Orrin Hatch

Mr. HATCH

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 24, S. 247.

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be agreed to.

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 372, as amended, be agreed to.

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, there are two technical amendments at the desk, submitted by myself and Senator Leahy, and I ask unanimous consent that they be agreed to.

Mr. HATCH

Mr. HATCH. The Senator really poses an interesting question. The current law requires no background check for sales at gun shows between non-licensed individuals. For sales by dealers, however, an Instant Check background check is required. If there is a question, the FBI gets 3 days to resolve the question. Of course, because a gun show generally lasts only 3 days, the show will be over by the time the FBI is through checking. Our bill requires the FBI to resolve any question within 24 hours. This strikes a balance between the time constraints of a gun show and the time needed by the FBI to resolve any Instant Check question. Further, this is an evolving process. As technology advances and more records are placed on the Instant Check database, the FBI will be able to resolve any question in less than 24 hours.

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, how much time remains?

Mr. HATCH. The Senator makes a good point. As chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I will work with the FBI and the ATF to ensure they have the resources to get the job done. We will do everything in our power to find the means to solve these problems. Mr. President, with respect to the Attorney General's prosecution record, this is not a record to be proud of--this business of prosecutions under Brady. There were zero in 1996, zero in 1997, and one in 1998. Yet, they want new laws. We are not enforcing the laws we already have. Is this a record to be proud of? Prosecutions for transfer of handguns or ammunition to a juvenile: This Justice Department, in 1996, had nine prosecutions. We have had that many shootings in the last short while. In 1997, five prosecutions. In 1998, six prosecutions. Why aren't we enforcing the laws that already exist instead of making political points to have a whole bunch of other laws that there is a question whether the Justice Department will enforce? Let me go into this one. Is this a record to be proud of by this administration? Prosecutions for possession or discharge of a firearm in a school zone. Think about that. In 1996, four prosecutions; in 1997, five; in 1998, eight. Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could enforce the laws that are already on the books? We would not have nearly the problems we have today. By the way, this business of prosecutions for transfer of a handgun or ammunition to a juvenile, and others, there are thousands of cases that they know of and there are only these limited number of prosecutions. Well, Mr. President, the plain fact of the matter is that the revised Lautenberg amendment, though improved to look more like the Republican proposal, is still not as good as the current bill as amended. The revised Lautenberg amendment still fails to provide qualified immunity to persons who obey the law and act appropriately with firearms, even after the Senate voted on it yesterday to provide qualified immunity when parents properly use child safety locks. The revised Lautenberg amendment still fails to provide tax relief to licensees and others who perform background checks. And the revised Lautenberg amendment still fails to relieve gun show organizers of substantial new recordkeeping requirements. It is very unfair. Thus, the revised Lautenberg amendment is a small step in the right direction, and I sincerely appreciate that step. However, in my view, it fails to go far enough. The revised Lautenberg amendment will change an unregulated market into a very heavily regulated market overnight. In fact, by imposing this much regulation, without providing any immunity or tax protection, and without any provision for licensing temporary dealers, the revised Lautenberg amendment will create a black market in gun trading, because people will not go to the gun shows, they will go into the streets and do it. By creating a black market in gun trading, the revised Lautenberg amendment will inevitably promote gun sales where there are no Federal licenses, no records, and no background checks. We do not need a black market, but we need a free market with reasonable, nonburdensome regulations where buyers and sellers have incentives to comply with the law. Mr. President, the current bill with the Smith-Jeffords amendment will strike the appropriate balance between the legitimate interests of law-abiding citizens to own, buy, and sell lawful products and the public interest in preventing criminals from obtaining guns. The powerful incentives included in our plan will ensure that persons will comply with the mandatory background check requirement on all sales at every gun show. The Republican plan also gives law-abiding gun owners the peace of mind that they have not inadvertently transferred a firearm to a felon, and strongly encourages the Attorney General to begin prosecuting the criminals who have violated the existing gun laws. Mr. President, this juvenile justice bill is too important to our country's schools, parents, and children to be held up by endless debates. Only this morning, we heard of another shooting in Georgia. So far, thank goodness, there have been no reports of death. We have to stop debating and pass this bill. We have had enough delays. We need to protect our students and our schools now. We in the Senate have an opportunity to take a major step toward protecting our children by passing the juvenile crime bill. Our country needs it. We should do it in a bipartisan way, and we need to do it today. I reserve the remainder of our time. Mr. LAUTENBERG addressed the Chair.

