Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "28272162",
    "label": "Project Exile",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/28272162"
}

{
    "id": "28272162",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/28272162",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Project Exile",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/28272162",
    "collections": [
        "Records of the Domestic Policy Council (Clinton Administration)",
        "Deanne Benos's Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2022/Batch0006/42-t-7367452-20120726S-025-005-2016.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2022/Batch0006/42-t-7367452-20120726S-025-005-2016.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2022/Batch0006/42-t-7367452-20120726S-025-005-2016.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/28272162",
    "naId": 28272162,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "otherTitles": [
        "42-t-7367452-20120726S-025-005-2016"
    ],
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/foia/2022/Batch0006/42-t-7367452-20120726S-025-005-2016.pdf",
    "mediaId": "8a696c23b3d434f5",
    "ocrText": "Project Exile: The Safe Streets and Neighborhoods Act of 2000\nTo be introduced by Rep. Bill McCollum (R-FL), March 22, 2000\n\"Project Exile: The Safe Streets and Neighborhoods Act\" will help make our\ncommunities and neighborhoods safer by addressing gun violence through the common sense\napproach of ensuring vigorous prosecution of gun criminals. In the last two years a handful of\nstates, including Virginia, have dramatically reduced the level of gun crime in their states by\nimplementing programs that ensure tough prison time for criminals who use guns. This\napproach simply enforces the laws already on the books, and ensures a minimum prison sentence\nof at least five years for convicted violators. In states and communities around the country\nwhere aggressive prosecution of gun crimes has been coupled with tough prison sentences,\nviolent crime has gone down. This is because criminals who use guns are the most hardened\noffenders and the ones who commit the most crime. Getting them off the streets leads to a\ndramatic reduction in crime, and sends an unmistakable deterrent message: We will not tolerate\ngun crimes.\nThe Project Exile Act will provide resources to states that ensure a mandatory minimum\nsentence of five years (without parole) for any person who uses or carries a firearm during and\nin relation to a violent crime (murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault) or serious drug\ntrafficking offense (an offense under state law involving manufacturing or distributing a\ncontrolled substance, for which a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is\nprescribed by law). Importantly, the Act requires that the mandatory minimum sentence must be\nin addition to the punishment provided for the underlying crime. Alternatively, a state can\nqualify for the Exile funds if it ensures that a person convicted of possessing a firearm and who\nhas a prior conviction for a violent crime serves a mandatory minimum sentence of five years.\nThe Act will give states the option to prosecute offenders in either federal or state court, so long\nas the states ensure that the mandatory minimum sentence of five years is served.\nThe Project Exile Act will provide a total of $100 million in federal resources over five\nyears as an incentive for states to implement such programs and to help defray costs associated\nwith tougher enforcement against gun criminals. Funds received under the Act will be for\nstrengthening state criminal justice systems in a wide variety of ways, including: hiring and\ntraining more judges, prosecutors and probation officers; increasing prison capacity; and\ndeveloping information-sharing case management systems that ensure that all segments of the\ncriminal justice system are contributing to and using the same case files for serious offenders.\nThe Act will build on the success of the Truth-in-Sentencing program that Congress has\nfunded over the last five years. The Truth-in-Sentencing program created an incentive for states\nto require convicted violent offenders to serve at least 85 percent of their sentences, and helped\nstates defray costs associated with the resulting longer prison terms. This program has helped\nmove the national average time served for violent offenders from 35 percent in 1994 to close to\n50 percent in 1998. It has been a key factor in lowering the crime rate over the last 7 years.\nLegislative Components\nState Eligibility Criteria\n(A) Except as provided in (B), to qualify a state must, at a minimum:\n(1) require a mandatory minimum sentence of five years (without parole) for any person\nwho: (a) uses or carries a firearm during and in relation to a violent crime (murder, rape,\nrobbery, and aggravated assault) or serious drug trafficking offense (an offense under\nstate law involving manufacturing or distributing a controlled substance, for which a\nmaximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed by law), with the five\nyear mandatory minimum sentence being in addition to the punishment provided for the\nunderlying crime; or (b) is convicted of possessing a firearm and who has a prior\nconviction for a violent crime or serious drug trafficking offense.\n(2) implement a public awareness campaign to put violent criminals on notice of the\ntough sentences for gun crimes and develop community support for the state's Safe\nStreets and Neighborhoods program; and\n(3) provide assurances that the state will coordinate with federal prosecutors and federal\nlaw enforcement agencies serving their jurisdictions, so as to promote federal\ninvolvement and cooperation.\n(B) A state can qualify even if it does not have a five year mandatory minimum provided in state\nlaw, pursuant to (A)(1), so long as it can assure that a person convicted for any of the above\nidentified crimes will receive mandatory minimum sentence of five years in federal court for the\noffense. Such an assurance can be in the form of an executive order by the chief executive of\nthe state, or an exchange of letters between the state and the appropriate federal districts.\n[Alternative: Also allow state to qualify if the five cities with the highest crime rate have\nentered into such federal-city task force arrangements; then require that the resources be\ndedicated to those cities]\nAllowable Uses\n- police\n- prosecutors\n- courts\n- probation officers\n- juvenile justice system\n- prison expansion, renovation and personnel\n- criminal history record improvements\n- case management programs involving information-sharing regarding serious offenders\nFunding Authorization\n$100 million total with $10 million provided the first year (fiscal year '01), $15 million the\nsecond year, $20 million the third year, $25 million the fourth year, and $30 million the final\nyear.\nFunding Formula\nEach state's share is based on its relative amount of violent crime (as a percentage of the total\nviolent crime of all other qualifying states).\nMiscellaneous\n- A state must provide assurances that it will allocate its resources with the aim of addressing\ncrime in its highest crime areas.\n- A state may make sub-grants to cities or counties to carry out the purposes of this Act.\nDefinitions\n- \"violent crime\" includes murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.\n- \"serious drug trafficking offense\" is an offense under state law involving manufacturing,\ndistributing, or possessing with intent to distribute, a controlled substance, for which a maximum\nterm of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed by law\nIt's a moral crime for Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Janet Reno\nand a host of Federal officers and prosecutors to fail to\nenforce the law. It's evil. And when innocent blood\nflows, it's on their hands.\nWayne LaPierre\nExecutive Vice President\nNational Rifle Association\nin American Rifleman,\n[More laws] gives jackbooted Government thugs more\npower to take away our constitutional rights, break in\nour doors, seize our guns, destroy our property and even\ninjure and kill us.\nWayne LaPierre\nExecutive Vice President\nNational Rifle Association\nin a 1995 fundraising letter\nIn recent months, the National Rifle Association has attempted to divert national attention\nfrom the shameful weakness of our nation's gun laws by repeating, at every opportunity, the\nmantra: \"We don't need more gun laws when the federal government refuses to enforce existing\ngun laws.\" Since the Columbine shooting and the ensuing national outcry, the gun lobby has spent\nmillions of dollars telling the nation that enforcing existing gun laws is a workable substitute for\nnew, common-sense regulation of firearms.\nThe truth is that gun laws are being enforced more strongly than ever. Overall, federal\nprosecutions are up 16 percent since President Clinton took office, 22 percent on the local and state\nlevel, where most prosecutions take place. Furthermore, sentences for violent gun criminals are\ntwo years longer under this Administration. On June 10, 1999, USAToday reported that \"Gun laws\nare enforced more vigorously today than five years ago by nearly any measure. Prosecutions are\nmore frequent than ever before; sentences are longer; and the number of inmates in federal prison\nis at a record level. The number of inmates in federal prison on firearm or arson charges (the two\nare lumped together) increased 51% from 1993 to 1998 A U.S. Sentencing Commission analysis\ndone for USA TODAY shows that lying on the background check form is prosecuted in federal\ncourt far more often than acknowledged.\"\nWhy then does the NRA persist in falsely accusing the President of failing to enforce\nexisting law? Because it knows that lawmakers are facing the most intense pressure yet from the\nAmerican people to strengthen our gun laws. Lost in this debate is the fact that, throughout its\nhistory, the NRA has worked tirelessly to either block or weaken the enactment of laws that would\nhave strengthened the federal capacity to fight gun crimes. The NRA's painstaking work to\neviscerate the very laws they now say must be enforced, reveals their current public relations\ncampaign to be the height of hypocrisy. This report details the many ways in which the gun lobby\nitself has hampered the nation's ability to enforce gun laws.\nINTRODUCTION\nThe gun lobby's influence on our firearm laws is undeniable - the laws are a swiss cheese\nof loopholes that defy logic and exist solely for the convenience of gun owners and the profit of\ngun manufacturers. At the cost of millions of dollars and an untold number of lives, the National\nRifle Association has placed obstacles and detours at each and every turn on the path to common\nsense gun legislation and has successfully limited both the reach and implementation of gun control\nlaws.\nIn 1968, following the assassinations of Martin Luther King, Jr., and Robert Kennedy, and\na marked increase in handgun violence throughout the country, Congress passed the Gun Control\nAct of 1968. The Gun Control Act specifically banned the interstate shipment of firearms and\nammunition to private individuals; prohibited the sale of guns to groups such as minors, drug\naddicts, mental incompetents, and convicted felons; strengthened licensing and recordkeeping\nrequirements for gun dealers and collectors; increased penalties for those who used guns in the\ncommission of crimes covered by federal law; and banned the importation of foreign surplus\nfirearms, except those suitable for sporting purposes. While the Gun Control Act had a modest\nimpact, it did not take long for the gun lobby to regroup and attempt to weaken the act's\nprovisions.\nThe NRA, for example, can take credit for enacting legislation specifically exempting\ndomestically manufactured guns from any consumer safety standards. When Congress created the\nConsumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) in 1972, it exempted firearms. All other consumer\nproducts, except tobacco, are regulated for safety. But, thanks to the gun lobby, guns are not.\nWhen asked why the bill to incorporate guns under the CPSC had failed in Congress, Senator\nHoward Metzenbaum (D-OH) a staunch supporter of common sense gun laws, said, \"The NRA's\nposition is consistent. They're opposed to any legislation that has the word 'gun' anywhere in it.\"\nWhen asked what would happen if the NRA dropped its opposition to the bill, Metzenbaum\nreplied, \"We would pass the bill overnight.\"\nThis loophole has led to tragic and predictable consequences. Gun manufacturers make\nguns that require so little trigger pressure that two-year-olds can fire them. They make weapons\nwhich lack even the most basic safety features like a load indicator or a magazine disconnect\nsafety. They have focussed all of their efforts on making guns smaller -- and therefore easier to\nconceal -- and more lethal. Without regulation, gun manufacturers lack any incentive to design\nsafer firearms. Instead, thanks to the NRA, gun manufacturers have enjoyed tremendous profits\nwhile producing products with a callous disregard for safety.\nBy examining the NRA's role in just three aspects of federal gun control - the McClure-\nVolkmer Act, the Brady Law, and funding of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms - it is\nclear that the gun lobby's recent calls for better enforcement of the current laws are merely a\nsmokescreen to fend off overwhelming public sentiment for stronger gun laws. The picture that\nemerges is one of NRA leadership and complicity in ensuring that this nation's gun laws are as\nweak and as difficult as possible to enforce.\nTHE MCCLURE-VOLKMER ACT: THE NRA WEAKENS ENFORCEMENT\nAfter the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968, the NRA's assault against any and all\nregulation of guns continued into the 1980's, but the tactics changed. Whereas the NRA typically\nopposed any proposed common sense gun legislation, in the 1980's they switched from the\ndefensive to the offensive with the McClure-Volkmer Act, a bill sponsored by two NRA Legion of\nHonor recipients, Sen. James McClure (R-ID) and Rep. Harold Volkmer (D-MO). With the\nMcClure-Volkmer Act, also known as the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, the NRA\ndecided to pursue gun legislation for the first time - in order to weaken the modest gun regulations\nenacted with the Gun Control Act of 1968.\nLaw enforcement groups around the country were outraged - they saw what the NRA was\nattempting to do and at what cost. The NRA proposals were going to put law enforcement officers\nat risk. The NRA was undeterred, however, and as The New York Times observed, \"it was a\nmeasure of the power of the gun lobby that no member of Congress, in the day-long debate, spoke\nin favor of keeping all the existing controls. Rather, the question was the extent to which they\nshould be eased.\" The NRA spent around $1.6 million dollars in its lobbying campaign - but the\npassage of the bill cost the NRA more than dollars - McClure-Volkmer cost the NRA support from\nlaw enforcement groups. Around the country, police officers had to swallow a bitter pill: the NRA\nwas unwilling to accept any gun control legislation, even if it would save officers' lives. Hubert\nWilliams, President of the Police Foundation, best described the problems with the McClure-\nVolkmer Act in his testimony before the Judiciary Committee:\nLaw enforcement's examination of the McClure-Volkmer bill comes down to this: It would\ngut the 1968 Gun Control Act, and thus it would make the job of protecting American citizens all\nthe more difficult. Congress passed the 1968 Gun Control Act in response to terrible tragedies: the\nassassinations by firearms of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy.\nTo support McClure-Volkmer is to demean their record of accomplishment and their noble\nlegacy. Those who support McClure-Volkmer cannot say that they also support American law\nenforcement, for the obvious fact is that the bill increases the threat to the lives of police officers.\nAs the law enforcement officers of this country predicted, what McClure-Volkmer\naccomplished was to make it much more difficult for local and federal law enforcement agencies to\nenforce the nation's gun laws. The result has been a gun law riddled with loopholes and an\nenforcement agency saddled with restrictions.\nIn practice, the McClure-Volkmer Act has:\nAllowed unlicensed individuals to sell their personal firearms as a \"hobby,\" allowing for the sale of\nmassive numbers of firearms to criminals and juveniles without background checks, since only\nthose licensed dealers \"engaged in the business\" of selling firearms are required to check the\nstatus of their purchasers. The critically important definition of \"engaged in the business\" gave\nmany people the basis to contend that their firearm activities do not rise to the level that\nrequires them to obtain a license and be regulated by the federal government.\nIncreased the size, scope and visibility of gun shows by permitting federally licensed dealers\n(FFLs) to conduct business at gun shows located in their home state. Although FFLs must\nconduct background checks on gun-show purchasers, their presence at these arms bazaars has\nunquestionably enlarged the impact of these events, where private sellers sell hundreds of\nweapons without background checks to prohibited purchasers.\nAllowed criminals to keep or regain their rights to own guns. The original Gun Control Act made\nit unlawful for persons convicted of a crime punishable by a prison term exceeding one year to\npossess a firearm. The McClure-Volkmer Act amended the GCA to provide that the law of the\njurisdiction where the crime occurred would determine what constitutes such a conviction. (In\nmany states, illegal possession of firearms, for example, or domestic abuse, is only a\nmisdemeanor.) Additionally, the McClure-Volkmer Act provided that a pardon, set aside or\nrestoration of civil rights removes the \"conviction\" for purposes of gun ownership. You may\nnot be able to vote after you get out of jail, but you can get your gun back.\nSeverely restricted the ability of the ATF to conduct inspections of the business premises of\nfederally licensed firearms dealers.\nRaised the burden of proof for violations of federal gun laws.\nNo wonder police officers, in full uniform, stood at parade rest at the entrance to the floor of\nthe House of Representatives as a sign of silent opposition to McClure-Volkmer during a crucial\nvote. It is no exaggeration to say that, fifteen years later, law enforcement is still standing in\nopposition to the gun lobby's successful attempt to cripple its ability to enforce the law.\n\"Engaged in the Business\": A Fatal Definition\nThe Gun Control Act of 1968 first required federal firearm licenses for those \"engaged in\nthe business.\" The definition of that phrase was substantially narrowed by the McClure-Volkmer\nAct. Prior to the 1986 Act, illegal gun dealing was a matter for a court or jury to determine on the\nbasis of the facts presented by prosecutors. After McClure-Volkmer became law, the Government\nwas required to meet a much tougher, multi-part standard of proof to illustrate that someone was\n\"engaged in the business\" without a license. To successfully prosecute an individual for illegal gun\ndealing, the ATF must now show that the unlicensed person engaged in \"a regular course of trade\nor business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and\nresale of firearms \" The definition of \"engaged in the business\" also expressly excludes any\n\"person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a\npersonal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms,\"\nregardless of its size. By essentially demanding responsible behavior only from those gun sellers\nwho have received a federal firearms license, this loophole allows the enormous secondary market\nfor guns - at gun shows, over the Internet, and through individual private sales - to flourish\nunimpeded by any restrictions on buyers or sellers.\nAs a result, tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of firearms sales are made every year by\nindividuals who may each sell an unlimited number of guns without obtaining a federal firearms\nlicense. Even at substantial investigative cost, such persons often cannot be successfully\nprosecuted for illegal gun dealing given the weakness of current law. As a result, the customers of\nsuch \"shadow sellers\" are not subject to a background check (as they would be if purchasing a gun\nfrom a licensed dealer) and shadow sellers are not required to keep any records of their sales\nwhatsoever. Accordingly, guns sold by such sellers later recovered at a crime scene cannot be\neffectively traced and (unless they yield fingerprints) are thus useless to law enforcement\nauthorities trying to find and arrest murderers and other violent criminals.\nFacilitating the Markets of Choice for Criminals:\nThe Rise of Gun Shows After McClure-Volkmer\nThe McClure-Volkmer Act allowed licensed gun dealers to participate in gun shows in their\nhome states and effectively popularized a significant source of criminal guns. Prior to the Act, the\npolicy of the ATF prohibited sales by licensees at anywhere other than their regular place of\nbusiness. While dealers were allowed to exhibit at gun shows, the actual sales had to be\nconsummated at their place of business. The McClure-Volkmer Act changed that - dealers could\nboth exhibit and sell weapons at gun shows and, as a result, gun shows began to flourish across the\ncountry. At the same time, Congress relaxed the law that distinguished gun dealers from\n\"occasional\" sellers, thereby permitting thousands of additional sellers to enter the field. After\nMcClure-Volkmer, the combination of dealers freed from their storefronts and the new class of\n\"private\" sellers resulted in a dramatic increase in the number and size of gun shows nationwide.\nGun shows no longer included only small-time collectors. After McClure-Volkmer, larger licensed\ndealers began to participate and were able to provide gun shows the merchandise necessary to\nattract customers. Indeed, the atmosphere of gun shows, usually held for one weekend only, leads\nto an atmosphere of impulse buying, which benefits both licensees and non-licensees alike.\nA January 1999 report by the Departments of Justice and Treasury summarized the threat of\ngun shows:\nGun shows provide a large market where criminals can shop for firearms anonymously.\nUnlicensed sellers have no way of knowing whether they are selling to a violent felon or\nsomeone who intends to illegally traffic guns on the streets to juveniles or gangs. Further,\nunscrupulous gun dealers can use these free-flowing markets to hide their off-the-book\nsales. While most gun show sellers are honest and law-abiding, it only takes a few to\ntransfer large numbers of firearms into dangerous hands.\nIn most states and under federal law, gun shows also provide legal outlets for individuals to\nsell guns from their \"private collections\" without a waiting period or background check on the\npurchaser. Many unscrupulous gun dealers exploit this loophole to operate full-fledged businesses\nwithout following federal gun laws.\nMoreover, gun shows provide even licensees with the opportunity to sell off their \"personal\ncollections.\" The McClure-Volkmer Act allowed licensees to sell guns from their personal\ncollections. Federally licensed gun dealers must conduct Brady background checks on all\nprospective purchasers of firearms in their business inventory and record the serial number of all\nguns purchased (together with the name and address of the gun's purchaser) in a bound volume\nmaintained by the seller. Such requirements do not apply to guns sold by a licensed dealer which\nallegedly come from his or her \"personal collection\" of firearms, if the weapon sold has been in the\ndealer's personal collection for more than one year or did not originally come from the dealer's\nbusiness inventory. The law places no limit on the number of such \"personal guns\" that a licensed\ndealer may sell \"off the books.\"\nAs a result, nobody knows, or is able to determine, how many thousands of \"off the books\"\nsales are made by unscrupulous federally licensed firearms dealers under cover of the \"personal\ncollection\" loophole. What we do know is that every such gun, despite being sold by a licensed\ndealer, can be sold without a background check to a felon, fugitive, domestic abuser or other\nprohibited purchaser and can't be traced if used in a crime. The same holds true for gun show sales\nin general, since so many sales that occur at gun shows are essentially unregulated, guns obtained\nat these shows that are later used in crime are difficult, if not impossible, to trace. According to the\nATF, 25-50 percent of the vendors at most gun shows are unlicensed dealers. Felons buying or\nselling firearms were involved in more than 46 percent of the ATF investigations involving gun\nshows. In more than a third of the investigations, the firearms were known to have been involved\nin subsequent crimes, including assault, robbery, burglary and homicide. Not surprisingly, a\nFebruary 1999 ATF report found approximately 10 percent of the guns used in crimes by juveniles\nand young people were sold at gun shows and flea markets.\nEasy Access to Firearms (Even for Felons)\nThe NRA-backed McClure-Volkmer provisions eased restrictions against felons gaining\naccess to firearms. The Gun Control Act of 1968 made it illegal for anyone convicted of a felony\nto ship, transport, possess or receive firearms in interstate commerce. Under that law, a felon could\nregain firearm privileges by being pardoned or having his civil rights restored, but only if the\npardoning authority expressly authorized the possession of a firearm. With McClure-Volkmer,\nCongress amended the law to provide that unless a pardon or restoration of rights expressly\nprovides that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms, it has the effect of\nrestoring such privileges. Accordingly, the burden is now on the authority that grants the pardon or\nrestores the felon's civil rights to state specifically that the felon may not possess firearms.\nWhile the NRA is preaching enforcement, it is clear that it effectively has weakened the\nnation's gun laws to the point that even felons have easier access to firearms.\nATF Can Do Its Job (But Only Once A Year)\nPrior to the adoption of the McClure-Volkmer Act, the ATF was permitted to inspect the\ninventory and records of a licensed importer, manufacturer or dealer for compliance with\napplicable laws at all reasonable times. The Act, however, limited the ATF to a single\nunannounced inspection of an individual dealer in any 12-month period [see Section\n923(g)(1)(B)(ii)(I) of title 18]. No other retailer of regulated products is so protected. The express\npurpose of this provision was to prevent what the NRA termed \"ATF harassment\" of gun dealers.\nIndeed, according to the NRA, the ATF's only purpose was to harass honest citizens. As one-time\nNRA Board Member U.S. Congressman John Dingell (D-MI) declared, and NRA Executive Vice\nPresident Wayne LaPierre quoted in his book, Guns, Crime and Freedom, \"If I were to select a\njack-booted group of fascists who were perhaps as large a danger to American society as I could\npick today, I would pick BATF. They are a shame and a disgrace to our country.\"\nAlthough inspections of licensed firearms dealers are among the most effective means to\nuncover violations of firearms laws, the stringent limitation on inspections ensures that criminal\nconduct by some FFLs will go unchecked and unpunished. In effect, a dealer who has been\ninspected by the ATF in early January knows that he now has eleven months before he can\nanticipate another visit by agents. In sharp contrast, ATF agents are permitted unlimited surprise\ninspections of explosives manufacturers, distributors and retailers.\nIn addition to inadequate inspections, the McClure-Volkmer Act also essentially guarantees\nthat the ATF would be unable to maintain adequate records for any useful amount of time. The\nAct codified the law requiring that upon permanently closing a regulated business, a federal\nfirearms licensee is required to forward all sales records required to be kept by law on the business\npremises (including the names and addresses of gun purchasers), to the Secretary of the Treasury.\nSince 1978, however, Congress has added a rider to the Treasury-Postal appropriations bill\nforbidding the Secretary from using any appropriated funds to consolidate or centralize within the\nDepartment any records maintained by federal firearms licensees. As a result, the Treasury\nDepartment is now restricted to keeping records of defunct firearms dealers on microfiche\nsearchable only by the serial number of a gun. In that form, this large body of historical data is\nthus useless to law enforcement authorities with cause to research the firearms purchase histories of\nconvicted felons, batterers and other prohibited purchasers who may pose a danger to the\ncommunity. The data is also unavailable for rapid search for law enforcement authorities faced\nwith a hostage or barricade-type emergency who need to know whether the perpetrator has\namassed an arsenal by legal means. Moreover, many guns used in crime are not identifiable by\nserial number, because criminals file or burn identifying markings off their guns. In the end, the\nATF's inability to maintain records for any length of time or in any usable manner renders\nineffective the recordkeeping provision and frustrates its attempts to do what the NRA claims it\nwants - enforcement of the laws.\nProsecution With One Arm Tied Behind the Agency's Back\nThe McClure-Volkmer Act ensured that the ATF would be unable to prosecute dealers who\nviolate federal gun regulations by raising the standard for prosecution to the impossibly high\n\"willfulness standard.\" The law provides that the Secretary of the Treasury may revoke a federal\nfirearms license for \"willful violation\" of applicable laws and regulations by the licensee after the\nlicensee is given notice and an opportunity for an administrative hearing. The high \"willfulness\nstandard\" was enacted at the request of the NRA, which accused the ATF of harassing gun owners.\nAs the NRA's Wayne LaPierre has claimed, \"they (ATF agents) behave like street thugs. Charged\nwith enforcing federal gun control laws, federal agents persecute and entrap citizens who have\ndone nothing wrong and would never contemplate doing anything wrong.\"\nTo prevent this perceived harassment, the McClure-Volkmer Act restricted the ATF's\nability to pursue those in violation of the laws. Except for failures to comply with the Brady Law,\nthe ATF has no authority to simply fine an FFL or to temporarily suspend his or her license for\ninfractions that do not warrant permanent revocation of a license. By forcing the ATF to take a\n\"revoke or pass\" approach to FFL policing, current law assures that dealers who deserve discipline\nshort of revocation will go unpunished and remain undeterred from continuing to violate important\nprovisions of the law. Even if a violation warrants revocation of an FFL's license, because of the\n\"willful violation\" standard, in order to revoke a license, the ATF must prove that the violator\nknew the law and then decided to violate it. A licensee's claim of ignorance or misunderstanding\nof the law operates as a full defense. The \"willful violation\" standard all but ensures that only a\nfew violators will ever be punished. Criminal cases use the \"beyond a reasonable doubt\" standard\n- the \"willful violation\" standard is much higher - and in criminal cases ignorance of the law is no\nexcuse. Effectively, unless the licensee admits to knowingly and intentionally having violated the\nlaw, the ATF will usually fail to meet the \"willful violation\" standard and the licensee will go\nunpunished.\nAccording to the Department of the Treasury, in FY1999 only 1,700 compliance\ninspections were conducted of the nearly 104,000 federal firearms licensees (most of which are\ndealers or pawnbrokers.) Just 13 dealers' licenses were revoked by ATF, but 56% of those\ninspected had violations which warranted follow-up inspections at the earliest opportunity.\nPresumably many of those dealers would have been issued fines or had their licenses suspended if\nthe law permitted such actions. Again, the McClure-Volkmer Act has ensured that the enforcement\nof the laws is\ncontinually frustrated.\nTHE BRADY BILL: NRA LOST THE WAR BUT WON SOME BATTLES\nWith the passage of the Brady Bill in 1993, Congress enacted the most important piece of\ngun control legislation since 1968. This historical event was the result of nearly a decade of\nstruggle against the no-holds-barred opposition of the NRA. The NRA argued that the requirement\nof a pre-purchase background check and short waiting period for handgun purchases contained the\nseeds of \"Government\" confiscation of all firearms. As the NRA testified, it did not believe\nbackground checks to be \"in the public's interest.\" However, true to its usual lobbying form, when\npassage of the Brady Bill seemed unstoppable, the NRA shifted its lobbying and grassroots\nresources into weakening the law to the maximum degree possible.\nIn 1988, the NRA warned its members that the Brady Bill would result in \"total, strict gun\ncontrol on all America\" and that it would cause the government to \"spend millions and billions of\nyour tax dollars investigating you and other honest citizens.\" Later in 1991, an article in\nUSAToday said, \"Since helping to defeat the waiting period in 1988, the NRA has done little to\ntout an 'instant-check alternative' it quickly embraced this year.\"\nEven more telling was this description of the NRA's actions in the state of Georgia, taken\nfrom a 1997 editorial in the Atlanta Constitution: \" to escape the waiting period in Georgia, the\nNRA reversed its long-standing position and pushed a bill creating the state's instant background\ncheck. But it also tried to plant a self-destruct device in the law. The NRA and its supporters\nwanted to make sure that if the federal Brady Law was ever declared unconstitutional, Georgia's\nbackground check would be repealed automatically.\"\nDuring the battle to pass the Brady Bill, the NRA's staunchest Senate allies let it be known\nthat the \"price\" of their acquiescence to a vote on the measure would be compromises that have\nsince severely frustrated the true intent of the law. While the NRA opposed background checks -\nand continues to do so today, they relented to the Brady Bill as long as it required the destruction\nof all records associated with the Brady background check, even at the potential expense of the\nsystem's integrity and utility to law enforcement authorities.\nThe NRA Never Met a Background Check It Didn't Hate\nIn the wake of the Columbine massacre on April 20, 1999, in which several weapons\nobtained through gun show sales were used to kill 12 students and a teacher, senior spokespersons\nfor the NRA repeatedly claimed that the Association had long-supported conducting gun show\nbackground checks. Such claims were completely and knowingly false. In fact, the NRA fought\nfor more than a decade against the minimal requirement that licensed gun dealers perform\nbackground checks until the Brady Bill finally became law in 1993 over the NRA's objections. At\nthe time of Brady, the NRA argued for an \"instant check\" system, knowing that criminal history\nrecords were insufficiently computerized to ensure effective checks. As political scientist Robert\nSpitzer noted, \"[b]y proposing an alternative of little or no feasibility, the NRA and its allies were\noffering a plan that seemed to offer a meaningful reform yet posed no actual change in gun\npurchasing procedures for many years to come.\" As a compromise, the bill was passed with a\ntermination date for the waiting period requirement and the\nprovision for the research and development of an \"instant check\"\nsystem. Now, $200,000,000 later, the FBI has developed the technology for an\n\"instant check\" system and millions of records have been computerized, and the NRA has the gall\nto say the Brady background check is in fact the \"NRA instant check.\"\nDespite the NRA's persistent attempts to thwart the law, the Brady background check has\nproven effective. The Department of Treasury notes that the Brady Bill, \"for the first time\nempowered FFLS and law enforcement to combat the practice of 'lying and buying.' Moreover,\nsince the Brady Law went into effect, background checks nationwide have stopped approximately\n500,000 felons and other prohibited persons from buying handguns. The Justice Department has\nestimated that, in the first five years of the Brady Law, 3/4 of those rejected from buying a\nhandgun were felons (or under felony indictment), domestic abusers or under restraining order.\nFelons alone made up 63% of those rejected.\nEven with the success of the Brady background check system, however, the NRA has never\nsupported this precautionary measure since it refuses to support extending background checks to all\npurchasers. Again, it must be stressed that current law only requires background checks for\npurchases made through FFLs, even though every year, more than 4,000 gun shows are held\nnationwide at which tens of thousands of firearms are legally offered for sale by private, unlicensed\nindividuals on a \"no-questions-asked,\" \"cash-and-carry,\" \"no-background-check\" basis. The\nInternet has also opened a vast new market for the sale and exchange of firearms. Although out-of-\nstate transfers are supposed to be handled through licensed gun dealers, who are required to handle\nthe background check process, in practice there is no current way to police private transactions on\nthe Internet. Despite such popular secondary gun markets, the NRA has refused to support an\nextension of the background check requirement to these venues.\nIn fact, as recently as the spring of 1999, the NRA unsuccessfully opposed Senator Frank\nLautenberg's (D-NJ) amendment to the Juvenile Justice Bill in the Senate to require such checks at\ngun shows and it helped kill comparable legislation the following month in the House of\nRepresentatives. It did so by authoring and backing a proposal by former NRA Board member\nRep. John Dingell to drastically cut the time that law enforcement authorities would have been\npermitted to complete gun show background checks (from 3 business days to just 24 hours).\nAgain, the NRA proposed an alternative of little or no feasibility - the NRA-Dingell\nproposal would not work. According to the FBI, had the Dingell Amendment been the law for the\nsix months preceding the House debate, over 17,000 individuals who were refused the ability to\nbuy a gun from a gun dealer would have been able to obtain one over-the-counter. That's why the\nNRA-authored Dingell Amendment was opposed by most major national law enforcement\norganizations and the National Association of Stocking Gun Dealers. Although the NRA now says\nit supports background checks - and claims to have even authored the current background check\nsystem - they have been steadfast in their opposition to any background check that would\neffectively prevent prohibited purchasers from gaining access to firearms. Instead, when push\ncomes to shove, the NRA will only support provisions that do not inconvenience gun buyers - and\nalso fail to promote the laws.\nThe Paranoia of \"Lists\" - NRA Recordkeeping Provisions Continually Frustrate Law\nEnforcement\nThe gun lobby has spent much time and money to convince Congress and the American\npublic that enforcement of current gun laws, meaning the stringent prosecution and incarceration of\ngun criminals, is the key to addressing the problem of gun violence. What they will not tell you is\nthat it is their paranoia about maintaining any sort of gun records that presents law enforcement\nwith the single largest impediment to successful prosecution.\nCurrently the Brady Law requires a federally licensed gun dealer to contact the national\ninstant background check system before completing a sales transaction and a record of the\nbackground check inquiry is kept. The record consists solely of an identifier number assigned to\nthe inquiry and the date of the sale. By law, all other information about the purchaser and the\ngun purchased must be destroyed.\nAs a result, premature destruction of instant background check records precludes the\neffective audit of the check system for accuracy and the absence of fraud. It also deprives law\nenforcement authorities of a valuable snapshot of firearms sales and/or purchasing activities by\ndealers under suspicion of illegal dealing and by purchasers under investigation for weapons or\nother criminal offenses.\nAlong with the destruction of all records related to Brady background checks, the NRA\ndemanded as the price of Senate passage of the Brady Bill a provision requiring local authorities to\ndestroy their copies of multiple gun sale forms less than three weeks after their receipt.\nFederally licensed firearms dealers are required to file a report with the Secretary of the Treasury\nreporting the sale of two or more handguns to any single individual within any five consecutive\nbusiness days. A copy of the report also must be filed with state or local law enforcement\nauthorities. Although the ATF may retain so-called \"multiple sale\" forms, federal law requires\nstate and local authorities to destroy all such forms (and any record of them having been filed)\nwithin 20 days of receiving them. The multiple sale reporting requirement does not cover\npurchases made at different FFLs. A purchaser can buy as many guns as he likes, without\nworrying about a multiple sale report, so long as the guns are purchased from different licensees.\nWithout the legal ability to maintain and periodically review multiple sale reports for\npurchasing patterns, efforts by State and local law enforcement authorities to identify and prosecute\ngun traffickers are seriously compromised. Given its severely limited resources, the ATF cannot\nreasonably be expected to conduct customized research on demand in its database of multiple sales\nreports for states and localities. Furthermore, the law's failure to address purchases made at\nvarious FFLs prevents the ATF from monitoring what are effectively multiple sale purchases and\nleaves unchecked a primary source of illegal gun trafficking.\nThe inability to retain multiple sales information for any period of time also severely\nrestricts the usefulness of the information. This is unfortunate given the important role multiple\nsales play in the illegal secondary gun market. Research by the Center to Prevent Handgun\nViolence further demonstrates that multiple handgun purchases disproportionately involve the\npurchase of categories of handguns that have been linked to crime\n(e.g., Saturday Night Specials and handguns with the shortest\nintervals of time between the purchase and recovery by law\nenforcement). The finding was particularly apparent for bulk\npurchases that involved the highest number of guns. Specifically, the Center found that Saturday\nNight Specials accounted for 17.5% of all pistols purchased in bulk and over 25% of pistols\npurchased in transactions involving five or more handguns. Furthermore, of the handguns\nrecovered from youth and juveniles as part of the 1998 Youth Crime Gun Interdiction Initiatives,\nhandguns with the shortest \"time to crime\" accounted for 32% of pistols purchased in transactions\nof 5 or more handguns. There is a close correlation between multiple sales and the illegal market -\nunfortunately, law enforcement is not given the tools necessary to pursue these issues and as a\nresult, the market continues unabated.\nTHE ATF: UNDERMANNED AND OVERREGULATED\nThe ATF is the lead enforcement agency for federal gun laws and statutes. While the NRA\ncries for the enforcement of the laws, no one should forget that the NRA has made sport of\nvilifying the agency chiefly entrusted with the task of enforcing the laws and has blocked all\nlegislation designed to empower it. The NRA has repeatedly claimed the ATF harasses gun\nowners and dealers. In the 1981 NRA-produced film, It Can Happen Here, the NRA depicted ATF\nagents as Gestapo-like fascists. During Congressional hearings the following year, one-time NRA\nBoard member Rep. John Dingell called ATF agents \"knaves and rogues\" and said, \"I would love\nto put them in jail. I would dearly love it.\" Of the agency, he said, \"I think they are evil.\"\nConcurrent with their ongoing smear campaign against the ATF, the NRA has waged a\nsustained and successful Congressional campaign to fiscally cripple ATF's firearms enforcement\nactivities by minimizing the Agency's budget in an era of high inflation. This campaign has taken\na heavy toll in the Agency's enforcement personnel. Between 1980 and 1987, for example, the\nnumber of ATF agents was slashed from 1,502 to 1,180 (-21.5%) and the number of inspectors\ndropped from 655 to 626 even as the number of licensed firearms dealers exploded.\nEmboldened by its success in the '80s, the NRA escalated its lobbying and its rhetoric in the\n'90s, calling ATF agents \"jackbooted thugs\" in a now infamous fundraising letter signed by Wayne\nLaPierre. Challenged on the slur in the media and Congress, LaPierre initially defended the slur on\nall federal law enforcement officers before \"clarifying\" his intent. Former President George Bush\nwasn't convinced and resigned his NRA life membership in protest. Nonetheless, the NRA has\nrefused to temper its character assassination of ATF and the many men and women who place\nthemselves in harm's way every day to enforce the nation's NRA-sabotaged firearms laws. As\nrecently as February 3 of this year, Rep. Helen Chenoweth (R-ID), a recipient of the NRA's\nLegion of Honor award, described President Clinton's plan to enhance ATF resources as a\n\"charade\" that would \"unleash 500 more abusive ATF agents on the American public.\"\nLaw enforcement agencies - the groups the NRA pleads with to enforce the laws -\nunderstand the NRA's agenda to weaken and deride the ATF. As William J. Bratton, former New\nYork City Police Commissioner observed, \"the NRA has strenuously opposed increased financing\nfor the bureau and has successfully lobbied against giving it the authority to quickly investigate the\norigins of gun sales.\" As a result of the NRA's tactics, for more than 25 years, Congress has\nprovided ATF with far fewer funds than necessary to hire, train, equip and support a sufficient\nnumber of inspectors and agents to effectively enforce the nation's firearms laws. For example, in\n1973, ATF and the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) had comparable numbers of agents and\nenjoyed nearly equal funding (about $250 million). By 1998, however, the number of DEA agents\nhad almost tripled (from 1,470 to 4,261), while ATF's remained static (1,631 ATF agents were on\npayroll in 1998, only 9 more than were employed in 1973). The DEA's budget grew to nearly 1.4\nbillion in 1998. ATF's funding, by contrast, increased to just $450 million in the same year\n(adjusted for inflation). Additionally, ATF agents assigned to gun violations are required by law to\nspend at least 25% of their time investigating the misuse of explosive devices and illegal tobacco\nsales. Virtually no other federal law enforcement agency's resources are stretched so thin.\nInsufficient funding means, necessarily, inadequate inspection and oversight of the more\nthan 104,000 federal firearms licensees who are currently firearms dealers. Inadequate inspection,\nin turn, means undetected illegal gun trafficking, \"straw purchases\" of firearms by sham buyers for\ncriminals and other individuals, and the kind of potentially sloppy dealer recordkeeping that can\ncripple crime gun tracing efforts. The ATF estimates that, in order to inspect each currently\nlicensed gun dealer just once during his or her three-year license term, the agency would need to\nhire, train and deploy approximately 500 more inspectors (excluding support personnel and\nequipment) than it can now afford. Thanks to the NRA - the ATF has been inadequately funded\nand staffed, as well as unjustly maligned - and now they are asking the agency to more\naggressively enforce the laws.\nCONCLUSION\nThis brief survey of three aspects of the gun debate - the McClure-Volkmer Act, the Brady\nLaw and funding of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms - illustrates that, when the NRA\ncomplains about the \"lack of enforcement,\" it is guilty of hypocrisy on a grand scale.\nUnfortunately, there are many, many more examples of NRA action on the state and local level\nthat further demonstrate the hollowness of the its rhetoric. Most gun laws are state, not federal,\nones and the NRA has just as much of a stranglehold on many state legislatures as it does on\nCongress. Its ongoing campaign to weaken state laws on carrying concealed handguns - over the\nobjections of law enforcement - is yet another example of the NRA's extremist agenda.\nIf the NRA wants Congress to step up enforcement, it should work to reverse the decades-\nlong damage that has been done to our gun laws at its behest. The NRA knows the ATF is\nunderstaffed; indeed, their lobbying efforts have resulted in Congress continually underfunding the\nagency. The NRA knows the laws are weak - they have spent millions of dollars making sure of\nthat. And now, the NRA claims that the fault lies with the President, the Vice President, and the\nAttorney General, federal officers, and prosecutors. Enough with the rhetoric. If we want the gun\nlaws enforced, let's remove the obstacles to enforcement. Let's strengthen the laws that work and\nlet's empower the agency that enforces those laws.\nSOURCES\nWilliam J. Bratton, \"Mr. Heston, the Police Are Not the Enemy,\" New York Times, June 20, 1998.\nFox Butterfield, \"Are Gun Laws, and Agency that Enforces Them, Equal to the Task?\", New York\nTimes, July 22, 1999.\nCommerce in Firearms in the United States, U.S. Department of Treasury, Bureau of Alcohol,\nTobacco and Firearms, February 2000\nGun Shows: Brady Checks and Crime Gun Traces, U.S Department of Treasury, U.S. Department\nof Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, January 1999.\nWayne LaPierre, American Rifleman, May 1997.\nWayne LaPierre, Guns, Crime, and Freedom, 1994.\nLegislation to Modify the 1968 Gun Control Act: Hearings Before the Committee on the\nJudiciary, U.S. House of Representatives, 99th Congress, 1st and 2ⁿᵈ sessions (1986).\n\"Presale Handgun Checks, the Brady Interim Period, 1994-1998.\" Bureau of Justice Statistics\nBulletin, NCJ 175034.\nRobert Spitzer, The Politics of Gun Control, 1998.\n03/20/00 MON 08:01 FAX\nJ.\n001\nU.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES\nCommittee on the Judiciary\nDemocratic Staff Office\nB-351-C Rayburn House Office Building\nWashington, D.C. 20515\nFACSIMILE COVER LETTER\nTO:\nDcame\nFAX NO: 416-7028 # PAGES: 2 (including this page)\nFROM:\nPERRY APELBAUM\nSAMPAK GARG\nCAROLYN DONNELLY\nTED KALO\nCORI FLAM\nKEENAN KELLER\nANTHONY FOXX\nTERESA VEST\nCOMMENTS:\nIf parts of this transmission are unclear or transmission\nwas faulted, please call: (202) 225-6906.\n03/20/00 MON 08:01 FAX\n002\n03.07.2000 press release\nPage 1 of 1\nFor Immediate Release\nDate: March 07, 2000\nContact: Susan Dryden, 202-225-2176\nMcCollum to Introduce \"Project Exile: The Safe Streets and Neighborhoods Act of\n2000\"\nBill Keeps Children, Families and Neighborhoods Safe by \"Exiling\" Criminals Who\nUse Guns\nWashington, D.C. - U.S. Representative Bill McCollum (R- FL), Chairman of the House\nSubcommittee on Crime, today announced he will introduce next week \"Project Exile: The Safe\nStreets and Neighborhood Act of 2000.\" The bill would help make neighborhoods and communities\nsafer by implementing programs that ensure tough prison time for criminals who use guns. The\nlegislation provides block grants to states to use for resources to enforce existing gun laws, whether\nstate or federal laws, whichever provide tougher criminal penalty to those who commit crimes with\nguns.\n\"My proposal is modeled after programs which have proven successful in many states and sends the\nmessage to criminals that if they commit crimes with a gun, they will be 'exiled' to prison for a long\ntime so our children, families and neighborhoods remain safe\" said McCollum\nIn states and communities around the country where aggressive prosecution of gun crimes has been\ncoupled with tough prison sentences, violent crime has gone down. The bill will provide $55 million\nover the next 5 years as an incentive for states to implement such programs.\n\"We want to make sure the communities where our children play and go to school are safe. The Safe\nStreets and Neighborhoods Act is a common sense approach to getting criminals who use illegal guns\noff our streets and sending them a clear message that we will not tolerate gun crimes,\" said\nMcCollum.\nQualifying states would be allowed to use their funds to strengthen their criminal justice systems in a\nwide variety of ways: hiring and training more judges, prosecutors and probation officers; increasing\nprison capacity; and developing information-sharing case management systems to build case files for\nserious offenders.\n###\nhttp://www.house.gov/mccollum/pr03-07-2000.html\n03/20/2000\nProject Exile: The Safe Streets and Neighborhoods Act of 2000\nTo be introduced by Rep. Bill McCollum (R-FL), March 22, 2000\n\"Project Exile: The Safe Streets and Neighborhoods Act\" will help make our\ncommunities and neighborhoods safer by addressing gun violence through the common sense\napproach of ensuring vigorous prosecution of gun criminals. In the last two years a handful of\nstates, including Virginia, have dramatically reduced the level of gun crime in their states by\nimplementing programs that ensure tough prison time for criminals who use guns. This\napproach simply enforces the laws already on the books, and ensures a minimum prison sentence\nof at least five years for convicted violators. In states and communities around the country\nwhere aggressive prosecution of gun crimes has been coupled with tough prison sentences,\nviolent crime has gone down. This is because criminals who use guns are the most hardened\noffenders and the ones who commit the most crime. Getting them off the streets leads to a\ndramatic reduction in crime, and sends an unmistakable deterrent message: We will not tolerate\ngun crimes.\nThe Project Exile Act will provide resources to states that ensure a mandatory minimum\nsentence of five years (without parole) for any person who uses or carries a firearm during and\nin relation to a violent crime (murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault) or serious drug\ntrafficking offense (an offense under state law involving manufacturing or distributing a\ncontrolled substance, for which a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is\nprescribed by law). Importantly, the Act requires that the mandatory minimum sentence must be\nin addition to the punishment provided for the underlying crime. Alternatively, a state can\nqualify for the Exile funds if it ensures that a person convicted of possessing a firearm and who\nhas a prior conviction for a violent crime serves a mandatory minimum sentence of five years.\nThe Act will give states the option to prosecute offenders in either federal or state court, so long\nas the states ensure that the mandatory minimum sentence of five years is served.\nThe Project Exile Act will provide a total of $100 million in federal resources over five\nyears as an incentive for states to implement such programs and to help defray costs associated\nwith tougher enforcement against gun criminals. Funds received under the Act will be for\nstrengthening state criminal justice systems in a wide variety of ways, including: hiring and\ntraining more judges, prosecutors and probation officers; increasing prison capacity; and\ndeveloping information-sharing case management systems that ensure that all segments of the\ncriminal justice system are contributing to and using the same case files for serious offenders.\nThe Act will build on the success of the Truth-in-Sentencing program that Congress has\nfunded over the last five years. The Truth-in-Sentencing program created an incentive for states\nto require convicted violent offenders to serve at least 85 percent of their sentences, and helped\nstates defray costs associated with the resulting longer prison terms. This program has helped\nmove the national average time served for violent offenders from 35 percent in 1994 to close to\n50 percent in 1998. It has been a key factor in lowering the crime rate over the last 7 years.\nLegislative Components\nState Eligibility Criteria\n(A) Except as provided in (B), to qualify a state must, at a minimum:\n(1) require a mandatory minimum sentence of five years (without parole) for any person\nwho: (a) uses or carries a firearm during and in relation to a violent crime (murder, rape,\nrobbery, and aggravated assault) or serious drug trafficking offense (an offense under\nstate law involving manufacturing or distributing a controlled substance, for which a\nmaximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed by law), with the five\nyear mandatory minimum sentence being in addition to the punishment provided for the\nunderlying crime; or (b) is convicted of possessing a firearm and who has a prior\nconviction for a violent crime or serious drug trafficking offense.\n(2) implement a public awareness campaign to put violent criminals on notice of the\ntough sentences for gun crimes and develop community support for the state's Safe\nStreets and Neighborhoods program; and\n(3) provide assurances that the state will coordinate with federal prosecutors and federal\nlaw enforcement agencies serving their jurisdictions, so as to promote federal\ninvolvement and cooperation.\n(B) A state can qualify even if it does not have a five year mandatory minimum provided in state\nlaw, pursuant to (A)(1), so long as it can assure that a person convicted for any of the above\nidentified crimes will receive mandatory minimum sentence of five years in federal court for the\noffense. Such an assurance can be in the form of an executive order by the chief executive of\nthe state, or an exchange of letters between the state and the appropriate federal districts.\n[Alternative: Also allow state to qualify if the five cities with the highest crime rate have\nentered into such federal-city task force arrangements; then require that the resources be\ndedicated to those cities]\nAllowable Uses\n- police\n- prosecutors\n- courts\n- probation officers\n- juvenile justice system\n- prison expansion, renovation and personnel\n- criminal history record improvements\n- case management programs involving information-sharing regarding serious offenders\nFunding Authorization\n$100 million total with $10 million provided the first year (fiscal year '01), $15 million the\nsecond year, $20 million the third year, $25 million the fourth year, and $30 million the final\nyear.\nFunding Formula\nEach state's share is based on its relative amount of violent crime (as a percentage of the total\nviolent crime of all other qualifying states).\nMiscellaneous\n- A state must provide assurances that it will allocate its resources with the aim of addressing\ncrime in its highest crime areas.\n- A state may make sub-grants to cities or counties to carry out the purposes of this Act.\nDefinitions\n- \"violent crime\" includes murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.\n- \"serious drug trafficking offense\" is an offense under state law involving manufacturing,\ndistributing, or possessing with intent to distribute, a controlled substance, for which a maximum\nterm of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed by law\nProject Exile: The Safe Streets and Neighborhoods Act of 2000\nTo be introduced by Rep. Bill McCollum (R-FL), March 22, 2000\n\"Project Exile: The Safe Streets and Neighborhoods Act\" will help make our\ncommunities and neighborhoods safer by addressing gun violence through the common sense\napproach of ensuring vigorous prosecution of gun criminals. In the last two years a handful of\nstates, including Virginia, have dramatically reduced the level of gun crime in their states by\nimplementing programs that ensure tough prison time for criminals who use guns. This\napproach simply enforces the laws already on the books, and ensures a minimum prison sentence\nof at least five years for convicted violators. In states and communities around the country\nwhere aggressive prosecution of gun crimes has been coupled with tough prison sentences,\nviolent crime has gone down. This is because criminals who use guns are the most hardened\noffenders and the ones who commit the most crime. Getting them off the streets leads to a\ndramatic reduction in crime, and sends an unmistakable deterrent message: We will not tolerate\ngun crimes.\nThe Project Exile Act will provide resources to states that ensure a mandatory minimum\nsentence of five years (without parole) for any person who uses or carries a firearm during and\nin relation to a violent crime (murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault) or serious drug\ntrafficking offense (an offense under state law involving manufacturing or distributing a\ncontrolled substance, for which a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is\nprescribed by law). Importantly, the Act requires that the mandatory minimum sentence must be\nin addition to the punishment provided for the underlying crime. Alternatively, a state can\nqualify for the Exile funds if it ensures that a person convicted of possessing a firearm and who\nhas a prior conviction for a violent crime serves a mandatory minimum sentence of five years.\nThe Act will give states the option to prosecute offenders in either federal or state court, so long\nas the states ensure that the mandatory minimum sentence of five years is served.\nThe Project Exile Act will provide a total of $100 million in federal resources over five\nyears as an incentive for states to implement such programs and to help defray costs associated\nwith tougher enforcement against gun criminals. Funds received under the Act will be for\nstrengthening state criminal justice systems in a wide variety of ways, including: hiring and\ntraining more judges, prosecutors and probation officers; increasing prison capacity; and\ndeveloping information-sharing case management systems that ensure that all segments of the\ncriminal justice system are contributing to and using the same case files for serious offenders.\nThe Act will build on the success of the Truth-in-Sentencing program that Congress has\nfunded over the last five years. The Truth-in-Sentencing program created an incentive for states\nto require convicted violent offenders to serve at least 85 percent of their sentences, and helped\nstates defray costs associated with the resulting longer prison terms. This program has helped\nmove the national average time served for violent offenders from 35 percent in 1994 to close to\n50 percent in 1998. It has been a key factor in lowering the crime rate over the last 7 years.\nLegislative Components\nState Eligibility Criteria\n(A) Except as provided in (B), to qualify a state must, at a minimum:\n(1) require a mandatory minimum sentence of five years (without parole) for any person\nwho: (a) uses or carries a firearm during and in relation to a violent crime (murder, rape,\nrobbery, and aggravated assault) or serious drug trafficking offense (an offense under\nstate law involving manufacturing or distributing a controlled substance, for which a\nmaximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed by law), with the five\nyear mandatory minimum sentence being in addition to the punishment provided for the\nunderlying crime; or (b) is convicted of possessing a firearm and who has a prior\nconviction for a violent crime or serious drug trafficking offense.\n(2) implement a public awareness campaign to put violent criminals on notice of the\ntough sentences for gun crimes and develop community support for the state's Safe\nStreets and Neighborhoods program; and\n(3) provide assurances that the state will coordinate with federal prosecutors and federal\nlaw enforcement agencies serving their jurisdictions, so as to promote federal\ninvolvement and cooperation.\n(B) A state can qualify even if it does not have a five year mandatory minimum provided in state\nlaw, pursuant to (A)(1), so long as it can assure that a person convicted for any of the above\nidentified crimes will receive mandatory minimum sentence of five years in federal court for the\noffense. Such an assurance can be in the form of an executive order by the chief executive of\nthe state, or an exchange of letters between the state and the appropriate federal districts.\n[Alternative: Also allow state to qualify if the five cities with the highest crime rate have\nentered into such federal-city task force arrangements; then require that the resources be\ndedicated to those cities]\nAllowable Uses\n- police\n- prosecutors\n- courts\n- probation officers\n- juvenile justice system\n- prison expansion, renovation and personnel\n- criminal history record improvements\n- case management programs involving information-sharing regarding serious offenders\nFunding Authorization\n$100 million total with $10 million provided the first year (fiscal year '01), $15 million the\nsecond year, $20 million the third year, $25 million the fourth year, and $30 million the final\nyear.\nFunding Formula\nEach state's share is based on its relative amount of violent crime (as a percentage of the total\nviolent crime of all other qualifying states).\nMiscellaneous\n- A state must provide assurances that it will allocate its resources with the aim of addressing\ncrime in its highest crime areas.\n- A state may make sub-grants to cities or counties to carry out the purposes of this Act.\nDefinitions\n- \"violent crime\" includes murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.\n- \"serious drug trafficking offense\" is an offense under state law involving manufacturing,\ndistributing, or possessing with intent to distribute, a controlled substance, for which a maximum\nterm of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed by law\nOF\n1789\nFACSIMILE COVER SHEET\nDEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY\nOFFICE OF POLICY DEVELOPMENT\nPhone: (202) 622-0300\nFax: (202) 622-7301\n111\nDATE:\nPage 1 of\nTO:\nDeanne 1 Leanne\nFAX:\n456-7028\nFROM:\nS6\nSUBJECT:\n&\nMESSAGE:\nIsn't this a windfull?\nSuran\n1\nO.P.D.\nAPR-21-2000 18:35\n202 622 7301 P.01/02\nTOTAL P.02\nU.S. Newswire\n4-20-00\nP. 1 of 2\nP. 10\nNRA's Project Exile Condemned as\nBetrayal by Gun Rights Groups\nTo: National Desk\nContact: Jews for Preservation of Firearms Ownership, 262-673-9745;\nCitizens of America, 310-442-9877;\nor Gun Owners of America, 703-321-8585\nWASHINGTON, April 20 /U.S. Newswire/ -- \"Project Exile,\" a\nflagship program of the National Rifle Association, has provoked a\nhammering denunciation from a large and growing coalition that\nincludes national, state, and grass-roots firearms rights\norganizations, as well as individuals prominent in the firearms\nrights and civil rights community.\nIn a statement that became public last Saturday (April 15) via the\ninternet news source WorldNet Daily.com, the coalition condemned\n\"Project Exile,\" which is a general demand for strict enforcement of\nall existing federal gun laws. The coalition states that this clearly\nimplies the NRA leadership's endorsement of unconstitutional laws and\nwarn that these laws will ultimately be enforced against NRA's own\nmembers. Calling \"Project Exile\" \"a grotesque betrayal of the\neighty-three million American firearm owners who conduct peaceable\nlives every day,\" they note that the program is also supported by\nBill Clinton and Handgun Control Inc. They call on the NRA's\ncurrent leadership to repudiate the program.\nThe coalition arrayed against \"Project Exile\" is led by Citizens\nOf America, Gun Owners of America, Jews for the Preservation of\nFirearms Ownership, and KeepAndBearArms.com, and includes numerous\nlarge state-level groups.\nIn a statement linked to his name on the Web site, coalition\nco-organizer and COA President Brian Puckett calls for ousting NRA\nofficials, also stating \"One should not confuse the NRA and its\nmembers with the current leadership, the so-called 'winning team',\nwhich has presided over the most profound and far-reaching losses of\nour Second Amendment Rights since the 1968 Gun Control Act.\"\nAnother co-organizer, former NRA Director Russ Howard, stated\ntoday, \"Project Exile makes it painfully clear that loyalty to the\nConstitution is now dangerously inconsistent with blind loyalty to\nNRA management.\"\nCoalition co-organizer Angel Shamaya, director of\nKeepAndBearArms.org and KeepAndBearArms.com, also stated today,\n\"We're getting new endorsements every day, including signatures from\nthe public. Project Exile is a total capitulation in our fight to\nregain stolen rights. We want everyone to understand why and to join\nus in denouncing this betrayal.\"\nThe entire strongly-worded statement \"We Condemn Project\nP.02/02\n202 622 7301\nO.P.D.\nAPR-21-2000 18:35\n03/22/00 WED 17:23 FAX\n001\nU.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES\nCommittee on the Judiciary\nDemocratic Staff Office\nB-351-C Rayburn House Office Building\nWashington, D.C. 20515\nFACSIMILE COVER LETTER\nTO:\nDeanne\nFAX NO:\n456-7028 #PAGES:\n(including this page)\nFROM:\nPERRY APELBAUM\nSAMPAK GARG\nCAROLYN DONNELLY\nTED KALO\nCORI FLAM\nKEENAN KELLER\nANTHONY FOXX\nTERESA VEST\nCOMMENTS:\nIf parts of this transmission are unclear or transmission\nwas faulted, please call: (202) 225-6906.\n03/22/00 WED 17:23 FAX\n002\nWIRE SLUG\nSTORY#\nPRUM\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 061\n2940\nRTareuttwr\n3/22/00 14:21:30\n2\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 0612\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE SKED\nGOP-PROJECT-EXILE sked\nThe Federal Document Clearing House\nTRANSCRIPT\nMarch 22, 2000\nNEWS CONFERENCE\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE BILL MCCOLLUM (R-FL)\nWASHINGTON, D.C.\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE BILL MCCOLLUM (R-FL) HOLDS NEWS.\nCONFERENCE ON\nPROJECT EXILE\neMediaMillWorks, Inc. (f/k/a Federal Document Clearing House,\nInc.)\n209 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, S.E., 2nd Floor\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20003\nTel: 202-547-4512\nFax: 301-883-9754\nCOPYRIGHT 2000 BY eMediaMillWorks, Inc.\nNO PORTION OF THIS TRANSCRIPTION MAY BE COPIED, SOLD OR\nRETRANSMITTED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORITY OF\neMediaMillWorks, Inc.\nEVENTDATE: 03-22\nREPUBLICANS HOLD NEWS CONFERENCE ON PROJECT EXILE\nMARCH 22, 2000\nSPEAKERS: U.S. REPRESENTATIVE BILL MCCOLLUM (R-FL)\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE DICK ARMEY (R-TX)\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE J.C. WATTS (R-OK)\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES ROGAN (R-CA)\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE HEATHER WILSON (R-NM)\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE ROBERT EHRLICH, JR. (R-MD)\n(+)\nMCCOLLUM: Well, thank you for being patient today. I'm\ngoing to be joined by several of my colleagues up here, and I\napologize a little bit for being late for this press\navailability. But I see we got a packed house, which is good.\nI'm Congressman Bill McCollum of Florida and I chair the\nCrime Subcommittee and today I'm here to announce the\nintroduction of a new bill, the Project Exile Act.\nThis is a bill that is patterned after something that's been\nvery successful in two different ways. A few years ago, we had\nwhat was known as truth in sentencing. It was a bill that\nprovided incentive grants to the states if they in turn agreed\nto provide 85 percent time being served by those who commit\nviolent crimes and serious, serious drug offenses.\nThe results of that have been staggering. Those incentive\ngrants, which provided money to the states to build more prison\nbeds, have resulted in a dramatic increase in the amount of time\nserved by violent criminals and drug offenders in this country,\n03/22/00 WED 17:24 FAX\n003\ngoing up since 1994 from 34 percent to over 50 percent or Cime\non average being served in this country. They are a principal\nreason why we have seen a major reduction in crime in this\ncountry during that time, violent crime in particular, and more\nthan half the states have adopted that truth-in-sentencing\npolicy.\nToday we're here about something that's very close to this\nbut something which is very particular, and that is to talk to\nus and to the nation about violent crime, tragedies that could\nbe prevented, tragedies of human heartache that are unnecessary,\nbecause we do not have the kind of tough sentencing and\nmandatory sentencings that we need to have in this country\nthroughout the 50 states with regard to those who commit crimes\nwith guns or those who carry guns after they've been convicted\nor those who might otherwise be sitting in jail somewhere and\nthey're not.\nThis bill that we're introducing today that my colleague are\nwith me or joining me in doing is a bill that would require a\nmandatory minimum sentence of five years for any person who uses\nor carries a firearm during or in relation to a violent crime;\nthat's murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault or a serious\ndrug-trafficking offense. In addition, this is in addition to,\nnot separate and apart from the punishment that's provided by\nthe underlying crime.\nMORE .ETX\n03/22/00 WED 17:24 FAX\n004\nmviqueira 3/22/00 10:00\nWIRE SLUG\nSTORY#\nFROM\nMOVED\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 061\n2953\nRTareuttwr\n3/22/00 14:26:24\n2\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 0611\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE SKED\nGOP-PROJECT-EXILE sked\nThe Federal Document Clearing House\nTRANSCRIPT\nMarch 22, 2000\nNEWS CONFERENCE\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE BILL MCCOLLUM (R-FL)\nWASHINGTON, D.C.\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE BILL MCCOLLUM (R-FL) HOLDS NEWS\nCONFERENCE ON\nPROJECT EXILE\neMediaMillWorks, Inc. (f/k/a Federal Document Clearing House,\nInc.)\n209 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, S.E., 2nd Floor\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20003\nTel: 202-547-4512\nFax: 301-883-9754\nCOPYRIGHT 2000 BY eMediaMillWorks, Inc.\nNO PORTION OF THIS TRANSCRIPTION MAY BE COPIED, SOLD OR\nRETRANSMITTED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORITY OF\neMediaMillWorks, Inc.\nEVENTDATE: 03-22\nREPUBLICANS HOLD NEWS CONFERENCE ON PROJECT EXILE\nMARCH 22, 2000\nSPEAKERS: U.S. REPRESENTATIVE BILL MCCOLLUM (R-FL)\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE DICK ARMEY (R-TX)\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE J.C. WATTS (R-OK)\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES ROGAN (R-CA)\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE HEATHER WILSON (R-NM)\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE ROBERT EHRLICH, JR. (R-MD)\n(+)\nMCCOLLUM: Well, thank you for being patient today. I'm\ngoing to be joined by several of my colleagues up here, and I\napologize a little bit for being late for this press\navailability. But I see we got a packed house, which is good.\nI'm Congressman Bill McCollum of Florida and I chair the\nCrime Subcommittee and today I'm here to announce the\nintroduction of a new bill, the Project Exile Act.\nThis is a bill that is patterned after something that's been\nvery successful in two different ways. A few years ago, we had\nwhat was known as truth in sentencing. It was a bill that\nprovided incentive grants to the states if they in turn agreed\nto provide 85 percent time being served by those who commit\nviolent crimes and serious drug offenses.\nThe results of that have been staggering. Those incentive\ngrants, which provided money to the states to build more prison\nbeds, have resulted in a dramatic increase in the amount of time\nserved by violent criminals and drug offenders in this country,\n03/22/00 WED 17:25 FAX\n005\nmviqueira 3/22/00 15:58:23\ngoing up since 1994 from 34 percent to over 50 percent of time\non average being served in this country. They are a principal\nreason why we have seen a major reduction in crime in this\ncountry during that time, violent crime in particular, and more\nthan half the states have adopted that truth-in-sentencing\npolicy.\nToday we're here about something that's very close to this\nbut something which is very particular, and that is to talk to\nus and to the nation about violent crime, tragedies that could\nbe prevented, tragedies of human heartache that are unnecessary,\nbecause we do not have the kind of tough sentencing and\nmandatory sentencings that we need to have in this country\nthroughout the 50 states with regard to those who commit crimes\nwith guns or those who carry guns after they've been convicted\nor those who might otherwise be sitting in jail somewhere and\nthey're not.\nThis bill that we're introducing today, that my colleague are\nwith me or joining me in doing, is a bill that would require a\nmandatory minimum sentence of five years for any person who uses\nor carries a firearm during or in relation to a violent críme;\nthat's murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault or a serious\ndrug- trafficking offense. In addition, this is in addition to,\nnot separate and apart from, the punishment that's provided by\nthe underlying crime.\nMORE ETX\n03/22/00 WED 17:26 FAX\n006\nmviqueira 3/22/00 15:58:32\nWIRE SLUG\nSTORY#\nFROM\nMOVED\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 061\n2956\nRTareuttwr\n3/22/00 14:26:55\n2\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 0611\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE SKED\nGOP-PROJECT-EXILE sked\nThe Federal Document Clearing House\nTRANSCRIPT\nMarch 22, 2000\nNEWS CONFERENCE\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE BILL MCCOLLUM (R-FL)\nWASHINGTON, D.C.\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE BILL MCCOLLUM (R-FL) HOLDS NEWS\nCONFERENCE ON\nPROJECT EXILE\neMediaMillWorks, Inc. (f/k/a Federal Document Clearing House,\nInc.)\n209 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, S.E., 2nd Floor\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20003\nTel: 202-547-4512\nFax: 301-883-9754\nCOPYRIGHT 2000 BY eMediaMillWorks, Inc.\nNO PORTION OF THIS TRANSCRIPTION MAY BE COPIED, SOLD OR\nRETRANSMITTED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORITY OF\neMediaMillWorks, Inc.\nEVENTDATE: 03-22\nREPUBLICANS HOLD NEWS CONFERENCE ON PROJECT EXILE\nMARCH 22, 2000\nSPEAKERS: U.S. REPRESENTATIVE BILL MCCOLLUM (R-FL)\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE DICK ARMEY (R-TX)\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE J.C. WATTS (R-OK)\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES ROGAN (R-CA)\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE HEATHER WILSON (R-NM)\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE ROBERT EHRLICH, JR. (R-MD)\n(+)\nMCCOLLUM: Well, thank you for being patient today. I'm\ngoing to be joined by several of my colleagues up here, and I\napologize a little bit for being late for this press\navailability. But I see we got a packed house, which is good.\nI'm Congressman Bill McCollum of Florida and I chair the\nCrime Subcommittee and today I'm here to announce the\nintroduction of a new bill, the Project Exile Act.\nThis is a bill that is patterned after something that's been\nvery successful in two different ways. A few years ago, we had\nwhat was known as truth in sentencing. It was a bill that\nprovided incentive grants to the states if they in turn agreed\nto provide 85 percent time being served by those who commit\nviolent crimes and serious drug offenses.\nThe results of that have been staggering. Those incentive\ngrants, which provided money to the states to build more prison\nbeds, have resulted in a dramatic increase in the amount of time\nserved by violent criminals and drug offenders in this country,\n03/22/00 WED 17:26 FAX\n007\nmviqueira 3/22/00 15:58:34\nTVWING\ngoing up since 1994 from 34 percent to over 50 percent of time\non average being served in this country. They are a principal\nreason why we have seen a major reduction in crime in this\ncountry during that time, violent crime in particular, and more\nthan half the states have adopted that truth-in-sentencing\npolicy.\nToday we're here about something that's very close to this\nbut something which is very particular, and that is to talk to\nus and to the nation about violent crime, tragedies that could\nbe prevented, tragedies of human heartache that are unnecessary,\nbecause we do not have the kind of tough sentencing and\nmandatory sentencings that we need to have in this country\nthroughout the 50 states with regard to those who commit crimes\nwith guns or those who carry guns after they've been convicted\nor those who might otherwise be sitting in jail somewhere and\nthey're not.\nThis bill that we're introducing today, that my colleague are\nwith me or joining me in doing, is a bill that would require a\nmandatory minimum sentence of five years for any person who uses\nor carries a firearm during or in relation to a violent crime;\nthat's murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault or a serious\ndrug- trafficking offense. In addition, this is in addition to,\nnot separate and apart from, the punishment that's provided by\nthe underlying crime.\nMORE ETX\n03/22/00 WED 17:27 FAX\n008\nmviqueira 3/22/00 15:59:19\nTVIWIRES...\nWIRE SLUG\nSTORY#\nFROM\nMOVED\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 039\n2966\nRTareuttwr\n3/22/00 14:31:41\n2\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 0392\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 1STADD\nGOP-PROJECT-EXILE 1stadd\nThe Federal Document Clearing House\nEVENTDATE: 03-22\nXXX the underlying crime.\nMCCOLLUM: This is an, again, an incentive grant program to\nthe states to get them to change their laws to be able to\nqualify if they will require a minimum mandatory sentence of\nfive years for those purposes or if a state provides for a\nperson who has been convicted of a felon of possessing a firearm\n-- after that person has been convicted of a felony for a\nviolent crime or a drug trafficking offense. Or a state could\nqualify if they simply made an arrangement with the federal\ngovernment to prosecute under existing laws with a minimum\nmandatory sentences those convicted felons who are running\naround with a firearm who, under federal law, would serve that\nminimum of five years, at least, in prison.\nI want to point to the fact that the state of Virginia,\nparticularly Richmond, is having enormous success in what is\nknown as Project Exile. We're simply naming our bill after\nthem. They have done a marvelous job of reducing crime in this\nstate next door to us.\nAnd some of the charts show what Project Exile has meant in\nRichmond, Virginia. You can see that prior to Project Exile,\nRichmond had one of the highest murder rates in the world. It\nhad an exploding crime problem. Since 1997, when Project Exile\nwas begun in Richmond, homicides have dropped 46 percent.\nThat's the lowest level since 1987. Crimes involving guns have\ndropped 65 percent. Aggravated assaults have dropped by 39\npercent. And overall the number of violent crimes have dropped\nby 35 percent.\nIt's a proven, common-sense approach, Project Exile is, to\npreventing gun crimes. And that's what we're here about today.\nI may comment more on it in a few minutes, but I'd like to\nintroduce some of my colleagues to be able to talk about this in\nrelationship to what they see as the importance of this, and\nthen we'll answer questions about it.\nAgain, I'd make one comment. It is a grant program. It's\n$100 million over five years. It will be available to the\nstates who qualify to use for a variety of purposes, such as\nprosecutors or police officers or any number of things they may\nwant to use this money for to improve their justice systems to\nhelp prevent crime and fight crime in those states.\nMORE ETX\n03/22/00\nWED 17:27 FAX\n009\nmviqueira 3/22/00 15:59:29\nTVWIRES\nWIRE SLUG\nSTORY#\nFROM\nMOVED\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 028\n2975\nRTareuttwr\n3/22/00 14:33:12\nWIRE\n3\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 0288\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 2NDADD\nGOP-PROJECT-EXILE 2ndadd\nThe Federal Document Clearing House\nEVENTDATE: 03-22\nXXX in those states.\nMCCOLLUM: But only to the states that qualify by having one\nof these two sets of sentencing guidelines on the books that\nrequire minimum mandatory sentences for the gun crimes I've\ndescribed, or who have an arrangement worked out with the\nfederal government that ensures that those who have been\nconvicted as felons and then are found in possession of a gun\nare given the minimum mandatory sentence under federal law.\nAny way, having said that, I think J. C. Watts is not here, I\nthought he might be. But Bob Ehrlich is the first on my list.\nAnd Congressman Ehrlich is going to talk to us about Maryland's\nversion of this. And I'll let him up first.\nBob.\nEHRLICH: Thanks, Bill.\nMCCOLLUM: You're welcome, thank you.\nCH: Just a little graph for everybody just to let youa2977reute u i BC-\n-REFUGEES 03-22 0572\nFUGEES 1STLD (PICTURE)\nto Kosovo too ri\nUNHCR boss\n03/22/00 WED 17:28 FAX\n010\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 0354\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 4THADD\nGOP-PROJECT-EXILE 4thadd\nThe Federal Document Clearing House\nEVENTDATE: 03-22\nXXX on the streets.\nROGAN: In California, we don't have a Project Exile, but we\ndo have three strikes. And three strikes over the last five\nyears or so has been probably the single most affective tool in\nreducing the violent crime rate. And the reason for it isn't\nbecause the bill was passed, it's because the criminals, the\nviolent criminals, know what that bill means. And when they\nknow what the cost of doing business is in California with the\nthree strikes bill, they choose not to do it in California or\nthey end up going to prison for a very long time.\nAnd, Bill, that's why this Project Exile will be so\nincredibly important on a nationwide basis. Because it's a bill\nthat I guarantee two things: Number one, criminals will\nunderstand it; and number two, they won't like it. And the even\nbetter result from it will be, it will get these violent\ncriminals off the streets.\nWe've passed some 20,000 gun control laws over the last 30\nyears in this country. All these gun control laws don't mean\nanything if they're not going to be enforced. And the\nClinton-Gore administration has been abysmal in their\nperformance on that record over the last seven-and-a-half years\nin enforcing these laws.\nThis is a bill that will give states the option of being able\nto become a partner with the federal government to enforce\nvigorous, tough, common-sense gun control legislation that will\nmake our city streets safer and will preserve public safety.\nSo, Bill, once again, I want to thank you and congratulate\nyou for your leadership. I'm proud to be with you here today.\nMCCOLLUM: Congresswoman Heather Wilson of New Mexico.\nWILSON: Thank you. I'm Heather Wilson, I represent\nAlbuquerque, New Mexico.\nLast year here in the Congress, we passed an increase in\nfunding in the commerce, justice, state bill, targeted at\nincrease in prosecutions for firearms offenses. But it was only\nfor the 15 cities that the Department of Justice recommended as\nthe highest priorities.\nMORE ETX\n03/22/00 WED 17:28 FAX\n011\nmviqueira 3/22/00 15:59:45\nWIRE SLUG\nSTORY#\nFROM\nMOVED\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 035\n2980\nRTareuttwr\n3/22/00 14:33:52\n2\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 0359\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 3RDADD\nGOP-PROJECT-EXILE 3rdadd\nThe Federal Document Clearing House\nEVENTDATE: 03-22\nXXX look at it.\nEHRLICH: And he got excited about it. He brought it to me,\nand I got excited about it. And the first thing we did in\nMaryland last year was convene a meeting of all our local states\nattorneys to talk about Project Exile; not only states\nattorneys, but federal officials as well.\nWe visited Richmond, Virginia. We took members of\nlegislature, representatives of NAACP, members of the Baltimore\nbusiness community, members of the Baltimore press\nestablishment, down with us to Richmond to speak to the people\nwho are actually doing exile in Richmond and now of course in\nthe state of Virginia as the program has gone statewide.\nWe have submitted testimony in Annapolis. We've lobbied to\npush public opinion with respect to this issue, because it is an\nissue you would think that would be common sense. And that's\nthe reason we're here today.\nI'm very happy to join Bill, our leadership and my colleagues\nhere today. It's my sincere hope that this program can be\nadopted. It can work in Maryland. It can work around the\ncountry. It should not be the subject of controversy anywhere\nat any place.\nWe can avoid so many tragedies with common-sense solutions\nwhen it comes to gun crime. We can preserve principles relating\nto federalism as this bill does, as Bill said. We can provide\nmaximum flexibility to our state legislators, and we can do the\ncommon-sense and right thing and that's why I'm here today.\nBill, congratulations.\nMCCOLLUM: Thank you, Bob.\nCongressman Jim Rogan of California. Jim, member of my\nJudiciary Committee.\nROGAN: My name is Jim Rogan, congressman from the 27th\nDistrict of California. First, I want to congratulate Chairman\nMcCollum for his incredible leadership on this issue.\nWe pass a lot of bills here in Congress, but there are very\nfew bills that get passed that will make a difference in\npeople's lives, and this is the kind of bill that will make a\ndifference in the lives of children and in the lives of ordinary\ncitizens on the streets,\nMORE ETX\n03/22/00 WED 17:29 FAX\n012\n5/22/00 14:50:40\nR\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 0351\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 6THADD\nGOP-PROJECT-EXILE 6thadd\nThe Federal Document Clearing House\nEVENTDATE: 03-22\nXXX Exile in Colorado.\nTANCREDO: For obvious reasons, this is extremely important\nto me. My district is the 6th Congressional District in\nColorado and includes Columbine.\nI said at the time that I believe Project Exile was an\nexcellent way for us to address the issue of gun violence in\nthis country. I also said that if it was a matter of resources,\nthat they could count on my to come here and try to do my best\nto get the resources that they would need to actually implement\nProject Exile.\nAnecdotally, I remember reading something in a Virginia paper\nnot too long ago where someone had been taken into custody, a\ndrug dealer had been taken into custody, and he had had a very\nlarge amount of drugs in his possession, far larger than anybody\nwould assume someone would have and not have a gun at the same\ntime. It's been their experience in Virginia and everywhere\nelse that if you get somebody and he's carrying this much in\nillegal narcotics he's also almost always carrying a firearm.\nBut he wasn't carrying a firearm, and so they were wondering\nabout it. The authorities kept pressing him as to in fact why\nhe wasn't carrying a firearm. Where was it? Had they just not\nfound it? And they just kept bugging him and kept pushing him.\nAnd finally he jumps up and says: \"It's five years, man.\nFive years, man.\"\nI think that's a great commercial. I wish we could run that,\nyou know, part of that Project Exile, both in Colorado and in\nVirginia, is an ad campaign. And we started them just a little\nbit ago in Colorado, and it's designed to get people to\nunderstand the ramifications of their actions if you choose to\nuse a firearm in the commission of a crime in Colorado and in\nVirginia. I think that'd just be -- I think that's all we have\nto have: \"It's five year, man.\" That should be on the\nbulletin boards everywhere. That should be the thing on -- that\nwe run on TV.\nBecause it matters, it does matter, as has been mentioned by\nmy colleagues here.\nMORE ETX\n03/22/00 WED 17:30 FAX\n013\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 0320\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 5THADD\nGOP-PROJECT-EXILE 5thadd\nThe Federal Document Clearing House\nEVENTDATE: 03-22\nXXX the highest priorities.\nWILSON: Fortunately for me, Albuquerque, New Mexico, was one\nof those cities. Fortunate, but unfortunate, because\nAlbuquerque is one of the most violent cities per capita in the\nnation. We're up there at number 33.\nSo it is likely that this year we will get two new assistant\nU.S. attorneys in Albuquerque to prosecute firearm crimes.\nBut we need to take that nationwide. Project Exile has shown\nthat this kind of approach works at both deterring crime and\ntaking those who use firearms in a crime and putting them behind\nbars.\nBut more important than how the crime rate is going\nnationwide or in Albuquerque, my hometown, is how people feel\nabout it. And we talk about in this country how we're the\nfreest country in the world. But if you don't feel safe walking\naround your neighborhood at night, then you're not really free.\nAnd to me that's what this bill is about. It's about giving\npeople the confidence over time that you can walk around your\nneighborhood, whether you're elderly or a woman or just walking\nalone and afraid. And you shouldn't have to be afraid if you're\nan American.\nThis bill says there's going to be hard time for armed crime.\nAnd I think that's the way we need to go. If somebody comes\naround a second time in possession of a gun after they've\nalready been convicted of a violent felony, I don't want to see\nthem any more in my town. And that's what this is about.\nAnd I want to commend Mr. McCollum for his actions.\nMCCOLLUM: Congressman Tancredo from Colorado. Congressman.\nTANCREDO: Thank you, Mr. McCollum.\nA couple of weeks ago, I stood at another podium in Colorado\nalong with the U.S. attorney there to herald the development or\nthe announcement that we were going to have a Project Exile in\nColorado.\nMORE ETX\n03/22/00 WED 17:31 FAX\n014\n3/22/00 14.38.21\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 0344\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 7THADD\nGOP-PROJECT-EXILE 7thadd\nThe Federal Document Clearing House\nEVENTDATE: 03-22\nXXX my colleagues here.\nTANCREDO: Believe it or not, criminals do pay attention to\nthings like this and will choose, if they have -- if they think\nabout it any length of time -- more often than not, they will\nchoose to avoid the possibility of spending that hard time.\nSo in Colorado this was actually started and implemented in\nSeptember of last year, and there's been a significant increase\nalready In the number of defendants and in the number of cases\nfiled. I believe that it will result in a reduced number of\nincidents.\nI certainly pray that it helps us all -- not just in\nColorado, but everywhere in this country -- reduce the\npossibility of another kind of Columbine event. Of course,\nthat's what I focus in on, that's the thing I try to at least\nestablish any sort of policy in terms of gun control issues\naround, and I believe that this does have an effect.\nAnd so I want to commend the chairman also, and I appreciate\nhim giving me a few moments to discuss it with you today.\nMCCOLLUM: Well, I want to thank all four of my colleagues\nare here today for joining in co-sponsoring this bill. I would\nexpect to have a wide variety of co-sponsors after we've\nintroduced it, but they are originals, and they're here for\nreasons they've each stated.\nSo I may not have been clear on all the details. I wanted to\ngive them some time. So let's take some questions from anybody\nwho has them.\nYes, sir?\nQUESTION: Did the Democrats manage to steal your enforcement\nissue yesterday? Carolyn McCarthy and Chuck Schumer put out a\nbill that has some of these elements and other items in it, and\nthey essentially said they were calling your bluff on\nenforcement.\nMCCOLLUM: Well, I don't know all the details of their bill.\nBut what I'm impressed with is the fact that this bill, as\nopposed to the administration's proposed bill, which I think is\nwhat they've introduced, has the mandatory minimum hook that's\nhere.\nMORE .ETX\n03/22/00 WED 17:31 FAX\n015\nR areuttwr\n3/22/00 14:42:08\nE\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 0345\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE STHADD\nGOP-PROJECT-EXILE 8thadd\nThe Federal Document Clearing House\nEVENTDATE: 03-22\nXXX hook that's here.\nMCCOLLUM: We have an incentive grant program. And what this\nprogram deals with is going to the states. This bill, I think,\nis very unique in this regard. And says to the states, look, if\nyou change your laws, your sentencing laws, if you change your\nsentencing laws to deal with the matters as we suggest -- that\nis go to Project Exile, like I think about six states in the\ncountry already have -- then you will be able to get this money\nto improve your justice systems.\nBut the catch to this, of course, is that change requires a\nminimum mandatory five year sentence in some manner or means for\nsomebody who uses or carries a gun in the commission of a\nviolent crime or a drug related crime, and/or has been a\nconvicted felon already for a violent crime or drug related\ncrime, and has a possession of a gun -- he might not be in the\ncommission of a crime. I think that's quite unique, and I don't\nthink that's spelled out in their bill.\nBy the way, I'm not worried either about how many people put\nin copy cat bills. We've been working on this for sometime. I\ndon't think -- what they've done though is this bill.\nWho has another one? Anybody got something else?\nYes, ma'am?\nQUESTION: What are the six states, how many states would be\neligible or moving toward\nMCCOLLUM: Well, this is very similar to what it was back\nwhen we filed the first bill that I mentioned to you with regard\nto truth in sentencing a few years ago to provide incentive\ngrants to states. There were about six or seven states that\nqualified.\nMy understanding from all the survey of our crime\nsubcommittee is that there are now six states we believe that\nhave qualified today for these grants, as of this moment. And I\nknow of four or five of them -- Virginia, Texas, Florida, I\nthink Colorado, I know Louisiana, and there's one more here,\nSouth Carolina. The objective is to encourage the other states\nto do this.\nMORE ETX\n03/22/00 WED 17:32 FAX\n016\nR | areuttwr\n3/22/00 14:42:58\n1\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 0303\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 9THADD\nGOP-PROJECT-EXILE 9thadd\nThe Federal Document Clearing House\nEVENTDATE: 03-22\nXXX to do this.\nMCCOLLUM: If every state -- if a lot of states requalified\nthis program, this bill would not be here today. It wouldn't be\nI\nnecessary. But it is, and this will hopefully encourage the\nstates that have not to come aboard very quickly.\nWho has another one?\nQUESTION: $100 million (OFF-MIKE). Is that enough to make a\nreal impact on Congress?\nMCCOLLUM: Well, I think the issue is will it make an impact\non the states wanting to do this to get more money. And usually\nin the criminal justice area, our experience has been that they\ndo want the money.\nAnd this bill is not evenly divided. It starts out with --\nbecause we only have six states we think that are currently\nqualified -- with $10 million. And then it graduates up $5\nmillion more to be appropriated -- or at least is authorized for\nappropriation each year after that, until it gets to the\ncompletion of the five years, at which point there will be $30\nmillion in the pot.\nso there is an incentive just in what -- when the money is\navailable, for the states that have not adopted these laws to\nget in line because there's going to be an ever-increasingly\nlarger pot of money.\nAnd I would suggest to you if this doesn't prove to be\nenough, we'll add more. We did originally $500 million in the\ntruth and sentencing grants and we found out that we didn't have\nto use all of it. That was not all consumed initially. so I\nthink $100 million is plenty.\nQUESTION: On the issue of (OFF-MIKE) violence, do you think\nthat Smith & Wesson (OFF-MIKE) ?\nMCCOLLUM: Well, I don't really. I'm not here to comment on\nthe Smith & Wesson settlement. I have no way of knowing whether\nit will or it won't.\nMORE ETX\n03/22/00 WED 17:32 FAX\n017\nINO-GUP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 029\n3078\nRTareuttwr\n3/22/00 14:48:27\n1\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 0297\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 10THADD\nGOP-PROJECT-EXILE 10thadd\nThe Federal Document Clearing House\nEVENTDATE: 03-22\nXXX or it won't.\nMCCOLLUM: I think we're going to continue to see all kinds\nof changes in this arena. And I'm hopeful that we produce a\nbill that's completely separate from this, that's been over\nthere in the juvenile crime arena for some time, that also\nresolves the issues that are pending in a whole other set of gun\nissues.\nToday we're here to address the one thing that's really\ncritical and that's the Project Exile, and how do we get\ntogether. And we know that we have bipartisan desire on this\nbill to do Project Exile.\nWho has another one? Anybody?\nYes, ma'am?\nQUESTION: If this is such a great idea why are they not\nmoved with states? (inaudible) Why do they need federal monies\nto do\nMCCOLLUM: Well, my guess is most states have some resistance\nto incarceration for lengthy periods of time. Minimum mandatory\nsentences carry a price, in a dollar sense. You have to have\nthe jail space and prison space.\nNow, this combined with the prison grant program we already\nhave out there, which truth in sentencing still exists, is on\nthe books, there is money in it and probably will be in this\nnext fiscal year from the federal government. I would like to\nbelieve that states will go and buy into this program, and that\nthe public will latch onto it and demand seeing the results in\nMaryland, in Colorado, in Virginia, that their states do the\nsame thing. But my guess is that's the reason.\nYes, ma'am?\nQUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)\nMCCOLLUM: There -- it may be a great idea to hire more\nagents, and we're certainly no foreclosing that. This bill does\nnot concern the federal law enforcement or federal crimes.\nMORE ETX\n03/22/00 WED 17:32 FAX\n018\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 032\n3082\nRTareuttwr\n3/22/00 14:50:16\n2\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 0327\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 11THADD\nGOP-PROJECT-EXILE llthadd\nThe Federal Document Clearing House\nEVENTDATE: 03-22\nXXX or federal crimes.\nMCCOLLUM: What we're dealing with here today is trying to\nencourage the states to make changes. You may remember that a\ncouple years ago, less than that, actually, that we passed a\nbill that's now law that has minimum mandatory sentences in it\nfor those who commit crimes at the federal level with guns or\nfor those who have been, obviously you know this -- it's been on\nthe books for some time -- it's been debated a lot -- convicted\nfelons who are found possessing a gun.\nWhat we don't have though are the 50 states out there doing\nthis. At least we don't have 44 of them. And so this bill\nconcerns encouraging the states, where most crime is -- most\ncrime is state crime, very few are -- or actually, violent\ncrimes -- are federal crimes.\nSo this encouraged the states. And I think the bottom line\nof this is what has been said a couple of times here today. I\njust don't think we ought miss this. And that is there is a\nmessage here. And the message is, if you commit a crime with a\ngun, you're going to do a lot of time. And it's a deterrent\nmessage. It's a very important message. And the states have to\nbe involved in it for that message to be there.\nYes?\nQUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)\nMCCOLLUM: We understand that there's generally support out\nthere. I do not have an endorsement for this bill or a whole\nlist of them today because the bill was in fluid state to\nproduce it today, so they couldn't see the final copy.\nBut I would expect that we'd have a wide variety of folks in\nboth Democrat and Republican and all interested parties in\nwanting to be involved in supporting this legislation.\nWe're going to have a hearing on it April 6 in the\nsubcommittee on crime. This bill will move, I think very\nrapidly. And I'd like to believe that we'll have this in law\nbefore the end of the summer.\nMORE ETX\n03/22/00 WED 17:32 FAX\n019\nWHE SLUG\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 029\n3088\nRTareuttwr\n3/22/00 14:51:09\n1\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 03-22 0291\nBC-GOP-PROJECT-EXILE 12THADD\nGOP-PROJECT-EXILE 12thadd\nThe Federal Document Clearing House\nEVENTOATE: 03-22\nXXX of the summer\nMCCOLLUM: Yes, sir?\nQUESTION: Do you have any estimates, cost estimates, maybe\nfrom Virginia or other states, on how much this will increase\nprison costs?\nMCCOLLUM: I don't have a dollar figure, but I would suggest\nto you that it can be compared to what we've done in areas like\nthose things involving truth in sentencing, where there were\ntimes of incarceration that does cost more. There's no\nquestion, there is some cost involved in this.\nBut let me suggest to you that we're working on a parallel\nbill that will reduce that cost. And I'm not ready to go in to\ngreat detail with you today, because that's not the purpose of\nthis press conference either.\nBut the subcommittee on crime has produced, and we are\nworking as a bipartisan way on, a bill dealing with prison\nindustries, that in part would provide for a much greater return\nto pay and offset for states the cost of incarceration.\nSo there are a lot of innovative things going on out there\ntoday that would hopefully mitigate these costs.\nAnd I would bring back to you one other thing. When we use\nthe word \"cost,\" there are all kinds of implications to that.\nThe greatest cost to any American is his or her life. And we're\ndealing with children, and we're dealing with guns, and we're\ndealing with people losing their lives, and I think that cost is\nfar greater than the cost of any prison that might be resulting\nfrom a minimum mandatory of five years for any state under this\nbill.\nSo we've got a bill.\nWell, thank you very much for coming out today.\nI thank all of my colleagues for joining me.\nThank you.\nEND ETX\n03/22/00 WED 16:35 FAX\n001\nU.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES\nCommittee on the Judiciary\nDemocratic Staff Office\nB-351-C Rayburn House Office Building\nWashington, D.C. 20515\nFACSIMILE COVER LETTER\nTO:\nDeanne\nFAX NO:\n456-7028 #PAGES:\n(including this page)\nFROM:\nPERRY APELBAUM\nSAMPAK GARG\nCAROLYN DONNELLY\nTED KALO\nCORI FLAM\nKEENAN KELLER\nANTHONY FOXX\nTERESA VEST\nCOMMENTS:\nIf parts of this transmission are unclear or transmission\nwas faulted, please call: (202) 225-6906.\n03/22/00 WED 16:36 FAX\n5\n002\nPRESS RELEASE\nCongressman John Conyers, Jr.\nFourteenth District, Michigan\nRanking Member, Committee on the Judiciary\nDean, Congressional Black Caucus\nFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:\nCONTACT:\nMarch 22, 2000\nTed Kalo (225-6906)\nConyers Reacts to McCollum Enforcement Block Grant Bill:\n\"It Only Pays Lip Service to Enforcement\"\nToday, reacting to the Republican Leadership's introduction of a gun enforcement block\ngrant bill, John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, issued\nthe following statement:\n\"Everyone supports more enforcement. But when you hear the NRA and its allies in\nCongress cry their misleading statistics, remember that it is a trick. A trick to divert attention\nfrom their opposition to closing the gun show loophole. A trick so they don't have to explain\nwhy the NRA supports laws that allow criminals to get out of jail and get their guns back.\nAnd it is a farce. The NRA and its allies in Congress opposed the laws they now want so\nbadly to be enforced. And the NRA and its allies in Congress have made sure that the agencies\nthat enforce our gun laws can only do so with one arm tied behind their backs.\nWhen the NRA saw that it was losing the battle on gun safety, it changed the subject by\ntalking about federal enforcement of our gun laws. The NRA thinks that the facts are on their\nside, and they talk about a 50% drop in federal gun prosecutions. That number has been pulled\nout of a hat and bears no relationship to any statistic I have seen. