Jerrold Nadler

Mr. NADLER

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the VICTIM Act is bipartisan legislation that would increase public safety and improve law enforcement practices. The rise in violent crime affects every community across the country, not just Democratic communities. But we also know that public safety and respect for civil rights can coexist. Building healthy and strong communities does not require us to choose between our rights and our safety. I thank the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Demings) for introducing this important legislation, which is supported by a wide range of law enforcement associations. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NADLER

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Ross), the sponsor of the bill.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 3103) to amend title 18, United States Code, to eliminate the statute of limitations for the filing of a civil claim for any person who, while a minor, was a victim of a violation of section 1589, 1590, 1591, 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A, 2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423 of such title.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on S. 3103.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, S. 3103, the Eliminating Limits to Justice for Child Sex Abuse Victims Act of 2022 is bipartisan legislation that would ensure that survivors of child sex abuse are not barred by a statute of limitations when seeking civil damages in court. Data suggests that 86 percent of child sexual abuse goes unreported. Also common is delayed disclosure, or the tendency of survivors of child sexual abuse to wait many years before disclosing abuse to others. This is because survivors of sexual abuse often take a long time to process their trauma, and many survivors who were abused as a child may not even recognize the abuse they suffered until much later in life. Unfortunately, because survivors of child sexual abuse often delay reporting, any statute of limitations may prevent survivors from accessing justice and seeking damages in civil court. The current Federal civil remedy statute for victims of child sexual abuse includes a statute of limitations requiring all claims to be filed within 10 years of the injury or not later than 10 years after the victim turns 18 years old. These statutes of limitation can serve to protect the abusers and enable them to continue to exploit their power by allowing victims' claims to expire. This bill will enable survivors who are victims of Federal child sex abuse offenses, including aggravated sexual abuse, sex trafficking, human trafficking, forced labor, and sexual exploitation, to seek civil damages in Federal court regardless of the amount of time that has passed since the abuse. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Ross) for joining Senator Durbin in introducing this important legislation and recognizing that the challenges survivors face in reporting the trauma they have experienced should not bar them from accessing justice in the courts. Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, S. 3103 is bipartisan legislation that would ensure that survivors of child sex abuse are not barred by a statute of limitations when seeking justice in the courts. This bill recognizes that many victims of child sexual abuse delay reporting the trauma they have experienced. Therefore, it will enable survivors who are victims of more than a dozen Federal sex abuse offenses to seek civil damages in Federal court regardless of the time that has passed since the abuse. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NADLER

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on S. 4785.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, S. 4785 is bipartisan legislation that would extend until September 30 of this year, 2022, the mandatory special assessment of $5,000 imposed on those convicted of certain offenses involving sexual abuse, sexual exploitation, or human trafficking. Human trafficking is a multi-billion-dollar criminal industry that denies freedom to 24.9 million people around the world and generates more than $150 billion annually in illicit profits. It is a reprehensible crime that touches communities across the country--from major cities to suburban enclaves and rural back roads--and can cause devastating, sometimes irreparable harm to victims who fall prey to cunning traffickers. The fight against human trafficking requires a comprehensive, multidisciplinary strategy that includes prosecution of traffickers so that they cannot harm again, protection of victims through services to increase safety and treat trauma, and prevention efforts to alleviate social vulnerabilities to exploitation. From providing immediate, emergency care when victims are identified to long-term care that helps survivors recover from their victimization, victim assistance is vital to the Federal anti- trafficking strategy and efforts to combat sexual abuse and exploitation as well as child pornography, which continue to be a threat to our children and other vulnerable persons. The Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act, commonly referred to as the JVTA, requires Federal sentencing judges to impose a special assessment of $5,000 on those convicted of Federal crimes involving sexual abuse, child pornography, sexual exploitation, or human trafficking. The fees collected from the special assessment are transferred to the Domestic Trafficking Victims' Fund and used to fund and enhance vital services and programming that assist victims and survivors who have been abused, exploited, and/or trafficked. This past Sunday, the provision that requires judges to impose the special assessment expired, which necessitates the passage of this extension until the end of the fiscal year when it can be renewed as part of other ongoing legislation to fund the government. Congress must do all we can to ensure that resources are available to support the needs of victims and survivors of human trafficking, sexual abuse, and sexual exploitation, who often have complex needs requiring a broader array of trauma-focused services and treatment. Although we are considering the bill as introduced by Senators Klobuchar and Cornyn, I must also thank Representative Karen Bass for her work to introduce the House companion, H.R. 8684, and for her continued dedication to helping victims and survivors of human trafficking, sexual abuse, and sexual exploitation. Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support the extension of the $5,000 special assessment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 4785) to extend by 19 days the authorization for the special assessment for the Domestic Trafficking Victims' Fund.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. S. 4785 is bipartisan legislation that would extend the $5,000 special assessment that provides funding to help victims and survivors of sexual abuse, sexual exploitation, child pornography, and human trafficking, through services, programming, and treatment tailored to their specific needs. Each of us should make every effort to support programs that help rescue survivors of these reprehensible crimes and provide them with the resources they need to become whole again, while also holding perpetrators accountable for the harms they cause. I urge all my colleagues to support S. 4785, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NADLER

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from New York, the Honorable Patrick Ryan, be permitted to take the oath of office today. His certificate of election has not arrived, but there is no contest and no question has been raised with regard to his election.

Mr. NADLER

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, as the dean of the New York delegation, I have the distinct honor to rise today to introduce the new Member of the House of Representatives from New York's 19th Congressional District, Representative Patrick Ryan. Representative Ryan is a fifth generation New Yorker who was born and raised in Kingston, New York. After graduating from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, he served our Nation as an Army intelligence officer and deployed for two combat tours in Iraq. Returning to New York as a decorated veteran, Congressman Ryan went on to become a successful small business owner before returning to public service as the County Executive of Ulster County. As County Executive, Representative Ryan has been shown to be a dedicated public servant, and I know he does not take his new role lightly. As the dean of the delegation, I know I speak on behalf of the entire delegation when I say that Representative Ryan will be a wonderful colleague whose experience, entrepreneurial leadership, and history of devoted service to our country will help this Chamber navigate the challenges of our times. I am now honored, Madam Speaker, to yield to a fellow New Yorker (Mr. Ryan).

Mr. NADLER

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, today, I rise in strong support of the Inflation Reduction Act--landmark legislation that will have a lasting impact on our planet and help lower costs for Americans in New York City and across our country. From lowering prescription drug prices and health care costs for working families to including the most significant climate investment in our nation's history, the Inflation Reduction Act includes policies I have long fought for. With this legislation, our nation can finally rise to the seriousness of the moment in our fight against climate change by making the large- scale investments needed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent by 2030, lower energy costs for families, and create millions of good-paying clean energy jobs across our country. I am thrilled that with this legislation, our government will finally be able to negotiate the prices of some of our nation's costliest prescription drugs--drugs that have been on the market for years and reap billions of dollars in sales from Medicare alone. I am proud that the Inflation Reduction Act will bring down health care costs for over 3.7 million New Yorkers and will result in enormous savings for taxpayers. With the passage of this bill, Democrats are showing American families that our federal government can deliver for the people, not just special corporate interests. I look forward to voting to pass this historic legislation. Mr. DAVID Scott of Georgia. Madam Speaker, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 before us today makes historic investments in climate change mitigation, our critical forestry and conservation programs, rural communities, and energy and biofuels infrastructure. This package makes important investments in our oversubscribed farm bill conservation programs. By expanding participation in these programs and providing increased technical assistance funding, farmers will more readily be able to employ proven conservation practices on their land, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and sequester carbon. I have always believed that agriculture should be the tip of the spear in addressing the harmful effects of climate change. This legislation helps make that a reality. My colleagues may complain about the steps we had to take to ensure this additional funding for our farm bill conservation programs, I would note that our colleagues on the other side have similarly extended the authorization of farm bill authorizations, but in those cases, it was to cut funding from them. In this exercise, we are including additional funding, which will be beneficial as we look to writing the 2023 Farm Bill. Major investments in forestry will also help to combat climate change, reduce risk of catastrophic wildfire, and ensure that our public and private lands have the tools they need to continue to serve as our largest carbon sinks. In addition to the carbon benefits, this bill helps restore forest ecosystems, improve watershed health, and enhance wildlife habitat by providing much needed funding. Additionally, the forestry provisions of the bill will help bring rural prosperity to many parts of our Nation by ensuring that we are developing new, innovative, wood products, and by making sure that underserved communities can benefit from emerging climate mitigation markets. This bill makes sure that urban communities have access to forestry programs by providing needed funding for Urban and Community Forestry. Expanding the tree canopy in urban areas is one of the cheapest and most effective ways to address temperature impacts and air quality issues, and I'm sorry some of my colleagues don't recognize that. The Inflation Reduction Act's investments in rural communities, energy, and biofuels will help lower energy bills, increase the efficiency of energy systems, and provide opportunities for farmers and small business owners to employ emission reducing technology in their operations. Increasing energy efficiency is good for their bottom lines and good for the climate. This legislation also provides significant support for rural electric cooperatives as they transition to renewable and zero emission energy systems, and it also increases access to clean biofuels across the nation. This bill provides expedited relief to direct and guaranteed farm loan borrowers at risk of losing their farming operations. It also allows USDA to help farmers and ranchers who have suffered discrimination in Farm Service Agency farm loan programs. It requires USDA to use one or more nongovernmental entities to help provide this assistance. Lastly, it builds upon the American Rescue Plan efforts to increase access to capital and land for our beginning and underserved producers by expanding access to technical assistance, financial training, cooperative development, and assistance to address heirs' property issues. And part of this effort includes bolstering the capacity at our 1890 and 1994 Land Grant, Insular Area, and other Minority-Serving Institutions in the areas of research, education and extension. I want to thank the Members of the Agriculture Committee for their hard work on this legislation. And I also want to thank the Agriculture Committee staff who have dedicated many hours over the last year to helping see this legislation through to its passage today.

