Joe Biden

Very Positive
The irony is we have a Federal system that works pretty well. The Senator from Texas is right. You get convicted in a Federal court, you go to jail. And you go to jail based on the sentencing guidelines which drastically limits the discretion of a Federal judge. Because the Senator from Texas is right. 115

Joe Biden

Very Negative
You look around the country. What happens is, you get convicted of the same crime in, say, Delaware or Arkansas or California or New York, and you will find wildly varying sentencing, and wildly varying amounts of time that are actually served. 116

Joe Biden

Very Positive
So, first point: It does make a difference that you have certainty in the system. The Federal system has certainty and the Federal system works well. 117

Joe Biden

Very Negative
And, to quote a former President who was quoting someone else, I guess, but a phrase that was a favorite phrase of his, "If it ain't fixed, don't" -- "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." I always have trouble remembering everything Ronald Reagan said, and I had trouble with that, as well. He used to say, all kidding aside, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." The Federal system is not broke. It can be improved, but it is not broke. We have prison space. Our folks are going in prisons when they are convicted. We are providing more money for more prison space. We can argue whether it is fast enough or ahead of the curve enough or not, but we have space. 118

Joe Biden

Very Negative
Also, when we put folks in the Federal prison, they stay in the Federal prison. When they get convicted in a Federal court, they go to prison. 119

Joe Biden

Very Negative
Now, the problem is, my friends from the Dakotas and Texas and Delaware and everywhere else are frustrated, and they are frustrated because their States do not do such a hot job -- not very good, not as good as the Federal Government. 120

Joe Biden

Very Negative
That is a strange thing to hear said on this floor. But they are not as good. And so, what they do is, on average -- and I will not take the time to go down every State, because I do not want someone suggesting to me that I am in any way violating the rules of the Senate by maligning the State; and I am not maligning anyone, because these are just facts. 121

Joe Biden

Very Negative
The average amount of time a person convicted in a State court in any State in America -- not "any" -- most States in America, because some have truth-in-sentencing, but you get convicted of a crime and the statute book says you can get up to 10 years, and the judge stands there and says, "I'm going to send you to jail for 5 years." So your sentence is 5 years. In all the States, on average, that person is only going to go to jail and actually serve time in jail of about 2 years, roughly, 43 percent of the time to which they have been sentenced after having been convicted without having received the maximum. 122

Joe Biden

Neutral
This is not 42 percent of the time they could have been sentenced to. This is 42 or 43 percent of the time they were actually sentenced to by a judge. Say they are now sentenced to serve 5 years in the State penitentiary. They only get 43 percent of that time. 123

Joe Biden

Leans Negative
If a Federal judge says, "You are now sentenced to 5 years in the Federal prison," you serve that 5 years. You get good time off, which is minimal. 124

Joe Biden

Slightly Positive
And the other side of it, the Federal judge has the ability to increase or decrease your sentence 15 percent, either because of extenuating, mitigating, or aggravating circumstances. We left them a little discretion when we wrote that, but not much. 125

Joe Biden

Very Negative
Now, that is frustrating to everyone. So one of the provisions the Senator from Texas has -- and I know the Senator from North Dakota also feels strongly about -- is this truth in sentencing. It says, we, the Federal Government, are going to tell you, every State in America, that you have to adopt the way we do it federally or we are not going to give you any money for prison construction. 126

Joe Biden

Positive
As I have said before, I am for that. I think that is a good thing; if it will work if the States will actually go out and do what they have to do to qualify for this money. 127

Joe Biden

Very Negative
But let me tell you, let us assume that the Presiding Officer is the Governor of Connecticut or the Governor of Texas or the Governor of California. I walk up, and I am your administrative assistant, and I walk in and say, "Good news, Gov, you know that prison population problem we have? The U.S. Senate and the U.S. House just passed a bill and they sent it to the President. There are $6 -- $ 8 -- probably closer to $8 or $10 billion -- $6 or $8 billion in there for prison construction for the States." And you go, "Wow, boy, I dodged that bullet. I do not have to go to the legislature now to ask for a tax increase to build more prisons to solve our problems. The Federal Government is coming to our rescue." "Wait a minute. That's the good news. The bad news is, in order to even put in an application to get any of that prison construction money we have to prove to the Feds that we are keeping our prison population in jail for 85 percent of the time, like the Federal Government does -- 85 percent of the time for which they have been convicted." Even for a very slow Governor -- and the Senator from Connecticut would be a very quick Governor -- even for a very slow Governor it does not take long to calculate that in his mind or her mind. If they are only having their folks serve 43 percent of the time now, and they have to serve 85 percent of the time -- unless they pass a law saying no more crime in Texas this year, we will have a moratorium on crime, unless that happens, if the crime rate continues roughly at the same rate, the Governor has to go down to the State legislature and say, "Ladies and Gentlemen of the House and Senate of the State of Texas, Delaware, Connecticut, North Dakota -- we have a chance to get money, Federal money to build prisons. But before we can get a penny we have to double our prison budget, build twice as many cells as we now have, so we can keep the people we now have in jail for 85 percent of the time, which is twice the time they are now serving. And you have to go to the taxpayers -- of Connecticut or Delaware or New York or California -- and tell them I am going to increase your taxes to do that before we can get any Federal money." I think Governors should do that. I think they should be honest with you. I think they should be honest with the American people and say, "We have a problem here in the State of X. We have prison overcrowding. We are letting our folks out of jail early. It should stop and I am going to raise your taxes by $500 million, $1 billion" -- whatever the size of the State. 128

Joe Biden

Leans Positive
I call that truth in legislating. We are doing that here. We are telling the American people exactly what everything is going to cost and exactly where we are going to get the money to pay for it. It was a long time in coming but we are doing it. That is what Governors should do. 129

