89–006

107TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 107–46

CONSEQUENCES FOR JUVENILE OFFENDERS ACT OF 2001

APRIL 20, 2001.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of

the Union and ordered to be printed

Mr. SENSENBRENNER, from the Committee on the Judiciary,

submitted the following

R E P O R T

[To accompany H.R. 863]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill

(H.R. 863) to provide grants to ensure increased accountability for

juvenile offenders, having considered the same, reports favorably

thereon with an amendment and recommends that the bill as

amended do pass.

CONTENTS

Page

The Amendment ...................................................................................................... 1

Purpose and Summary ............................................................................................ 8

Background and Need for the Legislation ............................................................. 8

Hearings ................................................................................................................... 10

Committee Consideration ........................................................................................ 11

Vote of the Committee ............................................................................................. 11

Committee Oversight Findings ............................................................................... 11

Performance Goals and Objectives ......................................................................... 11

New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures ...................................................... 11

Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate .......................................................... 11

Constitutional Authority Statement ...................................................................... 13

Section-by-Section Analysis and Discussion .......................................................... 13

Agency Views ........................................................................................................... 20

Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ..................................... 24

Markup Transcript .................................................................................................. 37

The amendment is as follows:

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Consequences for Juvenile Offenders Act of 2001’’.

2

SEC. 2. GRANT PROGRAM.

Part R of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968

(42 U.S.C. 3796 et seq.) is amended to read as follows:

‘‘PART R—JUVENILE ACCOUNTABILITY BLOCK GRANTS

‘‘SEC. 1801. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED.

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General is authorized to provide grants to

States, for use by States and units of local government, and in certain cases directly

to specially qualified units.

‘‘(b) AUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES.—Amounts paid to a State or a unit of local government under this part shall be used by the State or unit of local government for the

purpose of strengthening the juvenile justice system, which includes——

‘‘(1) developing, implementing, and administering graduated sanctions for

juvenile offenders;

‘‘(2) building, expanding, renovating, or operating temporary or permanent

juvenile correction, detention, or community corrections facilities;

‘‘(3) hiring juvenile court judges, probation officers, and court-appointed defenders and special advocates, and funding pretrial services for juvenile offenders, to promote the effective and expeditious administration of the juvenile justice system;

‘‘(4) hiring additional prosecutors, so that more cases involving violent juvenile offenders can be prosecuted and case backlogs reduced;

‘‘(5) providing funding to enable prosecutors to address drug, gang, and

youth violence problems more effectively and for technology, equipment, and

training to assist prosecutors in identifying and expediting the prosecution of

violent juvenile offenders;

‘‘(6) establishing and maintaining training programs for law enforcement

and other court personnel with respect to preventing and controlling juvenile

crime;

‘‘(7) establishing juvenile gun courts for the prosecution and adjudication of

juvenile firearms offenders;

‘‘(8) establishing drug court programs for juvenile offenders that provide

continuing judicial supervision over juvenile offenders with substance abuse

problems and the integrated administration of other sanctions and services for

such offenders;

‘‘(9) establishing and maintaining a system of juvenile records designed to

promote public safety;

‘‘(10) establishing and maintaining interagency information-sharing programs that enable the juvenile and criminal justice system, schools, and social

services agencies to make more informed decisions regarding the early identification, control, supervision, and treatment of juveniles who repeatedly commit

serious delinquent or criminal acts;

‘‘(11) establishing and maintaining accountability-based programs designed

to reduce recidivism among juveniles who are referred by law enforcement personnel or agencies;

‘‘(12) establishing and maintaining programs to conduct risk and need assessments of juvenile offenders that facilitate the effective early intervention

and the provision of comprehensive services, including mental health screening

and treatment and substance abuse testing and treatment to such offenders;

‘‘(13) establishing and maintaining accountability-based programs that are

designed to enhance school safety;

‘‘(14) establishing and maintaining restorative justice programs;

‘‘(15) establishing and maintaining programs to enable juvenile courts and

juvenile probation officers to be more effective and efficient in holding juvenile

offenders accountable and reducing recidivism; and

‘‘(16) hiring detention and corrections personnel, and establishing and

maintaining training programs for such personnel to improve facility practices

and programming.

‘‘(c) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘restorative justice program’ means a program that emphasizes the moral accountability of an offender toward the victim and the affected community, and may include community reparations boards, restitution (in the form of monetary payment or service to the victim

or, where no victim can be identified, service to the affected community), and mediation between victim and offender.

3

‘‘SEC. 1802. GRANT ELIGIBILITY.

‘‘(a) STATE ELIGIBILITY.—To be eligible to receive a grant under this section, a

State shall submit to the Attorney General an application at such time, in such

form, and containing such assurances and information as the Attorney General may

require by guidelines, including—— ‘‘(1) information about—— ‘‘(A) the activities proposed to be carried out with such grant; and

‘‘(B) the criteria by which the State proposes to assess the effectiveness

of such activities on achieving the purposes of this part; and

‘‘(2) assurances that the State and any unit of local government to which

the State provides funding under section 1803(b), has in effect (or shall have

in effect, not later than 1 year after the date that the State submits such application) laws, or has implemented (or shall implement, not later than 1 year

after the date that the State submits such application) policies and programs,

that provide for a system of graduated sanctions described in subsection (c).

‘‘(b) LOCAL ELIGIBILITY.—— ‘‘(1) SUBGRANT ELIGIBILITY.—To be eligible to receive a subgrant, a unit of

local government, other than a specially qualified unit, shall provide to the

State——‘‘(A) information about—— ‘‘(i) the activities proposed to be carried out with such subgrant;

and

‘‘(ii) the criteria by which the unit proposes to assess the effectiveness of such activities on achieving the purposes of this part; and

‘‘(B) such assurances as the State shall require, that, to the maximum

extent applicable, the unit of local government has in effect (or shall have

in effect, not later than 1 year after the date that the unit submits such

application) laws, or has implemented (or shall implement, not later than

1 year after the date that the unit submits such application) policies and

programs, that provide for a system of graduated sanctions described in

subsection (c).

‘‘(2) SPECIAL RULE.—The requirements of paragraph (1) shall apply to a specially qualified unit that receives funds from the Attorney General under section 1803(e), except that information that is otherwise required to be submitted

to the State shall be submitted to the Attorney General.

‘‘(c) GRADUATED SANCTIONS.—A system of graduated sanctions, which may be

discretionary as provided in subsection (d), shall ensure, at a minimum, that——

‘‘(1) sanctions are imposed on a juvenile offender for each delinquent offense;

‘‘(2) sanctions escalate in intensity with each subsequent, more serious delinquent offense;

‘‘(3) there is sufficient flexibility to allow for individualized sanctions and

services suited to the individual juvenile offender; and

‘‘(4) appropriate consideration is given to public safety and victims of crime.

‘‘(d) DISCRETIONARY USE OF SANCTIONS.——

‘‘(1) VOLUNTARY PARTICIPATION.—A State or unit of local government may

be eligible to receive a grant under this part if——

‘‘(A) its system of graduated sanctions is discretionary; and

‘‘(B) it demonstrates that it has promoted the use of a system of graduated sanctions by taking steps to encourage implementation of such a system by juvenile courts.

‘‘(2) REPORTING REQUIREMENT IF GRADUATED SANCTIONS NOT USED.——

‘‘(A) JUVENILE COURTS.—A State or unit of local government in which

the imposition of graduated sanctions is discretionary shall require each juvenile court within its jurisdiction—

‘‘(i) which has not implemented a system of graduated sanctions,

to submit an annual report that explains why such court did not implement graduated sanctions; and

‘‘(ii) which has implemented a system of graduated sanctions but

has not imposed graduated sanctions in all cases, to submit an annual

report that explains why such court did not impose graduated sanctions

in all cases.

‘‘(B) UNITS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT.—Each unit of local government,

other than a specially qualified unit, that has 1 or more juvenile courts that

use a discretionary system of graduated sanctions shall collect the information reported under subparagraph (A) for submission to the State each year.

‘‘(C) STATES.—Each State and specially qualified unit that has 1 or

more juvenile courts that use a discretionary system of graduated sanctions

shall collect the information reported under subparagraph (A) for submisVerDate 11-MAY-2000 22:09 Apr 20, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\HR046.XXX pfrm04 PsN: HR046
4

sion to the Attorney General each year. A State shall also collect and submit to the Attorney General the information collected under subparagraph

(B).

‘‘(e) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section:

‘‘(1) The term ‘discretionary’ means that a system of graduated sanctions

is not required to be imposed by each and every juvenile court in a State or

unit of local government.

‘‘(2) The term ‘sanctions’ means tangible, proportional consequences that

hold the juvenile offender accountable for the offense committed. A sanction

may include counseling, restitution, community service, a fine, supervised probation, or confinement.

‘‘SEC. 1803. ALLOCATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS.

‘‘(a) STATE ALLOCATION.——

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In accordance with regulations promulgated pursuant to

this part and except as provided in paragraph (3), the Attorney General shall

allocate——

‘‘(A) 0.25 percent for each State; and

‘‘(B) of the total funds remaining after the allocation under subparagraph (A), to each State, an amount which bears the same ratio to the

amount of remaining funds described in this subparagraph as the population of people under the age of 18 living in such State for the most recent

calendar year in which such data is available bears to the population of

people under the age of 18 of all the States for such fiscal year.

‘‘(2) PROHIBITION.—No funds allocated to a State under this subsection or

received by a State for distribution under subsection (b) may be distributed by

the Attorney General or by the State involved for any program other than a program contained in an approved application.

‘‘(b) LOCAL DISTRIBUTION.——

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), each State which

receives funds under subsection (a)(1) in a fiscal year shall distribute among

units of local government, for the purposes specified in section 1801, not less

than 75 percent of such amounts received.

‘‘(2) WAIVER.—If a State submits to the Attorney General an application for

waiver that demonstrates and certifies to the Attorney General that——

‘‘(A) the State’s juvenile justice expenditures in the fiscal year preceding the date in which an application is submitted under this part (the

‘State percentage’) is more than 25 percent of the aggregate amount of juvenile justice expenditures by the State and its eligible units of local government; and

‘‘(B) the State has consulted with as many units of local government

in such State, or organizations representing such units, as practicable regarding the State’s calculation of expenditures under subparagraph (A), the

State’s application for waiver under this paragraph, and the State’s proposed uses of funds,

the percentage referred to in paragraph (1) shall equal the percentage determined by subtracting the State percentage from 100 percent.

‘‘(3) ALLOCATION.—In making the distribution under paragraph (1), the

State shall allocate to such units of local government an amount which bears

the same ratio to the aggregate amount of such funds as——

‘‘(A) the sum of——

‘‘(i) the product of——

‘‘(I) three-quarters; multiplied by

‘‘(II) the average juvenile justice expenditure for such unit of

local government for the 3 most recent calendar years for which

such data is available; plus

‘‘(ii) the product of——

‘‘(I) one-quarter; multiplied by

‘‘(II) the average annual number of part 1 violent crimes in

such unit of local government for the 3 most recent calendar years

for which such data is available, bears to——

‘‘(B) the sum of the products determined under subparagraph (A) for all

such units of local government in the State.

‘‘(4) EXPENDITURES.—The allocation any unit of local government shall receive under paragraph (3) for a payment period shall not exceed 100 percent

of juvenile justice expenditures of the unit for such payment period.

‘‘(5) REALLOCATION.—The amount of any unit of local government’s allocation that is not available to such unit by operation of paragraph (4) shall be

5

available to other units of local government that are not affected by such operation in accordance with this subsection.

