John Kennedy

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I don't think there is a single solitary Member of this Senate who would do anything to hurt public safety--and I mean that. Certainly, my colleague Senator Durbin wouldn't, nor would Senator Grassley or Senator Lee. My problem with this amendment, which Senator Grassley explained very well, has nothing to do with an objection to faith-based organizations participating in anti-recidivism. In fact, I am amazed that the bill got this far with a provision that would prevent our faith-based organizations from participating in the anti-recidivism program. I am stunned that it got this far. So I certainly don't object to that. Indeed, later on, I hope we can offer that amendment separately. I certainly don't object to Senator Cruz's suggestion that we not let dangerous people out of prison. So I am all for that portion of the amendment, and I hope we can deal with that separately. What I am not for is extending the sentencing review commission and, yet again, creating more bureaucracy, because that is my problem with the whole bill. If you believe our sentencing laws are unjust, then I am prepared to stay here night and day through Christmas, and let's debate them and let's fix them, but that is not what this is doing. What this is doing is giving away all of our authority as U.S. Senators to nameless bureaucrats--I am not using that term in a pejorative sense--in the Bureau of Prisons to decide who gets to leave prison early and who doesn't. It is like putting paint on rotten wood. So with respect to our Senator, my colleague, I object, with the caveat that I hope he will bring the two good parts of this amendment back later.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, this amendment is very, very simple. This is what it does. It requires the Director of the Bureau of Prisons to do four things: No. 1, notify each victim--or if the victim of a crime is deceased, the victim's next of kin--that the Bureau of Prisons expects to release the inmate who committed the crime to the victim. So step 1, the Bureau of Prisons has to notify the victim that the person who committed the crime is about to be released. No. 2, the Bureau of Prisons has to tell the victim--that word is used enough in this bill--the date that the inmate will be released. No. 3, the Director of the Bureau of Prisons has to allow the victim or the victim's next of kin to make a statement about the inmate's release. It doesn't give the victim veto power, but the victim is allowed to make a statement. Finally, it requires the Director of the Bureau of Prisons to review that statement. Now, this bill spends billions of dollars on our criminal justice system and on criminals--certainly hundreds of millions of dollars--but it doesn't do much for victims. All this bill would do is say that victims have some rights, too, and the victims' rights are very simple. Let me give an example. If a rapist is about to be released from prison early, the Bureau of Prisons has to tell the rape victim that we are letting him out early and the date we are letting him out. The victim is entitled to make a statement, and the Bureau of Prisons has to read it. That is the least we can do for victims under this bill.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I know there has been some confusion about these amendments, as one sort of bleeds into the other, so without repeating myself, I want to describe this amendment very quickly. This amendment would require the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, on a quarterly basis and without using the released inmate's name--so it would be anonymous--to publish, No. 1, the crime for which the inmate is or was imprisoned--I am talking about the released inmate-- the Bureau has to publish, No. 1, the crime for which the released inmate was in prison; No. 2, prior crimes for which the inmate was in prison--some would call that his rap sheet; No. 3, whether the released inmate has been rearrested, and if he or she has, what for, and the information would be broken down by State. This is merely reporting, and the objective is transparency. Now there are provisions of this amendment--I don't want to mislead anyone--that will reassert the right of the victim to be notified when an inmate is released. I will just sum up by saying that I don't want to mislead anyone. There is a victim's right of notification provision in this amendment as well, but it is primarily a transparency provision. I will be glad to answer any questions. I yield my time.