Joe Biden

Very Negative
But my worry is here is what will happen. Maybe I am wrong. But I just want to get it on the Record. I am worried that if we attach the string requiring 85 percent of the time be served for those sentenced, one of two things is going to happen. Either the judges in the State are going to cut drastically back on the amount of time they sentence people to, people who deserve to be in jail a long time, or the State is not going to apply for the Federal money because in the Senate bill there is, for example, only $3 billion for State prison money -- it is called regional prisons -- Federal money that the States can use to put away their State prisoners. In order to qualify for that $3 billion over 5 years, the States collectively have to go out and first spend $60 billion -- $60 billion. I am not making this number up. So the States would have to spend $60 billion to have the right to qualify to compete for $3. 130

Joe Biden

Very Negative
I think that is fine. If they do it. But I make a prediction to you, and I have been proven wrong before and occasionally been proven right. I will make you a bet. I will make you the following bet. I will bet you that if this provision requiring 85 percent of time served stays in the bill relating to any portion of the prison money, that the States will not build new prisons. That money will sit there and not be spent. Or, if it is spent, it will be spent in the following way. The county jails -- and a lot of counties have the responsibility of taking care of the jail system -- in wealthy counties will go out and they will spend the money and they will get the money. And the very place we need the increased prison space, in the high crime rate areas, will not have more prisons, and the very place we do not need it will get the prisons built if any are built at all. 131

Joe Biden

Somewhat Positive
So, what I would rather see us do -- and I just offer this as consideration for my friend from North Dakota and my friend from Texas and others, and keep in mind I am for certainty in the prison system. Again it used to sound almost heretical to suggest, but a Democrat wrote that bill -- this guy -- Biden. So I am all for it. My bona fides have been proven for 12 years on this subject. 132

Joe Biden

Very Positive
I am for certainty, and keeping you in jail to serve your time. But I would rather see us say something like the following, which I think we might be able to get agreement to on the House side: That a State, in order to qualify to get this money, would have to submit to the Attorney General a plan that would demonstrate and in fact require that over a period of time they would move to meeting the requirement of having people serve up to 85 percent of the time for which they are sentenced. Because I want prisons built now. I do not want them built 5 years from now or 15 years from now. 133

Joe Biden

Very Negative
Last year 30,000 violent offenders, convicted in a court of law by a jury of their peers, for a violent offense -- 30,000 of all those convicted of violent crimes never served a day in jail; 30,000 never saw the inside of a jail after being sentenced or heard the clank of the bars behind them. These are not first time nonviolent offenders -- they may be a first-time violent offender, but they are not first time nonviolent offenders. 134

Joe Biden

Very Negative
I want those folks in jail. The Senator from Texas, I know he understood it, he could have cited the statistic which I have been citing for 10 years on this floor, that roughly 6 or 7 percent -- depending on which study you take -- of the criminals in America commit somewhere between 65 and 80 percent of all the crimes. Did you hear what I just said? An infinitesimal -- a very small percentage of the criminals commit most of the crimes. 135

Joe Biden

Very Negative
Those of you who are schoolteachers, those of you who live with school-teachers, those of you who know school teachers, ask them, with discipline problems in their school -- different than crime now -- if they could go into a school of 1,500 people, how many people, if they could arbitrarily remove the troublemakers in the school to change the nature of the way in which the school was run -- how many kids would they have to kick out of a school of 1,500 to restore some semblance of order? 136

Joe Biden

Neutral
I will lay you 8 to 5, go home and ask anybody who teaches, I bet you they tell you for a school that size, they will give you a number from 30 to 75 kids max. That is human nature. 137

Joe Biden

Very Negative
It is the same way with criminals, the same principle. Almost 6 million felonies were committed last year -- crimes committed last year, and how many of these people commit them over and over and over again? Do you know how many crimes are committed on the average by an addict? A heroin addict? A cocaine addict? And most of them are polyabusers, they are heroin and cocaine and everything else. 138

Joe Biden

Very Positive
Do you know how many crimes a year they commit on average? One hundred fifty-four crimes a year. We have identified in the United States of America 2.7 million addicts; not users, addicts. 139

Joe Biden

Somewhat Positive
Now figure it, you found those 2.7 million and assume that the number is off by 50 percent. Assume they commit 100 crimes apiece, and you can get them all off the street or all cured. Big impact. 140

Joe Biden

Somewhat Negative
The point I am trying to make is this: We need more prison space. I think, although well intended, this is counterproductive to send me to a conference and tell me that I cannot bring back a bill that does not have a requirement of 85 percent of the time having been served. It seems to me you are sending me on a mission impossible, based on what the House has done. And even if I pull it off, and we have the votes to do it, you are being counterproductive. 141

Joe Biden

Neutral
I want more prison money. I put in the Biden crime bill a total of $6 billion. I like the House's provision even better. They have $13 billion. We cannot afford that much, relative to the other, but they have no strings attached, basically. They allow the States to build these prisons now. Now. Not wait for regional prisons, not wait for any signoff. They allow them to start now. 142

Joe Biden

Very Positive
I see my friend from North Dakota is standing to speak; I will yield to him in a moment and then I will come back to the rest of the motion of the Senator from Texas. But I respectfully suggest we be somewhat more innovative. 143

Joe Biden

Very Positive
There is a guy named Henry Fulsom, who is a fine Republican elected official, the most honorable, decent man I have ever known, whom I served with on the county council in New Castle County, DE. Henry Fulsom was the first guy I heard say -- which I have heard many times since and I am sure it was said several hundred years ago -- he said politics is the art of the practical. 144

Joe Biden

Very Positive
I want a practical solution here. I want those 30,000 people last year who were convicted of a violent offense in the State prison system to go to jail. And to paraphrase my friend from Texas, although it would be best to keep them in jail 85 percent of their time, at least while they are in 45 percent of their sentence, they are not marauding my mother, my family, my constituents, my people. So it is better than nothing. I am afraid the alternative is nothing. 145