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I will be very brief. The fact of the matter is that the overwhleming majority of instant checks can be completed in a matter of minutes. If the instant check system approves the purchase, it will do so quickly. If the instant check system disappoves the purchase, it will do so quickly. The problem is the portion that instead of being approved or disapproved, raise a question. Under the 24-hour rule, the Justice Department has to work harder to resolve questions for gun show instant checks. This is because the gun show will be over in 3 days. If you allow 3 days to resolve questions for gun show checks, the questions will not be resolved until after the gun show is over. It means private people are going to take their guns to the streets and sell them there. It means a black market. It means more problems--more accessibility to those who are unsavory in our society to guns. I can't imagine why people can't see this, because it is as clear as the nose on anybody's face. The politics of it is more important than seeing the truth.

Mr. HATCH

Mr. HATCH. I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. HATCH. I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished Senator from Alabama.

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I note the distinguished Senator did not dispute the findings of the inspector general. I ask unanimous consent an editorial from USA Today entitled ``100,000-cops program proves to be mostly hype'' be printed in the Record.

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, are the yeas and nays ordered on any of these amendments?

Mr. HATCH. I ask for the yeas and nays on final passage.

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, our bill is $1.1 billion per year. This is a $7 billion add-on. The fact of the matter is, we are going to have a Department of Justice authorization bill in the future. We will look at this and try to do it. We will have hearings on it, and we will do it the right way. It shouldn't be done on this bill. I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, in the past, time seemed to roll past school shootings and similar tragedies. The public was quickly distracted. Yet, Littleton was different. The need to do something about the serious problem of youth violence has always been apparent. The tragedy of a month ago gave us the ingenuity and dedication to follow through. I have said since the outset of this debate that this issue is a complex problem and one which requires dedication and a spirit of cooperation. I felt that we needed to examine this and other acts of school violence and not single-out one politically attractive interest as a cause. In doing what's right for our children and in doing what's right for the public at large, our personal interests had to take a back seat. While I believe the cooperative spirit was lacking on occasion, I believe that the Senate has crafted a consensus product and one which I intend to support. At the start of this debate, I along with several of my colleagues announced a comprehensive plan to respond to the problem of violent juvenile crime. Our Youth Violence Plan contains four main components: 1. Prevention and Enforcement Assistance to State and Local Government; 2. Parental Empowerment and Stemming the Influence of Cultural Violence; 3. Getting Tough on Violent Juveniles and Those Who Commit Violent Crimes with a Firearm; and 4. Providing for Safe and Secure Schools. Each element of this plan--all of it--is included in S. 254 as amended. I. Prevention & Enforcement Assistance to State and Local Government: The first tier of this plan involved passage of the underlying bill--S. 254, the Violent and Repeat Juvenile Offender and Accountability Act. We have provided a targeted infusion of funds to State and local authorities to combat juvenile crime. S. 254 provides over $1 billion a year to the States to fight juvenile crime and prevent juvenile delinquency. We need to reach out to young children early in life, insure that parents are empowered to do what they believe is best for their children, and take meaningful steps to give local education and enforcement officials the tools they need to hold violent juveniles accountable. S. 254 accomplishes this goal. II. Parental Empowerment and Stemming the Influence of Cultural Violence: The second tier of our plan involved Congress taking steps to empower parents, educators and the entertainment industry to do more to limit the exposure of America's children to violence in our popular culture. We offered several amendments to the underlying bill which furthered this leg of our plan and all of them passed the Senate. For example, this bill gives parents the power to screen undesirable material from entering their homes over the Internet. We have given the entertainment industry the tools it needs to develop and enforce pre- existing ratings systems so that children are not exposed to material that the industry itself has deemed unsuitable for children. And we have established a National Commission on Youth Violence. It is time for us to hold Hollywood--and the rest of the entertainment industry--a bit more accountable. III. Getting Tough on Violent Juveniles and Enforce Existing Law: A third tier of our plan insured that violent juveniles--teenagers who commit violent crimes--will be held accountable. Part of the solution is to insure that when a teenager brings a gun to school, he or she is held accountable by school authorities and the criminal justice system. We take care of this in the bill. We also extend the Youth Handgun Safety Act to semi-automatic assault rifles. The bill before the Senate contains reforms like the juvenile Brady provision--a measure which will prohibit firearms possession by violent juvenile offenders. We increase penalties for transferring a gun to a minor and other corrupting acts. Most importantly, we respond to the biggest of gun law loopholes--the Clinton Administration's failure to enforce the gun laws already on the books. We insure that the Department of Justice will fulfill its obligation to enforce the law. Prosecuting violent gun offenders will be made a priority for this Administration whether they like it or not. IV. Safe and Secure Schools: The fourth element of our plan revolves around the basic right that all students share--the right to receive the quality education they deserve. Our teachers and students need to know that their school is safe and that, should they take action to deal with a violent student, the teacher will be protected. Our bill promotes safe and secure schools, free of undue disruption and violence, so that our teachers can teach and our children can learn. We provide greater flexibility to local communities in how they use federal education funds. We also provide teachers with limited civil liability protection should they take action to remove a problem child from school. These are just some of the many, many reforms contained in this bill. There has been a sense among many Americans that we are powerless to reverse the trend of violence. People believe we are powerless to deal with violent juvenile crime and that we are powerless to change our culture. It is this feeling of powerlessness which threatened our collective ambition for meaningful, penetrating solutions in the wake of the Littleton tragedy. I believe the Senate has taken a meaningful step towards shedding this defeatism. Do I agree with everything in this bill? No. For example, I oppose to the gun show regulatory and taxing amendment. But addressing this gun show issue has been evolutionary. Both sides have moved on this and-- perhaps--we can find common ground as the bill moves through the House and conference. Given the seriousness of our youth violence problem--and the number of warning signs that tragedies will continue unless all of us come together--we must move forward. We should join together and pass this bill. Finally, in closing I want to end this debate with a reminder. We have been on this bill for two weeks talking about violent juvenile crime, about the events in Littleton, about kids who use guns, and about kids influenced by violence in the media. Unfortunately, all of that is very true. But let us not lose sight of the fact that there are millions of kids in this country, hundreds of thousands in Utah, who are really good young people. We give a lot of attention and this bill focuses even more of it on young people who get into trouble with the law. Let's not forget that about the kids who fly straight. As we wrap up consideration of this bill, let's thank the millions of young people across this land that work hard, study long hours, respect and love their parents and friends, and care for others around them. Mr. President, I would like added as cosponsors of this bill and have their names appear as cosponsors immediately following my name: Senator Leahy, Senator Sessions, Senator Biden and Senator Feinstein. I am very proud to be able to be the prime sponsor with these wonderful cosponsors. Senator Biden was one of the first cosponsors on this bill. I am more than pleased that my ranking member, Senator Leahy is a cosponsor and a prime cosponsor. S. 254 is a testament to those who worked on it and a product which, on the whole, will help our young people and do something significant about the problems of juvenile crime. I want to thank a few of the people who have worked on this bill. Let me first acknowledge the Majority Leader who worked with me to keep this bill alive. Given the demanding Senate schedule, it would have been easier for him to have refused to take up the bill or pull it down. We have a bill passing the Senate because he wanted to do what's right. Let me also acknowledge Ranking Member, Senator Leahy. He and I reached agreement on this important bill after much discussion and he ably managed the bill for his side of the aisle. I also want to commend Senator Sessions--the Chairman of the Youth Violence Subcommittee. S. 254 became the vehicle for quite of bit of politically charged legislation but it was Senator Sessions who stayed on me for more than two years and who never lost sight of the need to make the juvenile justice reforms we make in the underlying bill. Also, let me commend Senator Biden who came on this bill as a cosponsor when others were unwilling. A leader on crime control issues, he was instrumental in setting a cooperative tone which helped get this bill moving. Senator Allard, Senator Craig, Senator Brownback, and Senator Ashcroft are to be commended for their leadership and counsel. Senator Feinstein should be applauded for her cooperation. There are many others but I will end it there. At the staff level, I want to commend several people. First, on the Judiciary Committee staff, let me acknowledge a few people who have worked very hard on this bill. Committee Counsels Rhett Dehart and Mike Kennedy are to be commended for their lead work on this important bill. When others were skeptical about its prospects they were there to make the substantive case for moving this bill. They worked very hard, for several years, to get this bill introduced, reported, and passed. This bill's passage is a testament to their tireless efforts. In addition, I want to acknowledge and thank Kristi Lee, the Chief Counsel of the Youth Violence subcommittee for her work. I also want to commend a few others on the Committee Staff: Sharon Prost, Anna Cabral, Ed Haden, Craig Wolf, Catherine Campbell, David Muhl- hausen, Leah Belaire, Makan Delrahim, Jeanne Lopatto, Alison Vinson, Joelle Scott, Elle Parker, Krista Redd, and Luke Austin. They all worked around the clock on this bill. The amount of preparation that goes into these bills is significant and they were given little time to prepare for the floor. They are a great staff and I thank them for their efforts. Thanks as well should be given to the Committee's Chief Counsel and Staff Director, Manus Cooney. He is one of the first staff directors in the committee's history. On Senator Leahy's committee staff I want to acknowledge the Minority Chief Counsel--Bruce Cohen for his cooperative efforts and leadership. Beryl Howell, Senator Leahy's General Counsel should also be commended for her substantive work on the underlying Hatch-Leahy substitute and managers' package. Ed Barron is a true gentleman and an able lawyer. Let me also acknowledge the Youth Violence Subcommittee's Minority Chief Counsel, Sheryl Walter and Glen Shor with the Criminal Justice Overight Subcommittee. Others I would be remiss in not mentioning include: Dave Hoppie, Robert Wilkie, and Jim Hecht of the Majority Leader's staff; Stewart Verdery and Eric Euland of the Whip's office; Ken Foss, Candi Wolff, and Jade West of the Policy Committee; Mike Bennett, Karen Knutson, Kris Ardizzone, David Crane, and Paul Clement. Let me acknowledge the hard work of Mary Kay MacMillan, Tony Coe, Bill Jensen, and Tim Trushel of the Senate Legislative Counsel's office, who all put in extraordinary effort in preparing this bill and many amendments. And finally, I would be remiss if I did not express thanks to our wonderful floor and cloakroom staff: Elizabeth Letchworth, Dave Schiappa, Tripp Baird, Malloy McDaniel, Marshall Hiton, Dan Dukes, Laura Martin, and Myra Baron. These folks keep things running during our hectic debates, and we appreciate them. I am very grateful to finally have this ordeal over. It has been a very, very difficult bill, as all of these crime bills usually are. I think if anybody tries to make this just a gun bill, they have missed the point of what we have accomplished here. Sure, there have been some amendments on guns that are very crucial and very important in the eyes of many people on the floor, but this bill is so much more--ranging from accountability, calling on youth to be responsible for their actions, to prevention moneys. For the first time in years, we have balanced prevention and accountability and law enforcement. The law enforcement aspect will help bring the law down on violent juveniles and others who aid them in committing these crimes. We have made real inroads and we have taken a number of very important steps with regard to changing the culture of violence in our society. That is important. Yes, we faced some tough amendments on guns. I don't like all of the results on this bill. But the fact of the matter is, they were votes, they were voted up and down, the Senate has spoken, and we need to recognize that for what it is. At this point I again express my appreciation to my friend, Senator Leahy, for the patience he has had with me, the patience he has had on the floor, the assistance he has been. It has been a real privilege to work for him. I respect and admire him and hope to do a lot of constructive things with him in the future.