Mr. NADLER

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline), the sponsor of this bill and a member of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on H.R. 1808.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today, we take another step to advance historic gun violence prevention legislation. H.R. 1808, the Assault Weapons Ban Act of 2022, restores and updates the prior assault weapons ban that kept weapons of war out of our communities for a decade before Republicans opposed its renewal. As we have learned all too well in recent years, assault weapons, especially when combined with high-capacity magazines, are the weapon of choice for mass shootings. These military-style weapons are designed to kill the most people in the shortest amount of time. Quite simply, there is no place for them in our streets. In 1994, we banned these killing machines, and countless lives were saved. But that ban was allowed to lapse 10 years later. Since then, we have seen the predictable results: Mass shootings have increased exponentially in our public spaces. Schools, movie theaters, supermarkets, houses of worship, parades, you name it, have all become vulnerable to attack. Uvalde, Parkland, Tree of Life Synagogue. How many more mass shootings must we endure? When will we learn? Well, I hope we are starting to learn today. I hope we are starting to learn today indeed. The Assault Weapons Ban Act would prohibit the sale, manufacture, transfer, or possession of semiautomatic assault weapons and large- capacity ammunition feeding devices. At the same time, it grandfathers existing semiautomatic assault weapons and contains numerous protections for law enforcement and responsible gun owners, including hunters, gun collectors, farmers, sports shooters, and those who use firearms for self-defense. It is important to consider today's debate in the context of our other efforts to address the violence plaguing our communities. Time and again, Democrats have advanced responsible gun safety legislation, only to face Republican opposition. We have advanced legislation to conduct background checks for all gun sales, to close the Charleston loophole, to close the boyfriend loophole, and to keep guns away from those who are a danger to themselves or others. We advanced my bill, the Protecting our Kids Act, and we sent the President the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which was signed into law and will save lives. These proposals were opposed by all but a few of our Republican colleagues. Today, they have another chance to take the action needed to make our communities safer. Will they stand with us? Will they show that they have learned? Or will they stand with an industry that right now is promoting a weapon to civilians that is powerful enough to shoot through bulletproof vests? Will our Republican colleagues choose to defend the weapons of choice for mass murderers and those who seek to target law enforcement? Or will they choose to defend Americans who simply want to go to school, to go shopping, to march in a parade, or to go to a movie theater without the fear of having a target on their back? It is an easy choice for me. I thank Congressman Cicilline for his leadership on this important legislation, I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting it, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), the distinguished Speaker of the House.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1302, I call up the bill (H.R. 1808) to regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren), a distinguished member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Garcia), a member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee), a member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Neguse), a member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Dean), a member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. NADLER. Fact: Contrary to Mr. Roy, this bill takes away nobody's weapons because existing weapons are grandfathered in if he would only read the bill. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Escobar), who is a member of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, contrary to Mr. Roy, I include in the Record a report from Third Way titled ``The Red State Murder Problem''. [From Third Way, Mar.15, 2022] The Red State Murder Problem (By Kylie Murdock and Jim Kessler) Every news outlet from FOX to CNN to The New York Times to local newspapers has a story with attention-grabbing headlines like ``US cities hit all-time murder records.'' Fox News and Republicans have jumped on this and framed it as a ``Democrat'' problem. They blame it on Democrat's ``soft-on- crime'' approach and have even referred to a New York District Attorney's approach as ``hug-a-thug.'' Many news stories outside of Fox have also purported that police reform is responsible for this rise in murder and have pointed to cities like New York and Los Angeles. There is a measure of truth to these stories. The US saw an alarming 30% increase in murder in 2020. While 2021 data is not yet complete, murder was on the rise again this past year. Some ``blue'' cities, like Chicago, Baltimore, and Philadelphia, have seen real and persistent increases in homicides. These cities--along with others like Los Angeles, New York, and Minneapolis--are also in places with wall-to- wall media coverage and national media interest. But there is a large piece of the homicide story that is missing and calls into question the veracity of the right- wing obsession over homicides in Democratic cities: murder rates are far higher in Trump-voting red states than Biden- voting blue states. And sometimes, murder rates are highest in cities with Republican mayors. For example, Jacksonville, a city with a Republican mayor, had 128 more murders in 2020 than San Francisco, a city with a Democrat mayor, despite their comparable populations. In fact, the homicide rate in Speaker Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco was half that of House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy's Bakersfield, a city with a Republican mayor that overwhelmingly voted for Trump. Yet there is barely a whisper, let alone an outcry, over the stunning levels of murders in these and other places. We collected 2019 and 2020 murder data from all 50 states. (Comprehensive 2021 data is not yet available.) We pulled the data from yearly crime reports released by state governments, specifically the Departments of Justice and Safety. For states that didn't issue state crime reports, we pulled data from reputable local news sources. To allow for comparison, we calculated the state's per capita murder rate, the number of murders per 100,000 residents, and categorized states by their presidential vote in the 2020 election, resulting in an even 25-25 split. We found that murder rates are, on average, 40% higher in the 25 states Donald Trump won in the last presidential election compared to those that voted for Joe Biden. In addition, murder rates in many of these red states dwarf those in blue states like New York, California, and Massachusetts. And finally, many of the states with the worst murder rates--like Mississippi, Kentucky, Alabama, South Carolina, and Arkansas--are ones that few would describe as urban. Only 2 of America's top 100 cities in population are located in these high murder rate states. And not a single one of the top 10 murder states registers in the top 15 for population density. Whether one does or does not blame Republican leaders for high murder rates, it seems that Republican officeholders do a better job of blaming Democrats for lethal crime than actually reducing lethal crime. If you're tuned in to the media, you'd think murder is rocketing skyward in New York, California, Illinois. But those states don't even crack the top ten. In fact, the top per capita murder rate states in 2020 were mostly those far from massive urban centers and Democratic mayors and governors. Eight of the top ten worst murder rate states voted for Trump in 2020. None of those eight has supported a Democrat for president since 1996. The chart below shows the top 10 murder rate states in 2020. Mississippi had the highest homicide rate at 20.50 murders per 100,000 residents, followed by Louisiana at 15.79, Kentucky at 14.32, Alabama at 14.2, and Missouri at 14. The national average was 6.5 per 100,000 residents, but the top five states had rates more than twice that high. These red states are not generating ``murder is out of control'' national headlines. They seem to generate no headlines at all. The rest of the top ten were filled out by South Carolina, New Mexico, Georgia, Arkansas, and Tennessee--all states rarely talked about in breathless media reports about rampant crime in Democratic strongholds. Notably, New Mexico and Georgia were the only Biden-voting states in the top ten, and they ranked seventh and eighth, respectively. Five of the largest Biden-voting states by population, and those often in the news when it comes to crime, had much lower murder rates. New York at 4.11 per 100,000 residents, California at 5.59, and New Jersey at 3.70 were each well below the national average. Pennsylvania (7.22) and Illinois (9.20) were higher than the national average. But Mississippi's murder rate was nearly 400% higher than New York's, more than 250% higher than California's, and about 120% higher than Illinois's. In fact, the five states with the highest murder rates, all Trump-voting states, had rates at least 240% higher than New York's murder rate and at least 150% higher than California's, the homes to some of the largest cities featured prominently in the ``crime is out of control'' narrative. Beyond the top 10, we looked at the 2020 murder rates in the 25 states that voted for Donald Trump and compared it with the murder rates in the 25 states that voted for Joe Biden. The 8.20 murders per 100,000 residents rate in Trump states was 40% higher than the 5.78 murders per 100,000 residents in Biden states. These Biden-voting states include the ``crime-is-out-of-control'' cities of Los Angeles, New York City, Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia, Portland, Baltimore, and Minneapolis, among other large cities. Among the 50 states, murder rates were often well above the national average in many Republican-controlled states and cities. Jacksonville with 176 homicides and a murder rate (19.776) more than three times that of New York City (5.94) has a Republican mayor. Tulsa (19.64) and Oklahoma City (11.16) have Republican mayors in a Republican state and have murder rates that dwarf that of Los Angeles (6.74). Lexington's Republican mayor saw record homicides in 2020 and 2021, with a murder rate (10.61) nearly twice that of New York City. Bakersfield (11.91) and Fresno (14.09) each have Republican mayors and murder rates far higher than either San Francisco or Los Angeles. Of course, some cities controlled by Democrats have alarming murder rates, like Chicago (28.49) and Houston (17.32). But we hear about these and other Democrat-run cities all the time. We aren't getting the whole picture. In 2020, murder rates increased nearly everywhere. But they increased more in Trump-voting states than Biden-voting states, albeit slightly. The average increase in murder rate across all Trump-voting states was 32.2% compared to 30.8% in Biden-voting states. Three out of the five states with the highest murder rates in 2020--Mississippi, Missouri, and Alabama--didn't have reliable 2019 data available, so they weren't included in this analysis. Three of the five states with the largest increase in murder rate were Trump-voting Wyoming at 91.7%, South Dakota at 69%, and Nebraska at 59.1%. These states are decidedly rural and do not conform to the chaos-in-the-city meme that has overtaken the crime debate. Biden-voting Wisconsin came in at the number three spot at 63.2% and Minnesota came in fifth at 58.1%. Out of the top ten states, six were Trump- voting states--with the additional three being Kentucky, West Virginia, and Kansas. The remaining states in the top ten were Delaware and Washington. Only one of the top ten states in murder rate increases, Delaware, was among the top twenty in population density. Again, California, New York, and Illinois aren't in the top ten. California's murder rate increase was 31.1%, or about the national average. Both New York (45.8%) and Illinois (38.2%) were above the national average. The current narrative around crime and murder is convenient and wrong. Whether you're watching CNN or Fox News, or getting news online or from a traditional newspaper, you would think that the increase in murder is a phenomenon found mostly in liberal cities. Many have tried attributing this increase to Democratic policies, specifically police reform. Republican lawmakers and ad makers have contributed to this narrative through clever messaging and strategies. But the data clearly paint a different story. The increase in murders is not a liberal cities problem but a national problem. Murder rates are actually higher in Republican, Trump-voting states that haven't even flirted with ideas like defund the police. Eight of the ten most lawless, high-murder states are not only Trump-voting states, but GOP bastions for the last quarter of a century. A more accurate conclusion from the data is that Republicans do a far better job blaming others for high murder rates than actually reducing high murder rates. We sought 2019 and 2020 murder data from all 50 states. Our primary source was the annual crime reports released by state governments, more specifically from their Departments of Justice or Public Safety. We chose state data because we found it's more comprehensive than FBI data which is often compiled later. For example, ``the FBI estimated crime statistics for Mississippi are based on data received from 113 of 251 law enforcement agencies in the state that year.'' 37 states had crime reports for the years 2019 and 2020: Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Iowa, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. For the remaining states we pulled data from published public sources: Alabama--US News, Georgia--US News, Hawaii--The Center Square, Indiana-- Hartford City News Times, Louisiana--US News, Maryland--Ocean City Today, Mississippi--US News, Missouri--US News, New Mexico--US News, Ohio--Axios, Oregon--KOIN, Vermont--WCAX, West Virginia--The Center Square. In seven states, the public sources only provided murder per capita rates, so using the rates and census population data, we estimated the number of murders in that state. Data and sources are attached above.