Joe Biden

Neutral
I think we should use this as a wedge. It is not inappropriate like some of the other things in this amendment are totally inappropriate, in my view. It is not inappropriate to say to the States, "Look, you want Federal money, here's the deal: You have to do it this way." But I really think the 85 percent requirement makes it almost impossible for it to work, although I have no argument with the utility of that action if it were taken because, as I said -- again, I do not say this to keep pointing out I wrote a bill, but I say it for my own bona fides. This is not someone who is up here who really is not for tough prison sentences, who is not for flat-time sentencing, who is not for keeping people in jail. I am not a liberal in conservative clothing on this thing. This is real, live stuff. 146

Joe Biden

Positive
I am the guy who wrote the bill with others. The Federal system works well. The States would do well to emulate the system. But it seems to me if you insist that they immediately go to 85 percent, the cost to them and their taxpayers is so gigantic in order to qualify for such a small piece of money, that they are not going to do it. 147

Joe Biden

Very Positive
I respectfully suggest that all my colleagues or their staff just pick up the phone, call your Governor back home -- Democrat or Republican -- and ask them what they think, whether they can go to the legislature now and ask for an additional tax increase to build a number of prisons immediately to demonstrate that they are keeping people in 85 percent of the time. 148

Joe Biden

Very Positive
I am delighted to yield to my friend. I thank him for his patience. My friend from North Dakota knows a great deal about this subject and feels strongly about it. 149

Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota. 151

Byron Dorgan

Unknown
Mr. President, I listened to the discussion by the Senator from Texas and the discussion by the Senator from Illinois. I had the same reaction as the chairman of the committee. 153

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
The Senator from Illinois makes the point that if we do not do something about the causes of crime, then we are not going to resolve this problem. There are not enough bricks in the country to build enough prisons to respond to America's crime epidemic. Much of it is for reasons that we do not even begin to understand. 154

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
Let me just describe, by reading you one piece from the Detroit News, about the death of a poor woman named Elizabeth Alvarez: 155

Byron Dorgan

Unknown
These boys were 10 and 14 years old. We do not even begin to understand what is happening in this country. Would we have read this 10, 20, or 40 years ago? Things have changed, and those who say things have not changed do not understand what is happening on the streets in this country. 158

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
This system does not work in this country. Walk a block from this building and look at any residential building and you will find bars on the windows. A block from the Capitol a building cannot be sold without bars on the windows. Is it to keep those residents in the buildings? No, not hardly, although you wonder who the prisoners are. It is to keep out those who would threaten the people living on the residential streets just blocks from the U.S. Capitol. 159

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
I suppose all of us come here with individual experiences that cause us to look at the criminal justice system in a different way. Etched in my memory forever is a late night phone call telling me my mother had been killed in a high-speed police chase by a man who was sentenced to 10 years in prison, with 5 years suspended. And, of course, he was out in a fraction of the 5 years. 160

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
I will probably never in my life overcome the anger I have at the criminal justice system. When you get involved in that system, especially if a loved one is affected, you understand that victims are not treated fairly. It is just a fact. They just are not treated fairly. There is a lot of anger all across this country because everyone now worries about becoming a victim to the increasing epidemic of violent crime. 161

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
There is fear in this country that we did not have 10, 20 and 30 years ago. Last year, 24,000 murders, 110,000 rapes, 670,000 robberies, 1.1 million assaults. That is in a free country. We are the murder capital of the world. The question is, Why? The Senator from Illinois asked that question. I wish I knew the answer. 162

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
If I or my colleagues knew the answer, I suspect we would spend all of our time constructing the kind of solutions that are necessary to respond and diminish the amount of violent crime in our country. But the fact is we do not know the answer. We know some of the causes, and we must begin to address some of those causes. 163

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
But in the meantime, I support the instruction offered by Senator Conrad from North Dakota and Senator Mack from Florida. They propose to instruct the conferees that the crime legislation which comes back to us include the provision that if you are convicted of a violent crime, you serve 85 percent of your sentence. 164

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
I come here to support that today, although it is not enough. It is the best we will get, but it is not enough. I this week introduced legislation which I expect to have considered over the next year or so, and I hope eventually will be passed, that does something much different than that. I want people convicted of violent crimes to be sentenced, and when they are sentenced they serve their entire sentence -- no fractions, no percentages. If you commit a violent crime, when you are sentenced, you serve your sentence. 165

Byron Dorgan

Very Positive
Now, how do you get States to do that? I have offered a bill that some will say is very difficult to support. Not for me. Some who do not know much about the Constitution will say it is unconstitutional, but in my judgment clearly it is not, and there are court decisions that support my position. 166

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
What I suggest is this: States should have in place a policy that says, if you are convicted of a violent crime, you will serve your entire sentence -- no time off, no good time, no deciding that after watching cable television for several years we will let you out early. If you are sentenced for 7 years, you serve 7 years. 167

Byron Dorgan

Positive
If States elect not to have that policy in place and they decide for their own reasons -- in order to save money, because of overcrowding, or other things -- they decide they want to let people who have committed violent crimes out early, then I say make them responsible for the cost of that decision. 168

Byron Dorgan

Positive
We spend a lot of time talking about cost shifting in the health care system because some people are covered and some people are not; some people do not have the resources so somebody else has to pay for it. 169

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
I tell you where there is shifting going on -- in the criminal justice system. Somebody says we cannot afford to keep somebody in prison, so we let them out early even if they are a violent criminal. Do you think that is not a cost to society? What about the next victim in the next month? Is that next victim not a cost, not only in terms of human tragedy but in income and property? The fact is this is simply cost shifting. Violent criminals let out early go out and commit more and more and more crime. 170

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
My legislation very simply would say, if a State makes the decision to let a violent criminal out early, and that criminal then goes out and commits another violent crime during the time when he or she would have been in prison, the victim has the right to sue the State that let them out early. I want the jurisdiction that decides to save money by letting violent criminals out of jail to be responsible for that violent criminal's next act. I want the victims to be able to sue the State for not keeping that violent criminal in jail. 171