Mr. KENNEDY. Certainly, I will.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Without objection, it is so ordered. The bill was ordered to a third reading and was read the third time.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I have the honor of representing Louisiana in the U.S. Senate, and it gives me no pleasure to say that in Louisiana we have a crime problem. In Louisiana and, frankly, in other parts of America, I regret to say, criminals are turning neighborhoods into war zones and small towns into drug dens and, in the process, families are being destroyed. Now, some people make a youthful mistake, and they could benefit from a second chance. I think most Americans agree with that, but other people never change. I don't know why it is. If I make it to Heaven, I am going to ask, but there are some people out there, they are not mixed up, they are not confused, they are not sick, it is not a question of whether their mama or daddy loved them enough--they are just bad. Unfortunately, they are just bad. For that reason, I think we all recognize that prisons are a necessary fixture that make our communities safer. As we prepare to hear a bill or bills on changes to sentences for Federal prisoners, I wanted to share with the Senate a cautionary tale from my home State of Louisiana. People in my State are being killed, and people in my State are being hurt because of these so-called ``criminal justice reforms''--I put that expression in quotation--that were put in place by my Governor. Louisiana, about 14 months ago, started letting prisoners out of our prisons. The overall goal of the Governor was to save money. So far, I think he has let out about 2,000 prisoners. Now, the inmates he let out were not vetted. They weren't vetted by the probation boards, they weren't vetted by the parole boards to see if they were a threat to public safety. These prisoners he let go weren't paired with programs to reduce recidivism. He just let them go. He did it under a statute he named and called the Justice Reinvestment Act. It certainly wasn't any reinvestment in justice for the victims. His law is failing the law-abiding public in my State. So far, 22 percent of inmates have been rearrested. Now, that is over 14 months--a very short period of time. The Governor and his Department of Corrections said: Well, we are only going to release nonviolent criminals. Well, somebody forgot to tell the criminals they were nonviolent. In the 23rd Judicial District Court in Louisiana, which encompasses small towns and three parishes, one in three inmates that the Louisiana State government let go has been rearrested. That is higher than the 22 percent I just quoted. That is a recidivism rate of 33 percent in a little over a year. I have talked to Louisiana's law enforcement officers and prosecutors. They don't support what the Edwards administration has done. Now, they are scared to say anything because the Governor controls a lot of their budgets and their money, but if you ask 9 out of 10 law enforcement officials in my State privately if they support it, they will tell you no, and the 10th is probably lying. The head of the District Attorneys Association, in fact, has publicly said that Louisiana's streets are not safer because of this so-called criminal justice reform. He also noted that simply reducing prison population is not a measure of success. He is a wise man. Louisiana State government now seems to care more about criminals than it cares about those criminals' victims. In fact, I have never heard my Governor talk about victims at all. It is always criminals. I recently received a letter. We all get letters from constituents, but this one really--this one really shook me up. I received a letter from a constituent in South Louisiana about what this failed experiment of criminal release in Louisiana has cost his family. His words--this gentleman's words--have been weighing on my heart and on my mind since I read them, and I would like to read a bit from that letter now. I am quoting: My name is Gary Prince, and my youngest son Jordan was killed by a drunk driver in May of 2015. He was only 18 years old, and he had just graduated high school 12 days before this accident. The man that killed him was driving the wrong way on Highway 90 near New Iberia and crashed into my son head-on. His blood alcohol level was .16, which is twice the State's legal limit. He was sent to jail with a sentence of 15 years, but this person that killed my son served only 18 months in jail. Mr. Prince, the father, goes on: There is a State law which States that anyone convicted of a DUI with vehicular homicide, with a blood alcohol level of .15 or greater, has to serve a minimum of 5 years without the benefit of early release. This was not taken into account for this criminal. My son was a good kid. He had a bright future. He wanted to follow in my footsteps and become a machinist. I feel that my family deserves better than this. I want you to know that when I say my prayers at night, I pray for a better Louisiana. Mr. Prince, I want you to know how sorry I am for you and your family's loss. While the State of Louisiana might consider this a nonviolent crime, your family paid a horrific price for this man's behavior. I can't imagine anything worse than a man or a woman having to bury his or her son, especially a teenager. For your son's killer to be out on the streets after 18 months is more than just salt in the wound. It is a miscarriage of justice, and