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent 5 minutes be given to myself and Senator Leahy, in that order.

Mr. HATCH. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. HATCH

Mr. HATCH. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following treaty on today's Executive Calendar: No. 2. I further ask unanimous consent that the treaty be considered as having passed through its various parliamentary stages up to and including the presentation of the resolution of ratification; that all committee provisos, reservations, understandings, declarations be considered agreed to; that any statements be printed in the Congressional Record as if read; I further ask consent that when the resolution of ratification is voted upon the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; the President be notified of the Senate's action and that following the disposition of the treaty, the Senate return to legislative session.

Mr. HATCH

Mr. HATCH. For the information of all Senators, the Senate will convene at 11 a.m. on Monday and be in a period of morning business until 1 p.m. Following morning business, the Senate will begin consideration of the Department of Defense authorization bill. Amendments to that legislation are expected to be offered during Monday's session of the Senate. If votes are ordered with respect to S. 1059, those votes would be stacked to occur at 5:30 p.m., Monday evening. As always, Senators will be notified as votes are ordered.

Mr. HATCH

Mr. HATCH. If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I now ask unanimous consent the Senate stand in adjournment under the previous order.

Mr. HATCH

Mr. HATCH. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. HATCH

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to a period for morning business, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. HATCH

Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I thank the President pro tempore.

Mr. HATCH

Mr. HATCH. This morning the Senate will resume debate on the juvenile justice bill. Under a previous order, the Senate will begin 60 minutes of debate on the Smith and Lautenberg pawnshop amendments. Following that debate, at approximately 10:30, votes on or in relation to the amendments will occur. Additional amendments are expected, and therefore votes will occur throughout the day and into the evening. In addition, consideration of the supplemental appropriations bill will begin today. It is hoped that a time agreement on this legislation will be made and a vote on final passage will also take place today. I thank my colleagues for their attention.

Mr. HATCH. What is the pending business?