‘‘(c) UNAVAILABILITY OF DATA FOR UNITS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT.—If the State

has reason to believe that the reported rate of part 1 violent crimes or juvenile justice expenditures for a unit of local government is insufficient or inaccurate, the

State shall——

‘‘(1) investigate the methodology used by the unit to determine the accuracy

of the submitted data; and

‘‘(2) if necessary, use the best available comparable data regarding the

number of violent crimes or juvenile justice expenditures for the relevant years

for the unit of local government.

‘‘(d) LOCAL GOVERNMENT WITH ALLOCATIONS LESS THAN $10,000.—If under this

section a unit of local government is allocated less than $10,000 for a payment period, the amount allotted shall be expended by the State on services to units of local

government whose allotment is less than such amount in a manner consistent with

this part.

‘‘(e) DIRECT GRANTS TO SPECIALLY QUALIFIED UNITS.——

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—If a State does not qualify or apply for funds reserved

for allocation under subsection (a) by the application deadline established by the

Attorney General, the Attorney General shall reserve not more than 75 percent

of the allocation that the State would have received under subsection (a) for

such fiscal year to provide grants to specially qualified units which meet the

requirements for funding under section 1802.

‘‘(2) AWARD BASIS.—In addition to the qualification requirements for direct

grants for specially qualified units the Attorney General may use the average

amount allocated by the States to units of local government as a basis for

awarding grants under this section.

‘‘SEC. 1804. GUIDELINES.

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General shall issue guidelines establishing procedures under which a State or unit of local government that receives funds under

section 1803 is required to provide notice to the Attorney General regarding the proposed use of funds made available under this part.

‘‘(b) ADVISORY BOARD.—The guidelines referred to in subsection (a) shall include

a requirement that such eligible State or unit of local government establish and convene an advisory board to review the proposed uses of such funds. The board shall

include representation from, if appropriate——

‘‘(1) the State or local police department;

‘‘(2) the local sheriff’s department;

‘‘(3) the State or local prosecutor’s office;

‘‘(4) the State or local juvenile court;

‘‘(5) the State or local probation officer;

‘‘(6) the State or local educational agency;

‘‘(7) a State or local social service agency;

‘‘(8) a nonprofit, nongovernmental victim advocacy organization; and

‘‘(9) a nonprofit, religious, or community group.

‘‘SEC. 1805. PAYMENT REQUIREMENTS.

‘‘(a) TIMING OF PAYMENTS.—The Attorney General shall pay to each State or

unit of local government that receives funds under section 1803 that has submitted

an application under this part not later than——

‘‘(1) 180 days after the date that the amount is available, or

‘‘(2) the first day of the payment period if the State has provided the Attorney General with the assurances required by subsection (c),

whichever is later.

‘‘(b) REPAYMENT OF UNEXPENDED AMOUNTS.——

‘‘(1) REPAYMENT REQUIRED.—From amounts awarded under this part, a

State or specially qualified unit shall repay to the Attorney General, before the

expiration of the 36-month period beginning on the date of the award, any

amount that is not expended by such State or unit.

‘‘(2) EXTENSION.—The Attorney General may adopt policies and procedures

providing for a one-time extension, by not more than 12 months, of the period

referred to in paragraph (1).

‘‘(3) PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO REPAY.—If the amount required to be repaid

is not repaid, the Attorney General shall reduce payment in future payment periods accordingly.

‘‘(4) DEPOSIT OF AMOUNTS REPAID.—Amounts received by the Attorney General as repayments under this subsection shall be deposited in a designated

fund for future payments to States and specially qualified units.

6

‘‘(c) ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.—A State or unit of local government that receives

funds under this part may use not more than 5 percent of such funds to pay for

administrative costs.

‘‘(d) NONSUPPLANTING REQUIREMENT.—Funds made available under this part to

States and units of local government shall not be used to supplant State or local

funds as the case may be, but shall be used to increase the amount of funds that

would, in the absence of funds made available under this part, be made available

from State or local sources, as the case may be.

‘‘(e) MATCHING FUNDS.——

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Federal share of a grant received under this part

may not exceed 90 percent of the total program costs.

‘‘(2) CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITIES.—Notwithstanding paragraph (1), with respect to the cost of constructing juvenile detention or correctional facilities, the

Federal share of a grant received under this part may not exceed 50 percent

of approved cost.

‘‘SEC. 1806. UTILIZATION OF PRIVATE SECTOR.

‘‘Funds or a portion of funds allocated under this part may be used by a State

or unit of local government that receives a grant under this part to contract with

private, nonprofit entities, or community-based organizations to carry out the purposes specified under section 1801(b).

‘‘SEC. 1807. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—A State or specially qualified unit that receives funds under

this part shall——

‘‘(1) establish a trust fund in which the government will deposit all payments received under this part;

‘‘(2) use amounts in the trust fund (including interest) during the period

specified in section 1805(b)(1) and any extension of that period under section

1805(b)(2);

‘‘(3) designate an official of the State or specially qualified unit to submit

reports as the Attorney General reasonably requires, in addition to the annual

reports required under this part; and

‘‘(4) spend the funds only for the purposes under section 1801(b).

‘‘(b) TITLE I PROVISIONS.—Except as otherwise provided, the administrative provisions of part H shall apply to this part and for purposes of this section any reference in such provisions to title I shall be deemed to include a reference to this

part.

‘‘SEC. 1808. ASSESSMENT REPORTS.

‘‘(a) REPORTS TO ATTORNEY GENERAL.——

‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), for each fiscal year

for which a grant or subgrant is awarded under this part, each State or unit

of local government that receives such a grant or subgrant shall submit to the

Attorney General a report, at such time and in such manner as the Attorney

General may reasonably require, which report shall include——

‘‘(A) a summary of the activities carried out with such grant or

subgrant; and

‘‘(B) an assessment of the effectiveness of such activities on achieving

the purposes of this part.

‘‘(2) WAIVERS.—The Attorney General may waive the requirement of an assessment in paragraph (1)(B) for a State or unit of local government if the Attorney General determines that——

‘‘(A) the nature of the activities are such that assessing their effectiveness would not be practical or insightful;

‘‘(B) the amount of the grant or subgrant is such that carrying out the

assessment would not be an effective use of those amounts; or

‘‘(C) the resources available to the State or unit are such that carrying

out the assessment would pose a financial hardship on the State or unit.

‘‘(b) REPORTS TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 90 days after the last day of each

fiscal year for which 1 or more grants are awarded under this part, the Attorney

General shall submit to the Congress a report, which shall include——

‘‘(1) a summary of the information provided under subsection (a);

‘‘(2) the assessment of the Attorney General of the grant program carried

out under this part; and

‘‘(3) such other information as the Attorney General considers appropriate.

‘‘SEC. 1809. DEFINITIONS.

‘‘For purposes of this part:

‘‘(1) The term ‘unit of local government’ means——

7

‘‘(A) a county, township, city, or political subdivision of a county, township, or city, that is a unit of local government as determined by the Secretary of Commerce for general statistical purposes;

‘‘(B) any law enforcement district or judicial enforcement district

that——

‘‘(i) is established under applicable State law; and

‘‘(ii) has the authority, in a manner independent of other State entities, to establish a budget and raise revenues; and

‘‘(C) the District of Columbia and the recognized governing body of an

Indian tribe or Alaskan Native village that carries out substantial governmental duties and powers.

‘‘(2) The term ‘specially qualified unit’ means a unit of local government

which may receive funds under this part only in accordance with section

1803(e).

‘‘(3) The term ‘State’ means any State of the United States, the District of

Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, American

Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands, except that American

Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands shall be considered as 1 State

and that, for purposes of section 1803(a), 33 percent of the amounts allocated

shall be allocated to American Samoa, 50 percent to Guam, and 17 percent to

the Northern Mariana Islands.

‘‘(4) The term ‘juvenile’ means an individual who is 17 years of age or

younger.

‘‘(5) The term ‘juvenile justice expenditures’ means expenditures in connection with the juvenile justice system, including expenditures in connection with

such system to carry out——

‘‘(A) activities specified in section 1801(b); and

‘‘(B) other activities associated with prosecutorial and judicial services

and corrections as reported to the Bureau of the Census for the fiscal year

preceding the fiscal year for which a determination is made under this part.

‘‘(6) The term ‘part 1 violent crimes’ means murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault as reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for purposes of the Uniform Crime Reports.

‘‘SEC. 1810. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

‘‘(a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this part——

‘‘(1) $500,000,000 for fiscal year 2002;

‘‘(2) $500,000,000 for fiscal year 2003; and

‘‘(3) $500,000,000 for fiscal year 2004.

‘‘(b) OVERSIGHT ACCOUNTABILITY AND ADMINISTRATION.—Of the amount authorized to be appropriated under subsection (a), there shall be available to the Attorney

General, for each of the fiscal years 2002 through 2004 (as applicable), to remain

available until expended——

‘‘(1) not more than 2 percent of that amount, for research, evaluation, and

demonstration consistent with this part;

‘‘(2) not more than 1 percent of that amount, for training and technical assistance; and

‘‘(3) not more than 1 percent, for administrative costs to carry out the purposes of this part.

The Attorney General shall establish and execute an oversight plan for monitoring

the activities of grant recipients.

‘‘(c) FUNDING SOURCE.—Appropriations for activities authorized in this part may

be made from the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund.’’.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

The amendments made by section 2 shall take effect on the first day of the first

fiscal year that begins after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 4. TRANSITION OF JUVENILE ACCOUNTABILITY INCENTIVE BLOCK GRANTS PROGRAM.

For each grant made from amounts made available for the Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grants program (as described under the heading ‘‘VIOLENT

CRIME REDUCTION PROGRAMS, STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT

ASSISTANCE’’ in the Department of Justice Appropriations Act, 2000 (as enacted

by Public Law 106–113; 113 Stat. 1537–14)), the grant award shall remain available

to the grant recipient for not more than 36 months after the date of reciept of the

grant.

8

1 Howard N. Snyder and Melissa Sickmund, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 1999 National Report 88 (2000). 2Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Juvenile Justice

Bulletin, December 2000 at 1. 3 Id.

4 Id.

5 Id.

6 Id.

7 Id.

PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

H.R. 863 authorizes the Department of Justice to make grants to

States and local governments to strengthen their juvenile justice

systems. The bill allows the States and localities flexibility in using

the grant funds and provides an illustrative list of possible uses for

the grant money. For example, the grant money may be used for

a range of purposes from the hiring of more judges, prosecutors,

and corrections personnel to supporting juvenile gun courts, drug

court programs, and accountability-based school safety programs.

This flexibility allows States and localities to strengthen their juvenile justice systems in ways that best meet their needs.

To be eligible for the grant funds, a State must have in place or

agree to implement a system of graduated sanctions for juvenile offenders within 1 year of applying for the funds. Under the legislation, the graduated sanctions system must ensure that sanctions

are imposed on juvenile offenders for every offense, that the sanctions escalate in intensity with each subsequent more serious offense, that the courts will be flexible in applying sanctions that address the specific problems of the individual offender, and that consideration is given to public safety and victims of crime.

A State or locality may still qualify for a grant even if its system

of graduated sanctions is discretionary, allowing juvenile courts to

not participate. If an applicant’s system is discretionary, however,

then the non-participating juvenile courts must report at the end

of the year why they did not impose graduated sanctions.