Byron Dorgan

Somewhat Positive
Tough? Sure. Radical? Maybe to some. Right? Absolutely. 172

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
The fear about the epidemic of violent crime in America is clear. It does not take Dick Tracy to understand who is going to commit the next violent act. It is going to be the person that committed the last violent act. For example, Polly Klaas in California, the young girl who was abducted from her home in the early evening and killed. I have in my briefcase the rap sheet of the man who abducted her. It is over 3 pages, single spaced, arrest after arrest, conviction and incarceration. And State incompetence after incompetence because the criminal justice system knew this criminal was dangerous and did not keep him locked up. And because that person was turned out on the streets, this young girl is now dead. 173

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
Well, my point is we have to do things better and we have to do things smarter. I want to put as much pressure as we can on all those in charge of incarcerating people to get them to keep violent criminals in prison for their full sentence. 174

Byron Dorgan

Somewhat Positive
I say to my friend from Delaware -- and I compliment him enormously for this bill -- we have to be a lot smarter about the way we incarcerate people. A criminal is not a criminal is not a criminal. We have over a million people in jail. Half of them are nonviolent. We do not need to build giant brick and mortar edifices to keep in prison offenders who are nonviolent. 175

Joe Biden

Very Negative
If the Senator will yield, he knows in the Biden crime bill there is $3 billion for just that, $3 billion for boot camps for nonviolent criminals. 177

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
I was about to say that, and this is a demonstration of what I think we can do on a much larger scale. We can make room for 100,000 violent offenders now by turning nonviolent people out of those cells, and putting them in incarceration facilities that cost one-fifth of what it costs to build these giant prisons. That is the point. We have to be much smarter. 179

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
I am simply saying the energy you see in the Chamber from Senator Conrad and Senator Mack is an energy that comes directly from the American people. The American people have decided that we do not want to be victims of crimes committed by criminals who should have still been in prison but were let out because States decided they could not afford to keep them in prison. They could not afford it, but the victim is going to have to afford the costs of being a victim of crime. 180

Byron Dorgan

Very Negative
Let me just again compliment the Senator from Delaware on this bill. However, I intend to come back again and again and again to try to effect a change in which we not only address the root causes of the crime epidemic but we also try to keep those who we know are violent behind bars for their full sentence so that they are not out victimizing other Americans. 181

Byron Dorgan

Unknown
Mr. BIDEN addressed the Chair. 182

Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware. 184

Joe Biden

Very Positive
I thank the Senator from North Dakota. We have no disagreement on the answer. It is the means to accomplish the ends. Let me be a bit facetious and suggest the following. A better way to assure that North Dakota would do what the Senator wants, if it does not already, or California or Texas or any State would do what the Senator wants would be to say, "You do not get any highway funds again unless you incarcerate people for 85 percent of the time," because they care about the highway funds. They do not have to raise more money in order to do that. They do not have to build anything. They are in a situation where that would have more impact. 186

Joe Biden

Neutral
But to say now my theory is this: You get no money to keep people in prison unless you spend, if it is not twice the money, if it is 30 percent of the money, unless you spend a lot more money than you are going to get -- everyone would have to agree to that -- unless you spend a lot more money than you are going to get, you do not get any money to build prisons, I predict to you it will have the exact opposite effect my friend from North Dakota wants. More of those people will be out of jail -- not fewer, more. 187

Joe Biden

Very Positive
Before I ask unanimous consent here, I will conclude by suggesting to you we do not have a Federal problem. Running the risk of seeming like I am being a little too facetious, my friends who dare do this should go home and run for Governor. That is the place you should be. Run for Governor. And you be the one to go tell the people of your State you are going to raise their taxes. I hope you do. You should. 188

Joe Biden

Very Positive
But it gives Governors and State legislators a way out in order to ask for the money. They are going to have to go to the people in this antitax era and say, "Let me raise your taxes." You know how they lecture on balanced budgets all the time. I love those gubernatorial lectures on balanced budgets. They say, "Come down here." And they pass two amendments when the National Governors Conference meets. They have two resolutions to send to Congress. The first one is, "Congress, balance your budget like we do." The second one is, "And, by the way. Send us more money because we don't want to do our job and go to the people and tell them we need more money." Ninety-six percent of all the crime committed in America is committed solely within the jurisdiction of a Governor, a mayor, a county executive, or a local person -- 96 percent. We should help. And we are going to help. We are going to provide billions of dollars of help. I do not mind telling the American people where we are going to get the money to pay for this. Here is how we are going to pay for it flat out. But let us at least raise the money so they will spend it on what we want them to. 189

Joe Biden

Unknown
Mr. President, I yield the floor. 190

Joe Biden

Unknown
Mr. HATCH addressed the Chair. 191

Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah. 193

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
Mr. President, what drives the emotion of the distinguished Senator from Florida and his counterpart on the Democrat side of the floor is that people out there are tired of the average sentence time served in the States being 40 percent. And they are specifically tired of it when it comes to violent criminals. When a murderer gets a sentence of 15 years on the average, and serves less than 7, the average murderer in this country, it does not take many brains to realize that there has to be something done to keep these people off the street. 195

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
When the average rapist gets sentenced to 8 years in prison and serves less than 2, a rapist -- our daughters are at risk -- it is not hard to understand why some of us would like to see those sentences, at least 85 percent, carried out. That is what the truth in sentencing is. Whether it should be triggered by the regional prison concept or some other concept, it is almost irrelevant to me. But we want to get the violent criminals, and lock them up and throw away the key for at least 85 percent of that time that they are sentenced. If they use a gun, then they ought to get it doubled. 196

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
That is the way to stop the unwise, the unlawful, and the dirty, rotten use of guns in this society, not some ridiculous, idiotic, 5-day waiting period that has caused almost everybody to go out and buy their guns now -- the typical liberal solution to things. "Let us have a 5-day waiting a period. That is going to solve all of our problems." All that has done is increased gun sales like 300 percent across this country because people could not wait to go out and get their guns now that they are going to have to wait 5 days. 197

Orrin G. Hatch

Leans Negative
These liberal solutions have never worked. Of course, now they have Brady II. Brady I was supposed to do everything for us. It has not done a doggone thing. In fact, it is going to undermine law enforcement in this country. 198

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
Now they want an assault weapon ban. They are going to ban 19 weapons. But they have defined them in such a way that over 100 will be banned, but they are going to exclude, exempt, 650 that have basically the same firing mechanism as these so-called 19 -- to take away the rights of American citizens, as defined in the second amendment to keep and bear arms, which is certainly more than a militia right as defined by some today. That is the national guard right. That is not what the Founding Fathers meant. That is not what they meant when they wrote that amendment. The militia was every American citizen who felt inclined to support our country. 199

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
So we can moan and groan about truth in sentencing all we want. But that is what the American people want. They want the violent criminals put away. 200

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Positive
I happen to agree with the distinguished Senator from North Dakota that we should not be spending all of our expensive jail time for those who are not violent people. I happen to agree with the Senator from Delaware that boot camps may be a solution for people like that. We should not make prison a very nice time for people. Unfortunately, our do-gooders on the liberal side of the equation want to make sure that everybody is treated beautifully in prison. Frankly, I think it is time to get tough on these people. 201

Orrin G. Hatch

Unknown
I have another part of this I would like to spend a few minutes on. 202

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
Mr. President, the two Houses of Congress are soon going to go to a conference on the crime bill. I regret to report that the crime bill passed by the other body contains several billion dollars in ill- defined social programs -- I might say ill-defined 1960's Great-Society- style social spending programs in the guise of anticrime legislation. 203

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
As such, these wasteful social spending boondoggles will rob the people of Utah and every other State of scarce resources which would be aimed at fighting crime, building prisons, hiring local, State, and Federal law enforcement officials and officers, and similar law enforcement measures. 204

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
Take, for example, the Local Partnership Act contained in the House bill. This program will give local governments $2 billion for fiscal years 1995 and 1996 to use for four purposes: education to prevent crime, substance abuse treatment to prevent crime, coordination of Federal crime prevention programs and, job programs to prevent crime. There are no other standards in the House bill. That is it -- those four broad-based standards. We just have these four general purposes. 205

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
In plain English, this is just Federal money for local government social programs with the crime label put on them for cosmetic purposes. By slapping the phrase "to prevent crime" on these purpose clauses, this provides the cover to hijack $2 billion of precious crime fighting resources for anything at all that localities will label "education to prevent crime," or for drug treatment, or for more Government jobs programs. 206

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
The $2 billion would be much better spent in really fighting crime by spending it on prisons, law enforcement officers, and equipment. 207

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
Let me take another example of wasteful social spending in the House bill, the Model Intensive Grant Program. This program allows the Attorney General virtually total discretion to spend $1.5 billion over 5 years in grants for up to 15 chronic high-intensive crime areas to develop comprehensive crime prevention programs. This money apparently can be spent on anything that can arguably be said to attribute to reducing chronic violent crime. 208

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
The House bill says this includes but is not limited to youth programs, "deterioration or lack of public facilities, inadequate public services such as public transportation," substance abuse treatment facilities, employment services offices, and police services, equipment, or facilities. 209

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
I believe in spending wisely on crime prevention, although most of that funding should not come from the crime bill, where we should focus very heavily on enforcement. 210

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
But this open-ended Model Intensive Grant Program allows spending on just about anything that can be remotely described as crime prevention, however tenuously, including public transportation. We are supposed to be sending the President an anticrime bill. Let the Department of Transportation offer some of its existing funds for transportation services for preventive crime. Let us not take it out of our crime bill. 211

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
Mr. President, you can bet that conferees from the other side of the aisle will propose inadequate funding for new prisons in the crime bill. We will undoubtedly need to spend more on prisons. We need to spend more on prisons for two interrelated reasons. We can talk about ensuring that children do not go astray, and we should be concerned about that. But we have many vicious criminals right now who are not serving enough of their sentences. And speaking of crime prevention, one of the best things we can do to prevent crime right now is to take violent criminals off the streets for long periods of time so that they cannot commit anymore crimes. 212

Orrin G. Hatch

Negative
Another social spending program in the House bill is $525 million for a Youth Employment and Skills Crime Prevention Program which funnels cash to State and local governments for job training and make-work programs. 213

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Positive
This is a duplication of the programs I have just mentioned, except this one is run by the Department of Labor. Despite the fact that there are already over 150 Federal job training programs at a cost of over $20 billion a year, the Attorney General announced this week that the administration supports this program and has asked that Congress increase the program to $1 billion. 214

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
Frankly, the best crime prevention program is one that ensures swift apprehension and certain and lengthy incarceration for violent criminals. The more than $4 billion in these three boondoggle programs in the bill the other body sent belong in prison construction and other measures. 215

Orrin G. Hatch

Slightly Negative
These social spending programs are neither tough nor smart on the fight against crime. We can and must spend our moneys more wisely, and in the process we have to move to truth in sentencing. 216

Orrin G. Hatch

Leans Positive
I want to point out a little bit about just how these programs work. This lists seven Federal departments who sponsor 266 programs which serve delinquent and at-risk youth -- 266. These are already existing programs. This is Federal departments on this side and the number of programs each department has. 217

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Positive
The Department of Education has 31 programs already in existence without the crime bill. The Department of Health and Human Services has 92 programs already in existence. We are doing a lot in this area without the crime bill. The Department of Housing and Urban Development has 3 programs; Department of Interior, 9 programs; Department of Justice, 117 programs; Department of Labor has 8; Department of Transportation, 6, for a total of 266 Federal programs for at-risk youth. 218

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
Yet, we would add $4 billion more. In other words, every time you try to do something about crime, those on the liberal side of the equation load the bill up with more social spending programs that are not working anyway, rather than do the things that have to be done against violent crime in our society. 219

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Positive
So I repeat this. The GAO recently reported to Senator Dodd, who heads our Family and Children Subcommittee on the Labor Committee, that there are 7 Federal departments fostering 266 prevention programs which currently serve delinquent or at-risk youth. Like I say, of these 266 programs, 31 are run by the Department of Education, 92 by HHS, and 117 by the Justice Department. 220

Orrin G. Hatch

Negative
GAO found that there already exists a massive Federal effort on behalf of troubled youth," which spends over $3 billion a year. GAO went on to report that: 221

Orrin G. Hatch

Unknown
That is in the GAO report, Federal Agency Juvenile Delinquency Development Statements, August 1992. 223

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
Despite the findings of the GAO, the House crime bill throws even more money at State and local government under the prevention label, while failing to acknowledge our ongoing efforts. Listening to the House bill supporters, one would assume the Federal Government has done nothing in the area of crime prevention. 224

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
They load up the House bill with almost $10 billion of prevention. I believe there are some legitimate areas where we can do something about prevention, but I have to tell you right now that we are doing plenty without loading up this crime bill with more than we need. We need the prisons; we need the police; we need to get tough on crime; we need the mandatory minimum sentences; we need the beefing up of Quantico, of our DEA, of our FBI, of our Justice Department prosecutors, rather than cutting back on them. We need tough antirural crime initiatives, antigang initiatives, violence-against-women initiatives, the scams on the senior citizens, against telemarketing fraud. All of that in this bill would make a difference against crime in our society. 225

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
Mr. President, I have to say that we have a lot of problems in going to conference on this crime bill, not the least of which is the gun ban and, of course, not the least of which is this racial justice act, which would virtually outlaw all implementations of all death penalties in our society today, and would cost the American taxpayers billions, if not trillions of unnecessary dollars, as the whole capital punishment system would come to a screeching halt and be embroiled in all kinds of litigation, all kinds of statistical analysis, all kinds of social welfare work, to the point that people will throw their hands up in the air and say we really cannot get tough on criminals, especially those who commit willful, violent, heinous murders against the public. 226

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
Mr. President, I wanted to make a couple of these points during this debate today, because I have to go back to the truth-in-sentencing provisions. If we do not get tough on the violent criminals, we are not going to make headway in this society. All of the prevention programs in the world are not going to help us. 227

Orrin G. Hatch

Unknown
With that, I yield the floor. 228

Joe Biden

Very Positive
Mr. President, I thank my friend from Utah. Look, Mr. President, we are debating old ground here. We have been through it a number of times. I have made my case as it relates to truth-in- sentencing. I am willing to take a chance if my friends are. I want to be able to say -- I should not say it this way -- I told you so. I am going to wash my hands of this one. 230

Joe Biden

Very Negative
I want to make it clear that I want more prison space. I think the States need the help. I think to do this to the States and insist this is the only way they can do it, they will not build the prisons needed, they will not spend the money we are going to appropriate for the States. When it turns out that we pass this big bill with prison money in it, if truth-in-sentencing is in here the way it is, do not come back to me 2 years from now and say we have a prison shortage in America. I do not want to hear it. 231

Joe Biden

Slightly Negative
If it turns out the States do all this, then I will, as I have done at least on one other occasion on the floor, come to the floor and say, mea culpa, mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. Forgive me, I was wrong. I would be delighted to stand here and say I was wrong. 232

Joe Biden

Negative
The States are going to spend $60 billion over 5 years, and we are going to spend somewhere around that area over the next several years. We are going to spend between $3 and $6 billion over the next several years, and we will build all these prisons and America will be safe. If that happens, the pages looking at me, who will be 5 years older, and will all be in college, I will remind them and everybody else, I will come to the floor and say I was wrong, mistaken. 233

Joe Biden

Positive
I am told this is cleared by my Republican friends. 234

Joe Biden

Somewhat Negative
I ask unanimous consent that the vote on Senator Conrad's motion to instruct occur at 6:30 p.m.; that upon the disposition of that motion, the Senate vote on Senator Gramm's motion to instruct; that these votes occur without any intervening action or debate; that no amendments be in order to either motion, and that no other motion to instruct the conferees on H.R. 3355 be in order after 4 p.m. today. 235

Orrin G. Hatch

Somewhat Positive
Reserving the right to object, Mr. President, and I do not believe I will object. We do have this other resolution we would like to get in on. 237

Joe Biden

Slightly Positive
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that we vote -- -- 239

Orrin G. Hatch

Unknown
We do not need a vote on it. 241

Joe Biden

Very Positive
I will accept it. Let me make sure I understand what I am accepting. I am accepting the motion to instruct that calls for a big room and the press present. 243

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
The last time -- in the last conference -- they called the conference on a Sunday in the middle of a Redskins game; they put it in a small room, or a relatively small hearing room, foreclosed anybody from the public from viewing what was going on, including the media. It turned out to be a fiasco. 245

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Positive
I really believe that it is in the best interest of the Senator from Delaware and all of us, to have this in the largest room we can find in the Senate -- one of the three caucus rooms -- or have it in open forum and allow anybody in the public to come, including the media, so they can see what we are doing about crime in this. It is not going to be a fun conference or a beautiful thing to behold. It is going to be a mess. I think it is time for the general public to see what it is like, the games that are played, sometimes maybe by both sides. 246

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Positive
So I think it will just be a thing that will benefit all of us. I am really cheered by the fact that our distinguished chairman on the Judiciary Committee is willing to accept that resolution. As soon as we get it typed up, we will bring it to the floor and get it passed. 247

Joe Biden

Very Positive
Mr. President, this is a little revisionist history here, but let me point out I do not think whether there is a Redskins game on or the Super Bowl we should not have a conference. I would like to point out I do not want to get in a big fight here that after months and months my Republican colleagues not allow me to go to conference. 249

Joe Biden

Leans Negative
They did not want a crime bill because it had gun legislation in, number one. 250

Joe Biden

Slightly Negative
No. 2, we held the conference in the Judiciary Committee room which is almost as big as the Senate floor. 251

Joe Biden

Very Positive
No. 3, to the best of my knowledge the press was there. Under the sunshine law there is not an ability to tell the press they cannot come into the room. To the best of my knowledge, the press was there; the TV was there; people were there. As a matter of fact, there were a couple of interesting stories written, to put this in perspective, about how I ramrod the Republicans, and they watched it. 252

Joe Biden

Negative
Why did I do that, by the way? I did that because they filibustered a crime bill for 2 years, and I will do it again if they try to filibuster it for 2 more years. I want the public there to see it, too. 253

Joe Biden

Very Positive
I promise you the public will be there. I promise you I will agree to whatever room they want to have it in, if we have it on the this side or if we do not have it on this side. I am all for everybody watching it. If you want to add the possibility of putting it in RFK stadium, I will add RFK stadium if you want. 254

Joe Biden

Very Positive
Keep in mind, the Biden crime bill we were trying to pass for 4 years. So I am anxious to pass it. I want everyone to be there. I want everyone to see it. I am ready to go. I will accept it even without it being written, even without seeing the language. I trust my colleague so much, I will accept his assertion that it be in a big room with television. I cannot, obviously, dictate to the Rules Committee which room they give us, but I promise you we will hold it on the lawn if we have to in order for everybody to be able to come and see it. And we will sell tickets if you want. 255

Joe Biden

Positive
So I will accept the motion, sight unseen. 256

Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Campbell). The Senator from Delaware is in the process of seeking a unanimous-consent request. Does he seek to revise that request? 258

Joe Biden

Slightly Negative
No. I withdraw the request. 260

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Positive
Mr. President, we will certainly agree with the request if we can. 262

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Negative
Just to straighten the Record out, though, the reason for the delay the last time is we were in a fight over the ratio of conferees. Finally, we got rolled on it. No question about it. 263

Orrin G. Hatch

Positive
The only reason I remember the Redskins game is because that was the only game I think I was permitted to go to in years, and my good friend from Wyoming was with me. It was not a very good game because they were losing. We did not mind coming to the conference, and we both left. 264

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Positive
The fact is it was a rollover of the other party conference that occurred behind closed doors, without the public having any idea about it and without anybody seeing what was going on, and with an attempt by maybe both sides trying to gain private advantage -- frankly, we felt on one side, but nevertheless I am sure the other side probably felt, both sides, so I will even agree to that. 265

Orrin G. Hatch

Very Positive
The fact of the matter is at this time it should not be, and I think it plays in the distinguished chairman's best interest, and certainly it does in our best interest, to make sure that we sit down and do it in an open forum so that everyone can see what is going on. On this side this year, in a rather large room, one of the three caucus rooms, either S. 325 in the Russell Building, or the Hart 216, or 106 in the Dirksen Building, whatever the large caucus room is. 266

Joe Biden

Slightly Positive
Mr. President, I doubt anybody would object to that. I have never yet found a Senator who was not willing to have television cameras in a room, particularly a big room, and particularly a big undertaking. I am happy to do that. 268

Joe Biden

Very Negative
I might add, somewhat facetiously, if the new rules we passed relative to the last week's debate are in place, no one will have to worry about a Redskins game interrupting anything. So we are going to be fine. 269

Joe Biden

Somewhat Positive
Mr. President, I would renew my unanimous-consent request and acknowledge to the Senator I accept the motion. 270

Alan Simpson

Leans Positive
Mr. President, reserving the right to object, and I will not object, I do think that it is appropriate to say that Senator Biden and Senator Hatch have worked very closely together. Surely we have our disagreements. But they have been accommodating to those on Senator Biden's side and on our side of the aisle. 272

Alan Simpson

Very Negative
This is a very difficult issue. It is about money. It is about partisanship. It is about police. It is about prevention. It is about punishment. But I think we can get it done, and I think it is very important. Senator Hatch has expressed it very clearly, that even though there was a filibuster -- there were threats that there were -- it was still a conference that took place in a shoe box, and they just kind of wadded people in on the sides. 273

Alan Simpson

Very Negative
I was there. I was a conferee. It was not a pleasant thing, because it is never pleasant when you get rolled. But when you are in the minority you do get rolled. I understand. That is politics. That is fair. I have no whine about that. 274

Alan Simpson

Very Positive
I think it will be good because I want the people -- not to see how the Senate does its work, the Senate does its work, I think, in a very open way, at least these two managers have -- I want them to see how the House works, where they took two motions to instruct from the U.S. House of Representatives that passed by votes of 260 to whatever and just sat and smiled and rolled their own House. 275

Alan Simpson

Very Positive
I remember that very well. It was with a great deal of high glee. And some of the people who were in there when the House instructed the conferees to stick with the provisions -- I think there were at least two provisions by big votes, this group of conferees from the House just, as I say, in an arrogant way just closed the book. 276

Alan Simpson

Leans Negative
This is the House that gives us lectures on the filibuster and says that we over here are an evil group who do an ugly thing called filibuster. Yes, we do. It helps a minority within the minority, regardless of what party you are in. 277

Alan Simpson

Unknown
Over there they just run it with an iron fist and hang people out to dry, take their amendments, put someone else's stamp on them, and ship them down the road. 278

Alan Simpson

Very Positive
I want the public to see that it is really something to see, to give them a whole new view. That is why I think the motion to instruct will be appropriate, and not to reveal any chicanery in the Senate, but to show how blatant are these House conferees. It is the same stacked deck. It is the same stacked House conference. Just take a look at it. And here we go. I know them. I like them. They were pleasant persons. But they play a version of hardball that makes us now look like we are wandering around with our hands and feet covered with Band-Aids. 279

Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further objection to the request of the Senator from Delaware? 281

Unknown
Without objection, it is so ordered. 282

Unknown
The Senator from Delaware. 283

Joe Biden

Unknown
Mr. President, I send a motion to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration. 286

Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will tell the Senator there was a motion currently pending. 288

Unknown
Does the Senator seek unanimous subsequent to set that motion aside? 289

Joe Biden

Very Positive
Yes. I unanimous consent to set aside, I believe it is the Gramm motion. 291

Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. 293

Unknown
The Gramm motion is set aside. 294

Unknown
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The motion will be stated. 296

Joe Biden

Slightly Positive
Mr. President, a lot of the motions we have heard and will hear, although very important to individual Senators and maybe even important to some aspects of the bill, are not the heart and soul and guts of this legislation. 308

Joe Biden

Very Negative
The reason this is such important legislation is not merely that it spends a lot of money, we do that lots of times on things that are not important. But it is important because it is the first time, as I said, we struck a balance here on the floor, liberals and conservatives alike, with notable exceptions. I believe that we have to deal both with the violent criminals who are out there, those people who are already convicted of a crime, with tough sentencing and penalties, more police, et cetera, at the same time trying to prevent crime as well, people from getting into the crime stream. 309

Joe Biden

Very Negative
As I said, the motion to instruct, so far by and large, has been about fighting crimes in the margin. Only some 5 percent of the violent crimes, only 5 percent are prosecuted at a Federal level. And yet my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, and some on my side, would have us believe that tough Federal penalties are critical parts of this bill. 310

Joe Biden

Very Negative
I am for the tough Federal penalties, but let me just assure you and anyone listening, if only 5 percent of all the violent crimes -- 5 percent -- are prosecuted at the Federal level, and we toughen that 5 percent, does anybody believe that is going to affect crime in America? 311

Joe Biden

Leans Negative
So it is kind of important we put this in focus. 312

Joe Biden

Very Negative
I agree that tougher penalties for violent offenders are important. That is why in the Biden bill that I introduced -- the original bill here, now the Biden-Hatch bill that passed here -- we included the largest ever expansion of the Federal death penalty to cover some 50 crimes that included over 60 additional penalties, primarily covering drugs and drug traffic. 313

Joe Biden

Very Negative
But stiff Federal penalties will not be the dam that stops the river of crime from flowing through our country. Far more importantly, this crime bill will help the States do their job, which is to investigate, prosecute, try, and incarcerate the 95 percent of the criminals who are terrorizing our streets and neighborhoods within State jurisdictions. And that means, first and foremost, that we have to make sure both sides of the crime fighting equation add up. 314

Joe Biden

Very Negative
On the one hand, we have to provide the States with the resources to punish violent criminals. We must also reach out and prevent would-be criminals from coming down the path in the first place. 315

Joe Biden

Leans Positive
As I have already said today, I do not want to waste any more time debating what I believe are the marginal options to instruct. 316

Joe Biden

Slightly Negative
So, without any further talk, I have sent to the desk a motion to instruct which directs the conferees to agree upon a balanced, comprehensive crime bill, which includes all the key building blocks that we passed in this Senate and that are truly effective crime- fighting strategies. 317

Joe Biden

Very Negative
In my opinion, I believe we should direct the conferees to, one, include in the conference report the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund. We must guarantee to the American people we have the money and we are going to spend the money on crime. I think it is the single most serious domestic as well as foreign problem that faces this Nation. And we should set aside a trust fund to guarantee the American people, for the next 5 years we are going to meet the commitment that we say, that the money is available for vital programs, ranging from prevention to punishment, that is authorized in the Biden-Hatch crime bill. 318

Joe Biden

Slightly Positive
It directs the conferees to provide adequate funding to put 100,000 cops on the street over the next 6 years; in our case, 5 years. But 100,000 cops. The House bill only has 50,000 cops that we provide the money for at the local level. 319

Joe Biden

Very Negative
These police officers will be on the streets of our neighborhoods and local communities in community policing programs. For if we know one thing about crime, we know that there is less crime that occurs on a corner where a cop is standing at that moment. We do not know a whole lot more, but we know if a cop is on the corner, and if a cop is not on the other corner, there is going to be crime committed on the other corner more likely than where the cop is standing. We know that. 320

Joe Biden

Neutral
This is a tough bill we passed out of the Senate to provide the States to hire 100,000 new cops. There are now only 544,000 cops in all of America. So we are almost increasing by 20 percent the number of local police officers in this bill. 321

Joe Biden

Neutral
And we should instruct the conferees to hold fast on my 100,000 number, not the 50,000 number the House has. 322

Joe Biden

Very Negative
My motion also directs the conferees to provide sufficient funding for secure prison facilities for violent offenders and tougher penalties to keep violent offenders where they belong -- behind bars. 323

Joe Biden

Very Negative
We should be instructed that we go back and not come back here with a conference report that does not have sufficient money in it for prison construction. 324

Joe Biden

Positive
I also want to help the States build and operate boot camps, jails, and other low- and minimum-security facilities, in line with what my friend, Senator Dorgan from North Dakota, was talking about. These are for nonviolent, less serious offenders. The House does not have any money in there for boot camps. You can do it at about 40 percent of the cost. We should stick with the Senate position to have that $3 billion in there for boot camps. 325

Joe Biden

Very Negative
My motion also instructs the conferees to heed the other side of the ledger and provide sufficient funding for State and local government crime prevention programs, including prevention programs specifically aimed at children most at risk to drugs and crime. 326

Joe Biden

Neutral
Under the leadership of people like Senator Dodd, Senator Domenici, Senator Danforth, and many others on our side of the aisle and on both sides, we have included such provisions in the crime bill. They are an important and balanced piece of this legislation. 327

Joe Biden

Leans Negative
So, Mr. President, I hope there is no argument about what I have just suggested. 328

Joe Biden

Very Negative
This crime bill is made up of four major components. One, there is a trust fund. Two, there are real, live, hard dollars for States to build boot camps and prisons. Three, there is in this bill 100,000 cops -- 100,000 cops. And, four, there is in this bill the Violence Against Women Act, which I also included and that my friend from Utah has cosponsored, that deals for the first time in a concentrated way with the abuse heaped upon women through violence in American society, and identifies it as not a unique but an identifiable and clearly able-to- be-dealt-with problem. 329

Joe Biden

Positive
And the last part of this bill we passed out of here which we should have instructions on is to do what Senators Domenici and others have instructed on the Republican side, as well as my friends on my side, and that is to balance it off with general, serious prevention efforts that we know work, by giving States money to set up these programs which we know work, to prevent children from moving into the crime and drug stream in the first place.