it is precisely what happens when policies like criminal release programs are pursued without considering the victims or their families. It is not justice. I believe in justice. I think most Americans do. What is justice? We talk about it a lot. I agree with what C.S. Lewis said: Justice is when someone gets what they deserve. I am not saying that deterrence and rehabilitation are not important in a prison system. They are. They have nothing to do with justice. They have to do with the effectiveness of your prison system. C.S. Lewis said: Justice is when people get what they deserve. Justice is when the people of Tibet, for example, get to worship the Dalai Lama because they deserve religious freedom. Justice is when a rapist is sent to prison and stays there for a time commensurate with his crime. That is justice. He is getting what he deserves. C.S. Lewis didn't just say that. Immanuel Kant said that. He said our penal laws are a moral imperative. He didn't say rehabilitation is unimportant. He didn't say deterrence is unimportant, because they are both important. They just have nothing to do with justice. Hegel said the same thing, and St. Augustine said the same thing--all of the great thinkers in history--that justice is when you get what you deserve. It doesn't have anything to do with the cost of government. It doesn't have anything to do with deterrence. It doesn't have anything to do with rehabilitation. Those are all important factors, but this has nothing to do with justice. A criminal release program gone wrong has had other effects in Louisiana, too. It frees people like Tyrone ``Smokey'' White. Let me tell you about Mr. White. Our Governor let him go. He is a career criminal. He repaid the State promptly by robbing two roofers at gunpoint. Somebody forgot to tell Smokey that he was supposed to be nonviolent, too. Less than a week later, Mr. White was released under Louisiana's criminal release program, despite having more than 60 arrests on his record. A criminal release program gone wrong looks like a convicted felon named Richard McLendon who, upon being granted early release, illegally gets himself a gun and uses it to fatally shoot another man in Bossier Parish. He then leaves his victim to die like roadkill on the side of the road with multiple gunshot wounds. A criminal release program gone wrong in Louisiana, anyway, looks like a Dwayne Watkins. He is a pedophile. He had more than 21 arrests for child abuse and other assorted crimes on his record. He got to walk out of jail early--not just once but two times. Watkins earned 10 years for illegally possessing a gun as a felon, and he got out early, and he promptly sexually abused two young girls. He earned 3 more years in jail, and then, thanks to Louisiana State government and the Edwards administration, he got out early again. Give me a break. In October, less than 2 months after his early release, he approached Kelly and Heather Jose at a shopping mall in Caddo Parish. When he asked to borrow their phone to call a cab, the couple offered him a ride. In Louisiana, we help each other. Well, Mr. Dwayne Watkins decided to repay their generosity by kidnapping them, shooting them, and burning them to death in their own car so badly that their bodies couldn't even be recognized. He is now awaiting trial for murder. Kelly Jose, one of the victims, was an Air Force Reservist--God rest his soul--in Barksdale Air Force Base. He enlisted in the Air Force in 1998. Heather Jose, the other victim, was a small business owner. She loved working in the ministry of a church. They were good people. They were just trying to do a good deed. This was a senseless tragedy, and it did not have to happen. Just this weekend, our sheriff from Caddo Parish rightly asked a question. He said: Why is Dwayne Watkins out of prison after violating his parole and sexually abusing two young girls? And many of us are asking that same question in Louisiana right now. But the answer is very simple--the Edwards administration's failed criminal release program. I want to take a moment and consider what price we might be asking the families back home to pay for these criminal release programs. In my State, innocent people are scared, and rightfully so, that they might become victims of violent crime. We are reneging on the justice we promised the victims like Mr. Prince, who lost a child. Do you want to put a price tag on justice? Have at it. I don't. In Louisiana, we also failed the Joses' three children. They don't have parents anymore. Mr. Dwayne Watkins took care of that. He should have been in jail serving his time. That is justice. Louisiana's failed experience has cost law-abiding folks dearly in every corner of my State. I just want to implore my colleagues in the Senate to please think about more than just the criminals. Think about more than just the money. Think about the lives of the victims and their families, as well, because they are supposed to count too.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I just want to make a few comments in memory of President George Herbert Walker Bush, whose funeral we attended today. Losing a parent or a grandparent is never easy. I know I speak for the people in Louisiana when I offer my heartfelt sympathies to the entire Bush family in their time of grief. I want them to know their loss echoes in the hearts of all Americans this week. I also want them to know their family is in our thoughts and in our prayers as we mourn together. At an age when most kids are trying to figure out what kind of smart phones they want to buy, President George H.W. Bush thought of nothing except answering the call of duty. He really was a part of the ``greatest generation.'' I believe he was a hero and a patriot, not because he made the choices that he made to fight for his country but because he got up and continued to make the choice to serve the American people every single day of his life as a Navy aviator, as a Congressman, as an Ambassador, as CIA Director, as Vice President of the United States, and, ultimately, as Commander in Chief. President Bush, very simply, was a great American, not just because he served his country during some of the darkest days in world history--although he did, and he did courageously--but because he embodied so many of the values that distinguish the American spirit. Traits like bravery, selflessness, faith, and kindness are things we don't have enough of in the village of Washington anymore and seem to be in short supply, but President Bush had them in spades. He was smart as a whip. He was a patriot, but he was also a person who deeply believed in the importance of working together to try to build a better world. Upon leaving office, President Bush started the Points of Light foundation. Points of Light is a charity whose mission is based on a fairly simple premise--that there is nothing more transformative than an individual's choosing to be generous with his or her time, gifts, and talents. This idea has resonated with millions of Americans across the world. Since its founding in 1990, Points of Light has electrified the American spirit of volunteerism, and each year the foundation supports more than 20 million hours of community service--what an extraordinary legacy. President Bush understood that at its core public service is about-- this is going to sound strange--loving your neighbor. The Points of Light foundation is a fitting legacy for this fine American who loved his country and his family to the fullest, and he devoted every day of his life to serving all 350 million of his neighbors. Without a doubt, he was one of the brightest of those thousand points of light, and our loss is Heaven's gain. A smart person once told me that people don't really care how much you know until they know how much you care. President George Herbert Walker Bush knew a lot, but he cared a lot too. America weeps, both in joy for his life and in sadness because his soul is in a better place but not with us. America and the world have lost a favorite son. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I want to take a moment to honor an American hero and a fellow Louisianan. In just a few days, Charles Davis, from Toledo Bend Lake, LA, will celebrate his 93rd birthday. Charles is a World War II veteran who gave many years of his life in the service of his country. Charles Davis was 16 years old when Pearl Harbor was bombed. Like many Americans, the attack on Pearl Harbor led Davis to serve his country by enlisting in the Navy. While just a teenager, his service in the military took him around the globe, fighting for the country he loves. During his time in the war, Charles served on a ship that was bombed while out at sea. He spent 37 hours adrift alongside 1,200 soldiers, with nothing to keep them alive other than their life vests. Charles thought he was going to die that day, but after 37 hours in the ocean, he was rescued. Nearly 300 of the men in the water with him did not make it. Among the men who died that day was another American hero, Charles's brother, Albert Anthony Davis. Charles served in the military for 8 years and after the war returned to Louisiana to serve as a firefighter. As Charles celebrates his 93rd birthday, I want to honor his life and dedication to his country. He risked his life in service to his country and lost a brother and many comrades during the war. Mr. Davis, we are grateful for your service, and I would like to wish you a very happy birthday and many blessings in the years to come.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be discharged from further consideration of S. 3628 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. KENNEDY. I know of no further debate on the bill.

Mr. KENNEDY. I ask unanimous consent that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 309, S. Res. 92.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Foreign Relations Committee be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 709.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to immediate consideration of S. Con. Res. 54.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to consideration of S. Res. 712, submitted earlier today.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee be discharged from further consideration and the Senate now proceed to S. Res. 688.

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 3 o'clock p.m., Monday, December 3; further, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and morning business be closed; further, that the Senate proceed to executive session and resume consideration of Executive Calendar No. 1153 and that notwithstanding rule XXII, the cloture vote on that nomination occur at 5:30 p.m.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. KENNEDY

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the majority leader and the senior Senator from Alaska be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills or joint resolutions on Friday, November 30, 2018.