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION

In the 1980’s, the public perception was that serious juvenile

crime was increasing and the juvenile justice system was too lenient.1 This perception was partially based on the tremendous

growth in the rate of juvenile violent crime in the late 1980’s

through the early 1990’s.2 After 1993, however, the rate began to

decline.3 By 1999, the decline had resulted in the lowest juvenile

violent crime arrest rate in the decade.4

JUVENILE VIOLENCE STILL TOO HIGH

While the rate of violent teenage crime is down, criminologists

and policymakers remain concerned that the level of juvenile violence is too high. In 1999, law enforcement agencies made an estimated 2.5 million juvenile arrests in the United States.5 In 1999,

17 percent of all arrests and 16 percent of all violent crime arrests

were juveniles.6 More specifically, 9 percent of murder arrests, 14

percent of aggravated assault arrests, 33 percent of burglary arrests, 35 percent of robbery arrests and 24 percent of weapons arrests involved juveniles.7 According to the Office of Juvenile Justice

and Delinquency Prevention at the Department of Justice,

9

8Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Juvenile Justice

Bulletin, May 1998, at 1. 9Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Fact Sheet #04,

March 2000, at 1. 10Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Juvenile Justice Bulletin, October 2000. 11 Id. 12Shay Bilchik, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Juvenile Justice Reform Initiatives in the States (1997).

‘‘[s]erious and violent juvenile offenders comprise a troubled and

often dangerous population. Although their numbers are small,

they are responsible for a disproportionate amount of crime.’’ 8

JUVENILE COURTS’ CASELOADS STILL TOO HIGH

While the juvenile violent crime rate has dropped, the case load

for juvenile courts has not. The number of juvenile delinquency

cases has increased 48 percent between 1988 and 1997.9 In 1997,

the juvenile courts handled 1.8 million cases in which the juvenile

was charged with a delinquency offense.10 A delinquency offense is

an offense for which an adult could be prosecuted in criminal

court.11

GRADUATED SANCTIONS HELP TO REDUCE THE RATE OF JUVENILE

CRIME AND RECIDIVISM

The drop in violent juvenile crime has offered States and localities the opportunity to focus more on first time offenders, as testimony before the Subcommittee on Crime has highlighted. At a

hearing before the Subcommittee held on March 8, 2001, witnesses

testified that the juvenile justice system needs to do a better job

of becoming involved in the lives of juvenile offenders at an earlier

time. The witnesses testified that getting involved earlier reduces

recidivism and the crime rate. Judge Michael Anderegg of the Family Division of the Marquette County (MI) Circuit Court testified

from the perspective of rural areas. He stated that ‘‘continuation of

the Federal effort to assist State courts in dealing with juvenile offenders will ultimately reduce adult crime, reduce the costs of

crime, and increase public safety.’’ Also at the March 8, 2001 hearing, the Executive Director of the

Texas Youth Commission, Steve Robinson, testified that their system of graduated sanctions was working to reduce juvenile crime.

He stated that ‘‘the preliminary numbers indicate that there has

been a 14-percent decrease in referrals to the juvenile probation departments since [Texas has] instituted graduated sanctions.’’ In

1995, Texas reformed its juvenile code to require the adoption of

a seven-step progressive sanctions policy.12 He also testified that ‘‘in Texas, our recidivism rate has dropped steadily since 1995.

...’’ The States’ systems of graduated sanctions vary based on

each individual State’s needs and the systems require substantial

funding commitments to ensure adequate implementation.

CONGRESSIONAL EFFORTS TO ASSIST STATES AND LOCALITIES

In the last two Congresses, legislation similar to H.R. 863 was

introduced to assist States and localities seeking to implement

graduated sanctions. H.R. 863, the ‘‘Consequences for Juvenile Offenders Act of 2001,’’ is similar to H.R. 1501, the ‘‘Consequences for

Juvenile Offenders Act of 1999,’’ a bill introduced in the 106th Congress.

10

H.R. 1501 would have created a new grant program to be used

to strengthen the juvenile justice system. Just as H.R. 863 does,

H.R. 1501 would have replaced the Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant (JAIBG) program with the Juvenile Accountability

Block Grant (JABG) Program. The appropriations bill funding the

Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State for FY 1999 (P.L.

105–119) established the JAIBG program, which is administered by

the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. The

JAIBG program provides block grants to States that have implemented, or are considering implementing, legislation and/or programs promoting greater accountability in the juvenile justice system.

Similar to H.R. 863, H.R. 1501 would have added new purposes

for which the funds could be used. Neither H.R. 862 nor H.R. 1501

include the JAIBG requirement that a certain percentage of the

funds be spent on specified purposes. The Subcommittee on Crime

reported H.R. 1501 favorably to the Committee by voice vote on

April 21, 1999. The bill was then considered by the full House

where a number of non-germane amendments were adopted. On

June 17, 1999, the amended bill passed the House by a recorded

vote of 287–139. The Senate amended the bill further and the Senate and House did not report the bill out of the conference on the

bill. All of the Members of the Subcommittee on Crime were original co-sponsors of H.R. 1501.

In the 105th Congress, H.R. 3, the ‘‘Juvenile Crime Control Act

of 1997’’ passed the House by a vote of 286–132. title III of that

bill contained an incentive grant program to help States and localities strengthen their juvenile justice system infrastructure, thereby enabling them to ensure meaningful sanctions for juvenile offenders. While H.R. 3 did not become law, title III did become the

basis for the JAIBG program created by the appropriations bill for

the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State. JAIBG received

an appropriation of $250 million for fiscal years 1998 and 1999,

and after rescissions, the program received $238 million in fiscal

year 2000 and $244 million in fiscal year 2001. Through those appropriations bills, the JAIBG has provided almost a billion dollars

to those States and localities that certified that they had implemented or were ‘‘actively considering’’ implementing the core requirements of H.R. 3. All 50 States are participating in that program, and make sub-awards to eligible counties and cities.

HEARINGS

The Committee’s Subcommittee on Crime held one hearing on

H.R. 863, the ‘‘Consequences for Juvenile Offenders Act of 2001,’’ on March 8, 2001. Testimony was received from four witnesses representing four organizations. The witnesses were: the Honorable

Michael Anderegg, Marquette, Michigan, Juvenile Court; the Honorable Jim Payne, Marion County, Indiana, Juvenile Court; Steve

Robinson, Executive Director, Texas Youth Commission; and Vincent N. Schiraldi, Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice.

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

On March 21, 2001, the Subcommittee on Crime met in open session and ordered favorably reported the bill H.R. 863, as amended,

11

by a voice vote, a quorum being present. On March 28, 2001, the

Committee met in open session and ordered favorably reported the

bill H.R. 863 with an amendment, by voice vote, a quorum being

present.

VOTE OF THE COMMITTEE

No recorded votes were taken on the bill H.R. 863 during Committee consideration.

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the

House of Representatives, the Committee reports that the findings

and recommendations of the Committee, based on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the descriptive portions of this report.

PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

While the grant funds authorized by H.R. 863 are to be awarded

to States and units of local government, the program will likely be

administered by the Office of Justice Programs within the Department of Justice. That office should set as a performance goal to distribute all grants funds appropriated for the program each year. It

should also set performance measures based on the level of compliance by States and localities receiving grant funds with the bill’s

requirements concerning appropriate use of the funds, adoption of

systems of graduated sanctions by grant recipients, the level of

matching funding provided by States and units of local government, and reporting requirements (both by grants recipients to the

Attorney General and by the Attorney General to Congress).

NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY AND TAX EXPENDITURES

Clause 3(c)(2) of House rule XIII is inapplicable because this legislation does not provide new budgetary authority or increased tax

expenditures.

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the

House of Representatives, the Committee sets forth, with respect to

the bill, H.R. 863, the following estimate and comparison prepared

by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section

402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974:

U.S. CONGRESS,

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE,

Washington, DC, April 5, 2001.

Hon. F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr., Chairman,

Committee on the Judiciary,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 863, the Consequences for

Juvenile Offenders Act of 2001.

12

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark Grabowicz, who

can be reached at 226–2860.

Sincerely,

DAN L. CRIPPEN, Director.

Enclosure

cc: Honorable John Conyers Jr.

Ranking Member

H.R. 863—Consequences for Juvenile Offenders Act of 2001.

SUMMARY

H.R. 863 would authorize the appropriation of $500 million for

each of fiscal years 2002 through 2004 for the Attorney General to

make grants designed to strengthen the juvenile justice system to

state, local, and tribal governments. Assuming appropriation of the

authorized amounts, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 863

would cost $1.5 billion over the 2002–2006 period. This legislation

would not affect direct spending or receipts, so pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply.

The bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

and would benefit state, local, and tribal governments.

ESTIMATED COST TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

For this estimate, CBO assumes that the amounts authorized in

H.R. 863 will be appropriated by the start of each fiscal year and

that spending will follow the historical rates for similar programs.

The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 863 is shown in the following table. The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 750 (administration of justice).

By Fiscal Year, in Millions of Dollars

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Spending Under Current Law for

Juvenile Accountability Block Grants

Budget Authority 1 250 0 0 0 0 0

Estimated Outlays 247 75 0 0 0 0

Proposed Changes

Authorization Level 0 500 500 500 0 0

Estimated Outlays 0 350 500 500 150 0

Spending Under H.R. 863 for

Juvenile Accountability Block Grants

Authorization Level 1 250 500 500 500 0 0

Estimated Outlays 247 425 500 500 150 0

1. The 2001 level is the amount appropriated for juvenile accountability incentive block grants, a program that is very

similar to the one authorized by H.R. 863.

PAY-AS-YOU-GO CONSIDERATIONS:

None.

13

INTERGOVERNMENTAL AND PRIVATE-SECTOR IMPACT

H.R. 863 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA and would benefit state, local, and tribal

governments. The bill would authorize the appropriation of $1.5

billion over three years in grants to state, local, and tribal governments for juvenile justice programs. Any costs incurred by these

governments would be the result of complying with grant conditions and would be voluntary.

ESTIMATE PREPARED BY:

Federal Costs: Mark Grabowicz (226–2860)

Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Shelley Finlayson

(225–3220)

Impact on the Private Sector: Paige Piper/Bach (226–2618)

ESTIMATE APPROVED BY:

Peter H. Fontaine

Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House

of Representatives, the Committee finds the authority for this legislation in Article I, section 8, of the Constitution.

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

SECTION 1: SHORT TITLE

Section 1 of the bill states the short title of the bill as the ‘‘Consequences for Juvenile Offenders Act of 2001’’.

SECTION 2: GRANT PROGRAM

Section 2 amends Part R of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control

and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796) in substituting in its

place ‘‘Part R—Juvenile Accountability Block Grants.’’ The new

Part R is comprised of 10 sections, numbered 1801 through 1810.

Section 1801. Program Authorized

New section 1801 authorizes the Attorney General to provide

grants to States, and in certain cases directly to eligible units of

local government, for use by States and localities for the purpose

of strengthening their juvenile justice systems. Section 1801(b) provides an illustrative list of acceptable expenditures for the grant

money. Some examples of acceptable uses of the grant funds include:

(1) hiring juvenile court judges, probation officers, and courtappointed defenders and special advocates, and funding pretrial services for juvenile offenders, to promote the effective

and expeditious administration of the juvenile justice system;

(2) hiring additional prosecutors, so that more cases involving violent juvenile offenders can be prosecuted and case backlogs reduced;

(3) establishing and maintaining interagency informationsharing programs that enable juvenile and criminal justice sysVerDate 11-MAY-2000 22:09 Apr 20, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR046.XXX pfrm04 PsN: HR046
14

tem, schools, and social services agencies to make more informed decisions regarding the early identification, control, supervision, and treatment of juveniles who repeatedly commit

serious delinquent or criminal acts;

(4) establishing and maintaining accountability-based programs designed to reduce recidivism among juveniles who are

referred by law enforcement personnel or agencies;

(5) establishing and maintaining programs to conduct risk

and need assessments of juvenile offenders that facilitate effective early intervention and the provision of comprehensive

services, including mental health screening and treatment and

substance abuse testing and treatment to such offenders;

(6) establishing and maintaining accountability-based programs designed to enhance school safety; or

(7) establishing and maintaining restorative justice programs.

While this list should not be construed as an exclusive list, it is

the view of the Committee that it generally reflects the types of expenditures States and localities incur in meeting the needs of their

juvenile justice systems. These programs are aimed at ensuring

that juveniles receive appropriate sanctions and face consequences

for their wrongdoing and at the same time receive the help they

may need to prevent future offenses. The States and localities have

the discretion to determine how best to use the grant money to

meet the needs of their juvenile justice systems.

Section 1802. Grant Eligibility.

Section 1802 establishes the eligibility criteria for States and localities to receive funding under the grant program. Section

1802(a) provides that States applying for grant funds, must provide

the Attorney General with information about the proposed activities the State and its localities will carry out with the grant and

the criteria by which the State proposes to assess the effectiveness

of such activities on achieving the purposes of this part. In addition, the applicant must provide the Attorney General with assurances that the State and any localities within the State that qualify for funding have in effect, or will have in effect within 1 year

of submitting its application, policies and programs that provide for

a system of graduated sanctions as defined in Section 1802(c). The

Attorney General also may require additional information.

Section 1802(b) establishes the eligibility criteria for localities,

both within States which qualify for funding, and within States

that do not qualify or apply for funds, to receive grant funds under

the bill. Section 1802(b)(1)(A) requires that the localities must provide information about the activities the localities propose to carry

out with the subgrant and the criteria by which the locality proposes to assess the effectiveness of such activities. Localities within

qualifying States must provide this information to the States. Localities within non-qualifying States must provide this information

to the Attorney General.

Section 1802(b)(1)(B) requires that localities must provide assurances that a system of graduated sanctions, as described in section

1802(c), is or will be in effect within 1 year of applying for the

funds. While both the States and localities must meet the same criteria, it is important to note that the Committee recognizes that loVerDate 11-MAY-2000 22:09 Apr 20, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR046.XXX pfrm04 PsN: HR046
15

calities, by themselves, may be unable to effect certain reforms.

Section 1802(b)(1)(B) reflects this distinction and provides that localities must only provide assurances to the State that the four requirements in section 1802(c) are being met ‘‘to the maximum extent applicable.’’ It is also the Committee’s view that localities in

non-qualifying States only need to assure the Attorney General

that they have in place policies or programs that meet the four requirements in section 1802(c). The Committee’s view is that localities within qualifying States will almost always qualify by virtue

of the State qualifying.

Section 1802(c) describes four requirements that a system of

graduated sanctions must meet for an applicant to qualify for the

grant funds. The first requirement is that the sanctions must be

imposed on a juvenile offender for each delinquent offense. Each

time a court determines a juvenile has committed a delinquent act,

the court should hold the juvenile responsible and accountable for

his or her behavior. Juveniles must be made to understand that

there will be a consequence for breaking the law. By beginning

with the juvenile’s first act of delinquency, the goal is to prevent

young offenders from engaging in more serious wrongdoing later in

their lives.

The second requirement is that the sanctions escalate in intensity with each subsequent, more serious delinquent offense. This

type of system will help prevent recidivism and break the cycle of

delinquency that often leads juveniles into more serious crimes in

their late teens or early adult years. The Committee recognizes

that it will be difficult to precisely measure the extent to which a

State or locality ensures a sanction for every delinquent or criminal

act. It is the Committee’s view that a general assessment of the degree to which such policies and practices are being carried out is

a sufficient basis for a State’s or locality’s determination.

The third requirement is that the system have sufficient flexibility to allow for individualized sanctions and services suited to

the individual juvenile offender. It is the Committee’s view that the

purpose of the juvenile justice system remains principally one of rehabilitation. Accordingly, the sanctions should be reasonable and

appropriate in response to the juvenile’s history of offenses and the

seriousness of the offense in question. The courts should be flexible

in applying the sanctions to address the specific problems and

needs of the juvenile.

The fourth requirement is that the system accord appropriate

consideration to public safety and victims of crime. The sanctions

should have the goal of repairing harm to the victims and the community and protecting the public from future crimes.

Section 1802(d) provides that a State or locality may qualify for

the grant funds even if its system of graduated sanctions is discretionary. As such, a State or locality does not have to require all of

its juvenile courts to impose graduated sanctions or to impose them

in every case. In States and localities where the imposition of graduated sanctions is discretionary, however, the juvenile courts that

do not impose graduated sanctions at all, or do not impose them

in every case, must report at least annually to the applicable State

or locality why graduated sanctions were not imposed in all such

cases. The State then must submit this information to the Attorney

General. The Committee recognizes that the juvenile courts are alVerDate 11-MAY-2000 22:09 Apr 20, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR046.XXX pfrm04 PsN: HR046
16

13For example, if a State’s share is 35 percent, the State may request a waiver to receive

35 percent of the grant funds.

ready overburdened and it does not want to harm the courts’ ability to effectively and efficiently handle juvenile cases through burdensome reporting requirements. Therefore, it is the Committee’s

view that, to satisfy this requirement, the non-participating courts

may provide general statements explaining the reasons why graduated sanctions were not imposed in all cases.

Section 1802(e) defines the terms ‘‘discretionary’’ and ‘‘sanctions.’’

The term discretionary means that each and every juvenile court

in a State or locality does not have to impose a system of graduated

sanctions. The term sanctions means tangible, proportional consequences that hold juvenile offenders accountable for the offense

committed. A sanction may include, but is not limited to, counseling, restitution, community service, a fine, supervised probation,

or confinement.

Section 1803. Allocation and Distribution of Funds.

Section 1803(a) provides that each State is to receive 0.25 percent of the total grant funds. The term ‘‘State’’ is defined in new

section 1809. The remaining funds are then to be distributed

among the States based the size of each State’s juvenile population.

Section 1803(b)(1) requires that a participating State must distribute to its participating localities 75 percent of the total grant

funds the State receives. This ‘‘pass-through’’ provision is aimed at

ensuring that localities receive most of the funding when they bear

most of the juvenile justice expenditures.

Section 1803(b)(2) provides for a waiver of the pass-through provision when the State is responsible for more than 25 percent of

the total juvenile justice expenditures in the State. The State may

seek a waiver of the pass-through requirement from the Attorney

General so that it may keep a share of the grant funds equal to

its share of the total expenditures in that State. If the State demonstrates that the State’s expenditures for the administration of juvenile justice exceeded 25 percent of the total spent by the State

and its local governments for the administration of juvenile justice,

then the State may increase the amount of grant funds it keeps to

a level reflecting its share of the total expenditures.13 States may

not request a waiver for more than the State’s relative share of the

total juvenile justice expenditures in that State.

Section 1803(b)(3) provides an allocation formula to distribute

the grant funding among the localities within a State. The allocation formula is intended to provide maximum resources to the localities that bear the largest burden in administering the juvenile

justice system in the participating State. Under the formula, each

State determines the amount that each of its localities receives,

based on a combination of juvenile justice expenditures and the

level of violent crime in each locality. Reflecting the goal of providing more resources to the localities with greater juvenile justice

expenditures, the formula places greater weight on the juvenile justice expenditures than on the variable of the number of violent

crimes. It is the Committee’s intent that States not have the discretion to refuse to make a grant to localities that have provided the

17

requisite assurances, absent a good faith basis for believing that

the assurances provided are inaccurate.

Section 1803(b)(4) provides that a local government shall not receive a subgrant of more than 100 percent of its juvenile justice expenditures. When a locality would receive more than 100 percent

of its juvenile justice expenditures from the allocation formula, Section 1803(b)(5) allows the State to reallocate any amount above 100

percent to other local governments.

Section 1803(c) requires the State to investigate the methodology

used by a locality to determine the accuracy of the locality’s submitted data, if the State has reason to believe such information is

insufficient or inaccurate.

Section 1803(d) provides that States shall expend money on serv- ices to localities whose allotments are less than $10,000. The Committee is of the view that requiring localities receiving allocations

of less than $10,000 to comply with the planning and reporting requirements of the act places a burden on the localities that outweighs the benefit of the funds. Accordingly, the bill requires

States to withhold distribution of any allocation that is less than

$10,000. In such an event, the State is required to combine all such

allocations, and to then expend the funds for the benefit of the localities that did not receive allocations.

Section 1803(e) provides that the Attorney General will reserve

not more than 75 percent of the allocation that a non-qualifying

State would have received under section 1803(a) if it had qualified.

This reserve will be used to provide grants to localities that meet

the requirements for funding under section 1802 even though they

are in the non-qualifying States.

Section 1804. Guidelines.

Section 1804(a) requires the Attorney General to issue guidelines

establishing procedures under which a State or locality that receives funds is required to provide notice regarding the proposed

use of funds made available under this part.

Section 1804(b) requires an eligible State or locality to establish

an advisory board to review the proposed uses of such funds. While

the size of the board may be as large as State and local government

officials, determine, the members of the board must include representatives of certain groups, as appropriate. These groups are:

State and local police departments, prosecutor’s offices, juvenile

courts, probation offices, educational agencies, and social service

agencies; the local sheriff’s departments; nonprofit, nongovernmental victim advocacy organizations; and nonprofit, religious or

community groups. The use of the phrase ‘‘as appropriate’’ is to

make clear that advisory board members may be drawn from State

level agencies or organizations, local level agencies or organizations, or both, as determined by the State or local officials, as the

case may be.

Section 1805. Payment Requirements.

This section establishes various provisions regarding payment of

funds to eligible States and localities and repayment of unexpended

funds to the Attorney General. Section 1805(a) requires the Attorney General to pay out the grant funds no later than 180 days

after the date that the amount is available or the first day of the

18

payment period if the State has provided the Attorney General

with assurances required by subsection (c). Section 1805(b) requires

that a State or locality that receives a grant directly from the Attorney General repay the Attorney General any amount that is not

expended within a 36-month period beginning with the date of the

award. The Attorney General may extend this period for up to 12

months, in appropriate cases. Failure to repay grants amounts requires that the Attorney General to reduce future payments to that

State accordingly.

This section also limits grant recipients to using no more than

5 percent of any grants funds received for administrative costs. The

section further requires that recipients may not receive more than

90 percent of their total program costs. The remaining funds must

come from State or local funds. With respect to construction costs,

however, the State or unit of local government must pay for half

of the program cost. Finally, the section makes it clear that grants

funds are to be used to supplement, and not supplant, State and

local funds. The purpose of the bill is enable States and localities

to strength their juvenile justice system through additional spending, and not to allow them to shift State and local funds to other

uses.

Section 1806. Utilization of Private Sector.

This section provides that States or localities may use the funds

to contract with private, nonprofit entities or community-based organizations to carry out the purposes of section 1801.

Section 1807. Administrative Provisions.

This section establishes administrative provisions for recipient

States or localities that receive funds directly from the Attorney

General. The recipient of the funds must establish a trust fund and

deposit all payments received under this grant program into that

trust.

Section 1808. Assessment Reports.

Section 1808(a) requires that a State or locality that receives the

grant or subgrant funding must provide a report to the Attorney

General summarizing the activities carried out with the funds and

assessing the effectiveness of those activities. This section also includes a waiver provision for activities that are not practical to assess.

Section 1808(b) requires the Attorney General to submit a report

to Congress that includes a summary of the information under section 1808(a) and an assessment by the Attorney General of the

grant program.

Section 1809. Definitions.

This section provides definitions of key terms used in the legislation.

Section 1810. Authorization of Appropriations.

This section authorizes the appropriations of up to $500,000,000

for each fiscal year from fiscal year 2002 through fiscal year 2004.

Of the amounts authorized to be appropriated, the Attorney General may spend up to 2 percent for research, evaluation and demVerDate 11-MAY-2000 22:09 Apr 20, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR046.XXX pfrm04 PsN: HR046
19

1The existing program being reauthorized is entitled the ‘‘Juvenile Accountability Incentive

Block Grants‘‘ (‘‘JAIBG’’) program. The bill would redesignate the program as the ‘‘Juvenile Accountability Block Grant’’ (‘‘JABG’’) program.

onstration consistent with the grant program, 1 percent for training and technical assistance, and 1 percent for administrative

costs.

SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE DATE

Section 3 of the bill provides that the amendments made by the

bill take effect on the first day of the first fiscal year that begins

after enactment of the bill. This provision is designed to help ensure a smooth transition from the JAIBG to the JABG program.

SECTION 4. TRANSITION OF JUVENILE ACCOUNTABILITY INCENTIVE

BLOCK GRANTS PROGRAM

Section 4 of the bill provides that funds awarded under the

JAIBG program are to remain available to the grant recipients for

up to 36 months after the date of the receipt of the grant. This provision complements section 3 of the bill and is to make clear that

recipients of JAIBG grants funds may continue to use those funds

for a period of up to 36 months after their receipt of the funds, notwithstanding the replacement of the JAIBG program with the

JABG program.

AGENCY VIEWS

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

Washington, DC, April 19, 2001.

Hon. F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., Chairman,

Committee on the Judiciary,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This presents the views of the Department

of Justice on H.R. 863, the ‘‘Consequences for Juvenile Offenders

Act of 2001,’’ as ordered reported by the Committee on the Judiciary.

H.R. 863 would amend Part ‘‘R’’ of title I of the Omnibus Crime

Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (‘‘the Act’’) (42 U.S.C. § 3796,

et seq.) to reauthorize, with various changes, the Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant (‘‘JAIBG’’) program.1 In particular,

the bill would authorize the Attorney General to make grants to

States, for use by States and units of local government (including

qualifying Indian tribes and Alaskan Native villages) for 16 specified purposes (e.g., developing and implementing graduated sanctions for juvenile offenders; building or renovating juvenile correctional facilities; hiring juvenile court judges, probation officers, and

court-appointed defenders; and establishing juvenile gun courts).

Section 1810 of the act would authorize appropriations of $500 million for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2004. Appropriations for

activities authorized by the bill would be permitted to be made

from the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund.

We support enactment of H.R. 863. In our view, the JAIBG program has proven to be an effective and efficient way to assist State

and local governments in combating juvenile crime and should

therefore be continued beyond its current expiration date of OctoVerDate 11-MAY-2000 22:09 Apr 20, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR046.XXX pfrm04 PsN: HR046
20

ber 1, 2001. We do, however, have a number of concerns about provisions of the bill as they are currently drafted. These concerns—

and other detailed comments—are set forth in an enclosure to this

letter.

We look forward to working with you on this important legislation. We trust that you will not hesitate to call upon us if we may

be of additional assistance with this or any other matter. The Office of Management and Budget has advised that there is no objection from the standpoint of the Administration’s program to the

presentation of this report.

Sincerely,

SHERYL L. WALTER, Acting Assistant Attorney General.

cc: John Conyers, Jr.

Ranking Member

21

22

23

24

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill,

as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italics,

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):

OMNIBUS CRIME CONTROL AND

SAFE STREETS ACT OF 1968

* * * * * * *

TITLE I—JUSTICE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT

* * * * * * *

øPART R—CERTAIN PUNISHMENT

FOR YOUNG OFFENDERS

øSEC. 1801. GRANT AUTHORIZATION.

ø(a) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General may make grants

under this part to States, for the use by States and units of local

government, for the purpose of developing alternative methods of

punishment for young offenders to traditional forms of incarceration and probation.

ø(b) ALTERNATIVE METHODS.—The alternative methods of punishment referred to in subsection (a) should ensure certain punishment for young offenders and promote reduced recidivism, crime

prevention, and assistance to victims, particularly for young offenders who can be punished more effectively in an environment other

than a traditional correctional facility, including——

25

ø(1) alternative sanctions that create accountability and

certain punishment for young offenders;

ø(2) restitution programs for young offenders;

ø(3) innovative projects, such as projects consisting of education and job training activities for incarcerated young offenders, modeled, to the extent practicable, after activities carried

out under part B of title IV of the Job Training Partnership

Act or subtitle C of title I of the Workforce Investment Act of

1998 (relating to Job Corps) and projects that provide family

counseling;

ø(4) correctional options, such as community-based incarceration, weekend incarceration, and electronic monitoring of

offenders;

ø(5) community service programs that provide work service

placement for young offenders at non-profit, private organizations and community organizations;

ø(6) innovative methods that address the problems of

young offenders convicted of serious substance abuse (including

alcohol abuse) and gang-related offenses; and

ø(7) adequate and appropriate after care programs for

young offenders, such as substance abuse treatment, education

programs, vocational training, job placement counseling, family

counseling and other support programs upon release.

øSEC. 1802. STATE APPLICATIONS.

ø(a) IN GENERAL.——

ø(1) SUBMISSION OF APPLICATION.—To request a grant

under this part, the chief executive of a State shall submit an

application to the Attorney General in such form and containing such information as the Attorney General may reasonably require.

ø(2) ASSURANCES.—An application under paragraph (1)

shall include assurances that Federal funds received under

this part shall be used to supplement, not supplant, non-Federal funds that would otherwise be available for activities

funded under this part.

ø(b) STATE OFFICE.—The office designated under section

507——

ø(1) shall prepare the application as required under subsection (a); and

ø(2) shall administer grant funds received under this part,

including review of spending, processing, progress, financial reporting, technical assistance, grant adjustments, accounting,

auditing, and fund disbursement.

øSEC. 1803. REVIEW OF STATE APPLICATIONS.

ø(a) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General shall make a grant

under section 1801(a) to carry out the projects described in the application submitted by such applicant under section 1802 upon determining that—— ø(1) the application is consistent with the requirements of

this part; and

ø(2) before the approval of the application, the Attorney

General has made an affirmative finding in writing that the

proposed project has been reviewed in accordance with this

part.

26

ø(b) APPROVAL.—Each application submitted under section

1802 shall be considered approved, in whole or in part, by the Attorney General not later than 45 days after first received unless

the Attorney General informs the applicant of specific reasons for

disapproval.

ø(c) RESTRICTION.—Grant funds received under this part shall

not be used for land acquisition or construction projects, other than

alternative facilities described in section 1801(b).

ø(d) DISAPPROVAL NOTICE AND RECONSIDERATION.—The Attorney General shall not disapprove any application without first affording the applicant reasonable notice and an opportunity for reconsideration.

øSEC. 1804. LOCAL APPLICATIONS.

ø(a) IN GENERAL.——

ø(1) SUBMISSION OF APPLICATION.—To request funds under

this part from a State, the chief executive of a unit of local government shall submit an application to the office designated

under section 1802(b).

ø(2) APPROVAL.—An application under paragraph (1) shall

be considered to have been approved, in whole or in part, by

the State not later than 45 days after such application is first

received unless the State informs the applicant in writing of

specific reasons for disapproval.

ø(3) DISAPPROVAL.—The State shall not disapprove any application submitted to the State without first affording the applicant reasonable notice and an opportunity for reconsideration.

ø(4) EFFECT OF APPROVAL.—If an application under subsection (a) is approved, the unit of local government is eligible

to receive funds under this part.

ø(b) DISTRIBUTION TO UNITS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT.—A State

that receives funds under section 1801 in a fiscal year shall make

such funds available to units of local government with an application that has been submitted and approved by the State within 45

days after the Attorney General has approved the application submitted by the State and has made funds available to the State. The

Attorney General may waive the 45-day requirement in this section

upon a finding that the State is unable to satisfy such requirement

under State statutes.

øSEC. 1805. ALLOCATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS.

ø(a) STATE DISTRIBUTION.—Of the total amount appropriated

under this part in any fiscal year——

ø(1) 0.4 percent shall be allocated to each of the participating States; and

ø(2) of the total funds remaining after the allocation under

paragraph (1), there shall be allocated to each of the participating States an amount which bears the same ratio to the

amount of remaining funds described in this paragraph as the

number of young offenders of such State bears to the number

of young offenders in all the participating States.

ø(b) LOCAL DISTRIBUTION.—— ø(1) IN GENERAL.—A State that receives funds under this

part in a fiscal year shall distribute to units of local government in such State for the purposes specified under section

27

1801 that portion of such funds which bears the same ratio to

the aggregate amount of such funds as the amount of funds expended by all units of local government for correctional programs in the preceding fiscal year bears to the aggregate

amount of funds expended by the State and all units of local

government in such State for correctional programs in such

preceding fiscal year.

ø(2) UNDISTRIBUTED FUNDS.—Any funds not distributed to

units of local government under paragraph (1) shall be available for expenditure by such State for purposes specified under

section 1801.

ø(3) UNUSED FUNDS.—If the Attorney General determines,

on the basis of information available during any fiscal year,

that a portion of the funds allocated to a State for such fiscal

year will not be used by such State or that a State is not eligible to receive funds under section 1801, the Attorney General

shall award such funds to units of local government in such

State giving priority to the units of local government that the

Attorney General considers to have the greatest need.

ø(c) GENERAL REQUIREMENT.—Notwithstanding subsections (a)

and (b), not less than two-thirds of funds received by a State under

this part shall be distributed to units of local government unless

the State applies for and receives a waiver from the Attorney General.

ø(d) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of a grant made

under this part may not exceed 75 percent of the total costs of the

projects described in the application submitted under section

1802(a) for the fiscal year for which the projects receive assistance

under this part.

ø(e) CONSIDERATION.—Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b),

in awarding grants under this part, the Attorney General shall consider as a factor whether a State has in effect throughout such

State a law or policy that requires that a juvenile who is in possession of a firearm or other weapon on school property or convicted

of a crime involving the use of a firearm or weapon on school

property——

ø(1) be suspended from school for a reasonable period of

time; and

ø(2) lose driving license privileges for a reasonable period

of time.

ø(f) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this part, ‘‘juvenile’’ means a

person 18 years of age or younger.

øSEC. 1806. EVALUATION.

ø(a) IN GENERAL.——

ø(1) SUBMISSION TO THE DIRECTOR.—Each State and unit

of local government that receives a grant under this part shall

submit to the Attorney General an evaluation not later than

March 1 of each year in accordance with guidelines issued by

the Attorney General. Such evaluation shall include an appraisal by representatives of the community of the programs

funded by the grant.

ø(2) WAIVER.—The Attorney General may waive the requirement specified in paragraph (1) if the Attorney General

determines that such evaluation is not warranted in the case

of the State or unit of local government involved.

28

ø(b) DISTRIBUTION.—The Attorney General shall make available to the public on a timely basis evaluations received under subsection (a).

ø(c) ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.—A State or unit of local government may use not more than 5 percent of funds it receives under

this part to develop an evaluation program under this section.¿

PART R—JUVENILE ACCOUNTABILITY

BLOCK GRANTS

SEC. 1801. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General is authorized to provide

grants to States, for use by States and units of local government,

and in certain cases directly to specially qualified units.

(b) AUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES.—Amounts paid to a State or a unit

of local government under this part shall be used by the State or

unit of local government for the purpose of strengthening the juvenile justice system, which includes—— (1) developing, implementing, and administering graduated

sanctions for juvenile offenders;

(2) building, expanding, renovating, or operating temporary

or permanent juvenile correction, detention, or community corrections facilities;

(3) hiring juvenile court judges, probation officers, and

court-appointed defenders and special advocates, and funding

pretrial services for juvenile offenders, to promote the effective

and expeditious administration of the juvenile justice system;

(4) hiring additional prosecutors, so that more cases involving violent juvenile offenders can be prosecuted and case backlogs reduced;

(5) providing funding to enable prosecutors to address

drug, gang, and youth violence problems more effectively and

for technology, equipment, and training to assist prosecutors in

identifying and expediting the prosecution of violent juvenile offenders;

(6) establishing and maintaining training programs for

law enforcement and other court personnel with respect to preventing and controlling juvenile crime;

(7) establishing juvenile gun courts for the prosecution and

adjudication of juvenile firearms offenders;

(8) establishing drug court programs for juvenile offenders

that provide continuing judicial supervision over juvenile offenders with substance abuse problems and the integrated administration of other sanctions and services for such offenders;

(9) establishing and maintaining a system of juvenile

records designed to promote public safety;

(10) establishing and maintaining interagency informationsharing programs that enable the juvenile and criminal justice

system, schools, and social services agencies to make more informed decisions regarding the early identification, control, supervision, and treatment of juveniles who repeatedly commit serious delinquent or criminal acts;

(11) establishing and maintaining accountability-based

programs designed to reduce recidivism among juveniles who

are referred by law enforcement personnel or agencies;

29

(12) establishing and maintaining programs to conduct

risk and need assessments of juvenile offenders that facilitate

the effective early intervention and the provision of comprehensive services, including mental health screening and treatment

and substance abuse testing and treatment to such offenders;

(13) establishing and maintaining accountability-based

programs that are designed to enhance school safety;

(14) establishing and maintaining restorative justice programs;

(15) establishing and maintaining programs to enable juvenile courts and juvenile probation officers to be more effective

and efficient in holding juvenile offenders accountable and reducing recidivism; and

(16) hiring detention and corrections personnel, and establishing and maintaining training programs for such personnel

to improve facility practices and programming.

(c) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘‘restorative justice program’’ means a program that emphasizes the moral

accountability of an offender toward the victim and the affected

community, and may include community reparations boards, restitution (in the form of monetary payment or service to the victim

or, where no victim can be identified, service to the affected community), and mediation between victim and offender.

SEC. 1802. GRANT ELIGIBILITY.

(a) STATE ELIGIBILITY.—To be eligible to receive a grant under

this section, a State shall submit to the Attorney General an application at such time, in such form, and containing such assurances

and information as the Attorney General may require by guidelines,

including——

(1) information about—— (A) the activities proposed to be carried out with such

grant; and

(B) the criteria by which the State proposes to assess

the effectiveness of such activities on achieving the purposes

of this part; and

(2) assurances that the State and any unit of local government to which the State provides funding under section 1803(b),

has in effect (or shall have in effect, not later than 1 year after

the date that the State submits such application) laws, or has

implemented (or shall implement, not later than 1 year after the

date that the State submits such application) policies and programs, that provide for a system of graduated sanctions described in subsection (c).

(b) LOCAL ELIGIBILITY.——

(1) SUBGRANT ELIGIBILITY.—To be eligible to receive a

subgrant, a unit of local government, other than a specially

qualified unit, shall provide to the State——

(A) information about——

(i) the activities proposed to be carried out with

such subgrant; and

(ii) the criteria by which the unit proposes to assess

the effectiveness of such activities on achieving the purposes of this part; and

(B) such assurances as the State shall require, that, to

the maximum extent applicable, the unit of local governVerDate 11-MAY-2000 22:09 Apr 20, 2001 Jkt 089006 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\HR046.XXX pfrm04 PsN: HR046
30

ment has in effect (or shall have in effect, not later than 1

year after the date that the unit submits such application)

laws, or has implemented (or shall implement, not later

than 1 year after the date that the unit submits such application) policies and programs, that provide for a system of

graduated sanctions described in subsection (c).

(2) SPECIAL RULE.—The requirements of paragraph (1)

shall apply to a specially qualified unit that receives funds from

the Attorney General under section 1803(e), except that information that is otherwise required to be submitted to the State shall

be submitted to the Attorney General.

(c) GRADUATED SANCTIONS.—A system of graduated sanctions,

which may be discretionary as provided in subsection (d), shall ensure, at a minimum, that—— (1) sanctions are imposed on a juvenile offender for each

delinquent offense;

(2) sanctions escalate in intensity with each subsequent,

more serious delinquent offense;

(3) there is sufficient flexibility to allow for individualized

sanctions and services suited to the individual juvenile offender;

and

(4) appropriate consideration is given to public safety and

victims of crime.

(d) DISCRETIONARY USE OF SANCTIONS.—— (1) VOLUNTARY PARTICIPATION.—A State or unit of local

government may be eligible to receive a grant under this part

if—— (A) its system of graduated sanctions is discretionary;

and

(B) it demonstrates that it has promoted the use of a

system of graduated sanctions by taking steps to encourage

implementation of such a system by juvenile courts.

(2) REPORTING REQUIREMENT IF GRADUATED SANCTIONS

NOT USED.——

(A) JUVENILE COURTS.—A State or unit of local government in which the imposition of graduated sanctions is discretionary shall require each juvenile court within its

jurisdiction— (i) which has not implemented a system of graduated sanctions, to submit an annual report that explains why such court did not implement graduated

sanctions; and

(ii) which has implemented a system of graduated

sanctions but has not imposed graduated sanctions in

all cases, to submit an annual report that explains why

such court did not impose graduated sanctions in all

cases.

(B) UNITS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT.—Each unit of local

government, other than a specially qualified unit, that has

1 or more juvenile courts that use a discretionary system of

graduated sanctions shall collect the information reported

under subparagraph (A) for submission to the State each

year.

(C) STATES.—Each State and specially qualified unit

that has 1 or more juvenile courts that use a discretionary

31

system of graduated sanctions shall collect the information

reported under subparagraph (A) for submission to the Attorney General each year. A State shall also collect and

submit to the Attorney General the information collected

under subparagraph (B).

(e) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section:

(1) The term ‘‘discretionary’’ means that a system of graduated sanctions is not required to be imposed by each and every

juvenile court in a State or unit of local government.

(2) The term ‘‘sanctions’’ means tangible, proportional consequences that hold the juvenile offender accountable for the offense committed. A sanction may include counseling, restitution,

community service, a fine, supervised probation, or confinement.

SEC. 1803. ALLOCATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS.

(a) STATE ALLOCATION.——

(1) IN GENERAL.—In accordance with regulations promulgated pursuant to this part and except as provided in paragraph (3), the Attorney General shall allocate——

(A) 0.25 percent for each State; and

(B) of the total funds remaining after the allocation

under subparagraph (A), to each State, an amount which

bears the same ratio to the amount of remaining funds described in this subparagraph as the population of people

under the age of 18 living in such State for the most recent

calendar year in which such data is available bears to the

population of people under the age of 18 of all the States

for such fiscal year.

(2) PROHIBITION.—No funds allocated to a State under this

subsection or received by a State for distribution under subsection (b) may be distributed by the Attorney General or by the

State involved for any program other than a program contained

in an approved application.

(b) LOCAL DISTRIBUTION.——

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (2),

each State which receives funds under subsection (a)(1) in a fiscal year shall distribute among units of local government, for

the purposes specified in section 1801, not less than 75 percent

of such amounts received.

(2) WAIVER.—If a State submits to the Attorney General an

application for waiver that demonstrates and certifies to the Attorney General that——

(A) the State’s juvenile justice expenditures in the fiscal

year preceding the date in which an application is submitted under this part (the ‘‘State percentage’’) is more than

25 percent of the aggregate amount of juvenile justice expenditures by the State and its eligible units of local government; and

(B) the State has consulted with as many units of local

government in such State, or organizations representing

such units, as practicable regarding the State’s calculation

of expenditures under subparagraph (A), the State’s application for waiver under this paragraph, and the State’s

proposed uses of funds,

32

the percentage referred to in paragraph (1) shall equal the percentage determined by subtracting the State percentage from

100 percent.

(3) ALLOCATION.—In making the distribution under paragraph (1), the State shall allocate to such units of local government an amount which bears the same ratio to the aggregate

amount of such funds as—— (A) the sum of—— (i) the product of—— (I) three-quarters; multiplied by

(II) the average juvenile justice expenditure for

such unit of local government for the 3 most recent

calendar years for which such data is available;

plus

(ii) the product of—— (I) one-quarter; multiplied by

(II) the average annual number of part 1 violent crimes in such unit of local government for the

3 most recent calendar years for which such data

is available, bears to—— (B) the sum of the products determined under subparagraph (A) for all such units of local government in the

State.

(4) EXPENDITURES.—The allocation any unit of local government shall receive under paragraph (3) for a payment period

shall not exceed 100 percent of juvenile justice expenditures of

the unit for such payment period.

(5) REALLOCATION.—The amount of any unit of local government’s allocation that is not available to such unit by operation of paragraph (4) shall be available to other units of local

government that are not affected by such operation in accordance with this subsection.

(c) UNAVAILABILITY OF DATA FOR UNITS OF LOCAL GOVERN- MENT.—If the State has reason to believe that the reported rate of

part 1 violent crimes or juvenile justice expenditures for a unit of

local government is insufficient or inaccurate, the State shall——

(1) investigate the methodology used by the unit to determine the accuracy of the submitted data; and

(2) if necessary, use the best available comparable data regarding the number of violent crimes or juvenile justice expenditures for the relevant years for the unit of local government.

(d) LOCAL GOVERNMENT WITH ALLOCATIONS LESS THAN

$10,000.—If under this section a unit of local government is allocated less than $10,000 for a payment period, the amount allotted

shall be expended by the State on services to units of local government whose allotment is less than such amount in a manner consistent with this part.

(e) DIRECT GRANTS TO SPECIALLY QUALIFIED UNITS.——

(1) IN GENERAL.—If a State does not qualify or apply for

funds reserved for allocation under subsection (a) by the application deadline established by the Attorney General, the Attorney General shall reserve not more than 75 percent of the allocation that the State would have received under subsection (a)

for such fiscal year to provide grants to specially qualified units

which meet the requirements for funding under section 1802.

33

(2) AWARD BASIS.—In addition to the qualification requirements for direct grants for specially qualified units the Attorney

General may use the average amount allocated by the States to

units of local government as a basis for awarding grants under

this section.

SEC. 1804. GUIDELINES.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General shall issue guidelines

establishing procedures under which a State or unit of local government that receives funds under section 1803 is required to provide

notice to the Attorney General regarding the proposed use of funds

made available under this part.

(b) ADVISORY BOARD.—The guidelines referred to in subsection

(a) shall include a requirement that such eligible State or unit of

local government establish and convene an advisory board to review

the proposed uses of such funds. The board shall include representation from, if appropriate——

(1) the State or local police department;

(2) the local sheriff’s department;

(3) the State or local prosecutor’s office;

(4) the State or local juvenile court;

(5) the State or local probation officer;

(6) the State or local educational agency;

(7) a State or local social service agency;

(8) a nonprofit, nongovernmental victim advocacy organization; and

(9) a nonprofit, religious, or community group.

SEC. 1805. PAYMENT REQUIREMENTS.

(a) TIMING OF PAYMENTS.—The Attorney General shall pay to

each State or unit of local government that receives funds under section 1803 that has submitted an application under this part not

later than——

(1) 180 days after the date that the amount is available, or

(2) the first day of the payment period if the State has provided the Attorney General with the assurances required by

subsection (c),

whichever is later.

(b) REPAYMENT OF UNEXPENDED AMOUNTS.——

(1) REPAYMENT REQUIRED.—From amounts awarded under

this part, a State or specially qualified unit shall repay to the

Attorney General, before the expiration of the 36-month period

beginning on the date of the award, any amount that is not expended by such State or unit.

(2) EXTENSION.—The Attorney General may adopt policies

and procedures providing for a one-time extension, by not more

than 12 months, of the period referred to in paragraph (1).

(3) PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO REPAY.—If the amount required to be repaid is not repaid, the Attorney General shall reduce payment in future payment periods accordingly.

(4) DEPOSIT OF AMOUNTS REPAID.—Amounts received by the

Attorney General as repayments under this subsection shall be

deposited in a designated fund for future payments to States

and specially qualified units.

34

(c) ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.—A State or unit of local government that receives funds under this part may use not more than 5

percent of such funds to pay for administrative costs.

(d) NONSUPPLANTING REQUIREMENT.—Funds made available

under this part to States and units of local government shall not be

used to supplant State or local funds as the case may be, but shall

be used to increase the amount of funds that would, in the absence

of funds made available under this part, be made available from

State or local sources, as the case may be.

(e) MATCHING FUNDS.——

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Federal share of a grant received

under this part may not exceed 90 percent of the total program

costs.

(2) CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITIES.—Notwithstanding paragraph (1), with respect to the cost of constructing juvenile detention or correctional facilities, the Federal share of a grant received under this part may not exceed 50 percent of approved

cost.

SEC. 1806. UTILIZATION OF PRIVATE SECTOR.

Funds or a portion of funds allocated under this part may be

used by a State or unit of local government that receives a grant

under this part to contract with private, nonprofit entities, or community-based organizations to carry out the purposes specified

under section 1801(b).

SEC. 1807. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—A State or specially qualified unit that receives funds under this part shall——

(1) establish a trust fund in which the government will deposit all payments received under this part;

(2) use amounts in the trust fund (including interest) during the period specified in section 1805(b)(1) and any extension

of that period under section 1805(b)(2);

(3) designate an official of the State or specially qualified

unit to submit reports as the Attorney General reasonably requires, in addition to the annual reports required under this

part; and

(4) spend the funds only for the purposes under section

1801(b).

(b) TITLE I PROVISIONS.—Except as otherwise provided, the administrative provisions of part H shall apply to this part and for

purposes of this section any reference in such provisions to title I

shall be deemed to include a reference to this part.

SEC. 1808. ASSESSMENT REPORTS.

(a) REPORTS TO ATTORNEY GENERAL.——

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), for

each fiscal year for which a grant or subgrant is awarded

under this part, each State or unit of local government that receives such a grant or subgrant shall submit to the Attorney

General a report, at such time and in such manner as the Attorney General may reasonably require, which report shall

include——

(A) a summary of the activities carried out with such

grant or subgrant; and

35

(B) an assessment of the effectiveness of such activities

on achieving the purposes of this part.

(2) WAIVERS.—The Attorney General may waive the requirement of an assessment in paragraph (1)(B) for a State or unit

of local government if the Attorney General determines that——

(A) the nature of the activities are such that assessing

their effectiveness would not be practical or insightful;

(B) the amount of the grant or subgrant is such that

carrying out the assessment would not be an effective use

of those amounts; or

(C) the resources available to the State or unit are such

that carrying out the assessment would pose a financial

hardship on the State or unit.

(b) REPORTS TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 90 days after the

last day of each fiscal year for which 1 or more grants are awarded

under this part, the Attorney General shall submit to the Congress

a report, which shall include——

(1) a summary of the information provided under subsection (a);

(2) the assessment of the Attorney General of the grant program carried out under this part; and

(3) such other information as the Attorney General considers appropriate.

SEC. 1809. DEFINITIONS.

For purposes of this part:

(1) The term ‘‘unit of local government’’ means——

(A) a county, township, city, or political subdivision of

a county, township, or city, that is a unit of local government as determined by the Secretary of Commerce for general statistical purposes;

(B) any law enforcement district or judicial enforcement district that——

(i) is established under applicable State law; and

(ii) has the authority, in a manner independent of

other State entities, to establish a budget and raise revenues; and

(C) the District of Columbia and the recognized governing body of an Indian tribe or Alaskan Native village

that carries out substantial governmental duties and powers.

(2) The term ‘‘specially qualified unit’’ means a unit of local

government which may receive funds under this part only in accordance with section 1803(e).

(3) The term ‘‘State’’ means any State of the United States,

the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the

Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern

Mariana Islands, except that American Samoa, Guam, and the

Northern Mariana Islands shall be considered as 1 State and

that, for purposes of section 1803(a), 33 percent of the amounts

allocated shall be allocated to American Samoa, 50 percent to

Guam, and 17 percent to the Northern Mariana Islands.

(4) The term ‘‘juvenile’’ means an individual who is 17

years of age or younger.

36

(5) The term ‘‘juvenile justice expenditures’’ means expenditures in connection with the juvenile justice system, including

expenditures in connection with such system to carry out——

(A) activities specified in section 1801(b); and

(B) other activities associated with prosecutorial and

judicial services and corrections as reported to the Bureau

of the Census for the fiscal year preceding the fiscal year

for which a determination is made under this part.

(6) The term ‘‘part 1 violent crimes’’ means murder and

nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault as reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation

for purposes of the Uniform Crime Reports.

SEC. 1810. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

(a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized

to be appropriated to carry out this part——

(1) $500,000,000 for fiscal year 2002;

(2) $500,000,000 for fiscal year 2003; and

(3) $500,000,000 for fiscal year 2004.

(b) OVERSIGHT ACCOUNTABILITY AND ADMINISTRATION.—Of the

amount authorized to be appropriated under subsection (a), there

shall be available to the Attorney General, for each of the fiscal

years 2002 through 2004 (as applicable), to remain available until

expended——

(1) not more than 2 percent of that amount, for research,

evaluation, and demonstration consistent with this part;

(2) not more than 1 percent of that amount, for training

and technical assistance; and

(3) not more than 1 percent, for administrative costs to

carry out the purposes of this part.

The Attorney General shall establish and execute an oversight plan

for monitoring the activities of grant recipients.

(c) FUNDING SOURCE.—Appropriations for activities authorized

in this part may be made from the Violent Crime Reduction Trust

Fund.

* * * * * * *

MARKUP TRANSCRIPT

BUSINESS MEETING

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 28, 2001

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY,

Washington, DC.

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in Room

2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner (chairman of the committee) presiding.

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The next item on the agenda is H.R.

863, the Consequences for Juvenile Offenders Act of 2001.

[H.R. 863 follows:]

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman

from Texas, the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime, for a motion.

Mr. SMITH OF TEXAS. Mr. Chairman, the Subcommittee on Crime

reports favorably the bill H.R. 863 with a single amendment in the

nature of a substitute and moves its favorable recommendation to

the full House.

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Without objection, the bill will be

considered as read and open for amendment at any point, and the

Subcommittee amendment in the nature of a substitute which the

members have before them will be considered as read and be considered as the original text for purposes of amendment.

The Chair recognizes—the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise to strike the last word.

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. May I recognize the gentleman from

Texas who is the Subcommittee Chair?

Mr. CONYERS. Absolutely.

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman

from Texas, the Subcommittee Chair, on his motion for 5 minutes.

Mr. SMITH OF TEXAS. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 863, the Consequences

for Juvenile Offenders Act of 2001, is designed to improve the juvenile justice system. It is a bipartisan bill cosponsored by every

member of the Crime Subcommittee. H.R. 863 was reported favorably by the Subcommittee last week by voice vote.

Two weeks ago at a hearing on this bill, our witnesses confirmed

the need for the Federal Government to assist State and local governments with preventing and responding to juvenile crime. This

bill does just that.

Mr. Chairman, in the interest of time, I would like to ask unanimous consent that the rest of my statement be made a part of the

record.

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Without objection.

[The statement of Mr. Smith of Texas follows:]

57

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. LAMAR SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS

FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

Mr. Chairman, H.R. 863, the ‘‘Consequences for Juvenile Offenders Act of 2001,’’

is designed to improve the juvenile justice system. It is a bipartisan bill, co-sponsored by every member of the Crime Subcommittee. H.R. 863 was reported favorably

by the Subcommittee last week by voice vote.

Two weeks ago at a hearing on this bill, our witnesses confirmed the need for the

Federal Government to assist State and local governments with preventing and responding to juvenile crime. This bill does just that.

H.R. 863 authorizes the Justice Department to make grants to State and local

governments to employ graduated sanctions in their juvenile justice system. The bill

authorizes $500 million annually for three years beginning in fiscal year 2002.

To receive these grant funds, States and local governments must have in place,

or plan to implement, a system of graduated sanctions for addressing juvenile delinquency within one year of applying for the funds. The sanctions must escalate in

intensity with each subsequent, more serious offense.

The bill also requires that the system be sufficiently flexible to address the specific problems of the individual offender. H.R. 863 is a balanced effort to strengthen

juvenile justice systems so that appropriate, measured consequences are imposed on

juveniles at the earliest stage to prevent young offenders from engaging in more serious wrongdoing later in their lives.

The bill authorizes that each State’s share of the grant funds is based on the size

of each State’s juvenile populations. The State must distribute 75 percent of the

funds among its local governments. The State determines the amount each of its

local governments receives based on a formula that takes into account a combination of juvenile justice expenditures and the level of violent crime in each unit of

local government.

If the State demonstrates that the State’s expenditures for the administration of

juvenile justice exceeded 25 percent of the total spent by the State and its local governments for the administration of juvenile justice, then the State’s share of funding

is increased to a level reflecting its share of the total expenditures. So if its share

is 35 percent, the State may request a waiver to receive 35 percent.

The bill requires all of the grant money to be used to strengthen the juvenile justice system and includes a number of specific uses for the funds, such as developing

graduated sanctions, building and operating juvenile corrections facilities, and hiring juvenile court judges and prosecutors.

Mr. Chairman, this grant program seeks to encourage our juvenile justice system

to pay more attention to juvenile offenders at earlier times in their lives with the

aim of preventing more serious offenses later. With this approach, we hope to ensure that juvenile offenders learn that there are consequences for their actions. I

urge my colleagues to support the bill.

Mr. SMITH OF TEXAS. And Mr. Chairman, I furthermore would

like to add my thanks to Mr. Scott, the Ranking Member, for his

work on this bill, which began several years ago.

And I yield back the balance of my time.

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman from Michigan, Mr.

Conyers.

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise to strike the last word.

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. CONYERS. Of course I support H.R. 863 and I commend Mr.

Scott and the Subcommittee Chairman, Mr. Smith. Their tireless

efforts have created a bill that we are all together on.

But over the last several Congresses, we’ve debated the get-tough

approach versus the prevention and treatment approach to addressing juvenile crime. This measure reflects the advice of the researchers and expert practitioners who are unanimous on the point

that more—that more resources are needed for appropriate individually tailored responses to juvenile crime.

The measure before us is not a one-size-fits-all approach but a

substantive bipartisan approach that actually will reduce crime

and delinquency where it occurs, and that’s why we all support it.

58

My view also is that juvenile justice is also about gun safety. I

understand clearly that the sponsors of the bill have valid concerns

that introducing the issue of gun violence into the debate would

foster differences of view and jeopardize good legislation. They are

correct that the Republican leadership bottled up this bill in a conference committee last year largely in an effort, I am told, to avoid

addressing gun violence.

But I believe that preventing juvenile crime is about thwarting

easy access to guns, just as much as it is about prevention programs and services for at-risk youth. Ten children a day are killed

by gun violence. The shooters at Columbine High School were provided a gun largely because of the lack of any background check

by licensed sellers at gun shows. We continue to witness unspeakable horrors every week as children open fire on their classmates.

You all read and see them weekly.

The Nation stands ready to require a child safety lock on every

gun. I think most Members of Congress are ready as well. But the

Congress ignores the cries of the children and their parents.

I know that the National Rifle Association’s publicity machines

have been spinning in high gear since the election to perpetuate

the myth that gun safety is a losing political issue. The facts are,

of course, that the NRA targeted countless House and Senate seats

and lost nearly every single one. So gather your courage, my colleagues. Bit by bit, the tide is turning.

Governor Pataki, New York, has proposed far more ambitious

gun safety measures than those that were bottled up by the Republican leadership this year. Senator McCain and Lieberman are attempting to find common ground on this issue as we speak. But regardless of the politics, I and others feel that we cannot back down

on this issue because it is the logical and correct position to take,

and if we really do not want to leave any child behind, we cannot

allow so many children to be killed in senseless and preventable

acts of gun violence. Too many families have lived through this unthinkable experience of burying their own children for us not to

act.

I would have offered amendments to this bill, reasonable and

moderate measures passed by the Senate in the last Congress, the

gun show background checks, child safety locks, a ban on the importation of large-capacity ammunition clips and a juvenile Brady,

but because of our parliamentary rules, I am not able to do so. But

let’s all stay tuned for further complementary support to this excellent measure before us.

Thank you very much.

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman’s time has expired.

The gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Scott.

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I look forward to the

next round of legislation that the gentleman from Michigan will be

introducing.

This bill before us today is a product of witnesses who presented

a clear consensus that rather than moving children out of the juvenile system into the adult system, more resources were needed in

the juvenile system for appropriate individually tailored responses

at the first offense, not the fifth offense, that allowed broader

choices than traditional limitations of either probation or incarceration.

59

We received that same advice from witnesses who appeared before the bipartisan Task Force on Youth Violence which was appointed by Speaker Hastert and Leader Gephardt to come up with

a bipartisan recommendation to deal with juvenile violence.

In the same manner recommended by these witnesses, the bill

before us today provides resources to be used to both hold the juvenile offenders accountable for their actions and to adequately address their needs for services, starting with an appropriate response when the delinquent offense first occurs and escalating the

level of response upon any succeeding offense until the problem is

eliminated.

Appropriate responses could consist of punishment, family and

individual counseling or other mental health services, drug treatment, or other assistance individual-tailored for the individual juvenile.

Mr. Chairman, we have a good bill with bipartisan support, so

I would hope that the members of the Committee would report the

bill.

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Let the Chair observe that we are

about 10 minutes away from a vote and I don’t think we can get

people back after this vote. So——

Mr. SMITH OF TEXAS. Mr. Chairman?

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. For what purpose does the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Smith, seek recognition for a manager’s

amendment?

Mr. SMITH OF TEXAS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at

the desk if that’s appropriate.

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The Clerk will report the amendment.

[Amendment to the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to

H.R. 863 Offered By Mr. Smith of Texas follows:]

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

The CLERK. Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a

substitute to H.R. 863 as reported by the Subcommittee on

Crime——

Mr. SMITH OF TEXAS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent

that the amendment be considered as read.

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Without objection, so ordered, and

the gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. SMITH OF TEXAS. Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment on

behalf of myself and Mr. Scott, the Ranking Member of the Crime

Subcommittee. It is the result of close cooperation between the majority and minority staffs of the Subcommittee.

The amendment makes a number of discrete changes to the bill

that are designed to better direct grants to the areas of greatest

need and also to ensure that recipients of the grants have sufficient

flexibility to use the funds productively.

Mr. Chairman, I will ask unanimous consent that the rest of my

statement be made a part of the record and I recommend that my

colleagues support the amendment.

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Without objection, so ordered.

[The statement of Mr. Smith of Texas in Support of Manager’s

Amendment to H.R. 863 follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. LAMAR SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS

FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

Mr. Chairman, I offer this Amendment on behalf of myself and Mr. Scott, the

ranking member of the Crime Subcommittee. It is the result of close cooperation between the majority and minority staffs of the Subcommittee.

The Amendment makes a number of discreet changes to the bill that are designed

to better direct grants to the areas of greatest need, and also to ensure that recipients of the grants have sufficient flexibility to use the funds productively.

The most important of these changes are the following:

• The Amendment modifies that portion of the bill that requires each participating State to distribute 75 percent of its grant funds to local governments.

This pass-through provision is necessary because local governments pay for

much of the juvenile justice expenditures. However, in the event that the

State government is responsible for more than 25 percent of the total juvenile

justice expenditures in the State, the State may seek a waiver from the Attorney General of the pass-through requirement so that it can keep a share of

the grant funds equal to its share of the total expenditures in that State.

• The Amendment also modifies the formula by which a State determines the

amount of the passed-through funds to be distributed among its local governments. The changes made to this formula will use juvenile justice expenditures, rather than adult crime expenditures, as a means to determine the

areas of greatest need for distributing the funds granted by the bill.

• The Amendment also adds two additional activities for which the bill’s grant

funds may be used. First, the Amendment will allow the grant funds to be

used to establish and maintain programs to enable juvenile courts and juvenile probation officers to be more effective and efficient in holding juvenile offenders accountable. Second, the Amendment will allow grant funds to be

used to hire and train juvenile detention and corrections personnel. While the

underlying bill provides for the hiring and training of court personnel and

prosecutors, it made no specific provision for using grants funds to hire the

corrections personnel.

• Finally, the underlying bill contains a cost-sharing provision that requires

grant recipients to pay for 10 percent of costs of any programs paid for with

grant funds. The Amendment would require State and local governments

using grant funds for the construction of facilities to pay at least 50 percent

of the cost with non-grant funds. This provisions is consistent with the approach taken in other grant programs.

Mr. Chairman, I believe this Amendment strengthens the bill and urge my colleagues to support.

69

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman from Massachusetts,

Mr. Delahunt.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Yes. And I’ll try to be brief, Mr. Chairman, but

I just want to commend both the Chairman and the Ranking Member for a very sound piece of legislation. This isn’t get-tough legislation; this is doing it smartly, doing it intelligently.

You know, in the course of the past several months, we’ve heard

a lot about bipartisanship, working together. The rhetoric seems to

have improved somewhat. But let me suggest in terms of what I

have seen that has an excellent opportunity to pass this Congress,

this is the first piece that I would suggest is truly bipartisan, it’s

very positive, I think continues—it continues the recommendations

and the concepts that were embraced about a year ago in the socalled bipartisan Task Force on Youth Violence that received unanimous support. It was comprised of eleven members on the Republican side and eleven members on the Democratic side.

I support the Manager’s Amendment. I would hope to work with

the Chair of the Subcommittee on possibly an amendment before

the bill goes to the floor or on the floor dealing simply with the

issues—the issue of findings, because I think it’s very important

that the American people should be aware that there is good news

out there, and hopefully this legislation would continue to support

the dramatic reduction in juvenile crime that is occurring in this

country.

You know, I think it was—since 1993, there has been a close to

70 percent decline in juvenile homicides. Now, I don’t think the

American people really understand that because the perception is

to the contrary. But I think it’s time that we as their representatives inform the Nation that this approach and these kind of efforts

are working, they’re working at the State level, and that we’re

stepping up to support their continuation and, in fact, their enhancement.

Mr. DELAHUNT. I yield back.

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentleman from California, Mr.

Gallegly.

Mr. GALLEGLY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I’ll be very

brief. I just want to publicly thank Chairman Smith for his help

in working with us on a provision in the manager’s amendment

dealing with the increase of training for correctional officers working with juveniles. And I would ask unanimous consent to have my

statement in its complete form for the record.

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. Without objection.

[The statement of Mr. Gallegly follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. ELTON GALLEGLY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS

FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Mr. Chairman, I would like to commend Mr. Smith, the new chairman of the Subcommittee on Crime, for working with me and including a provision in the manager’s amendment that I believe strengthens the bill.

The language would allow grant money to be used by state and local governments,

at their discretion, to increase training for correctional officers working in juvenile

facilities or to increase the ratio of officers to inmates.

This language is needed because juvenile correctional facilities have become increasingly dangerous—both to correctional officers and the juvenile detainees. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, in 1997 over 33% of the juveniles in facilities nationwide were sentenced for committing violent offenses. In California,

60% of the total first admissions in the juvenile system during 1997 were for violent

offenses, including many that were gang-related.

70

At the same time, as juvenile detainees have become more violent, many state

and local governments simply do not have the ability to hire enough correctional officers to ensure the safe operation of its juvenile facilities. When this happens, correctional officers are unable to gather the intelligence necessary to prevent violent

incidents or provide sufficient backup when an incident occurs.

This problem is compounded by a lack of proper training on the part of correctional officers in many state and local facilities. Adequate training is necessary to

protect our citizens from escapes, to protect the lives of correctional officers and

wards, and to ensure that juveniles are provided the services they need.

Once again, these provisions allow—but not require—state and local governments

to use funds to hire additional staff for correctional and detention facilities and provide correctional officers additional training.

This language is supported by the California Correctional Peace Officers Association and the members of Corrections U.S.A, a national coalition of over 80,000 correctional officers in forty states.

Thank you Mr. Chairman and I yield back the balance of my time.

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The gentlewoman from Texas, Ms.

Jackson Lee.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Yes, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Let

me add my appreciation to Chairman Smith and Ranking Member

Scott. This is a long journey. I hope that we will find in the 107th

Congress the ability to pass this legislation.

It was about 6 years ago when Ranking Member Scott and myself, along with other members of the Crime Subcommittee, and

then the then-chairman, Mr. McCollum, traveled the country to

hear people talk about the issues dealing with juvenile crime. At

that point there was a lot of hysteria, and the approaches dealt

mostly with incarceration.

And I think if we look at the statistics, and as Mr. Scott has said,

in joining him on the House Task Force on Juvenile Violence, all

of those experts said that we need intervention and prevention.

And despite the public perception of high levels of juvenile violence,

only 8 percent of juvenile offenses in 1994 were violent crimes, yet

thousands of young people are incarcerated. And at one point in

this very Committee, Mr. Chairman, we were talking about incarcerating young people with adults.

I do want to add the point that we have had an increase of utilization by young people of guns. Whether or not it is pervasive, it

still happens, and deaths do occur. I hope that we’ll find it in our

conscience and in our hearts and minds, to move legislation along

that deals with gun safety. That’s what I’d like to call it. I don’t

call it gun regulation, but gun safety. In doing that, I think we’ll

have a wonderful balance to this legislation.

In concluding, let me say that I thank both the Ranking Member

and the Chairman for including an amendment of mine in the

manager’s substitute I believe, or amendment to the amendment,

that deals with maintaining and establishing juvenile—in juvenile

courts and justice programs, efforts by prosecutors to reduce juvenile crime and recidivism by allowing the prosecutors to participate

in programs once the young person gets into the courthouse, to

produce or reduce recidivism.

The other thing that I think is extremely important is language

in this bill—can you believe it?—in a juvenile justice bill, which we

added last term that deals with intervention and mental health

support systems and screening. Our young people, as our adults,

need mental health services, and this particular amendment and

legislation now has it.

With that, let me yield back and ask support for this legislation.

71

Chairman SENSENBRENNER. The question is on the amendment

to the amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Smith. Those in favor will signify by saying aye.

Opposed, no.

The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it.

Are there any further amendments?

Hearing none, the question is on the amendment in the nature

of a substitute as amended. Those in favor will signify by saying

aye.

Opposed, no.

The ayes appear to have it. The ayes have it and the amendment

in the nature of a substitute as amendment—as amended is agreed

to.

The question now occurs on the motion to report the bill H.R.

863 favorably as amended by the amendment in the nature of a

substitute. All in favor say aye.

Opposed, no.

The ayes have it and the motion to report favorably is adopted.

Without objection, the Chairman is authorized to move to go to

conference pursuant to House rules. Without objection, the staff is

directed to make any technical and conforming changes, and all

members will be given 2 days, as provided by House rules, in which

to submit additional dissenting supplemental or minority views.

This concludes the agenda and the Committee is adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 2:27 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

Æ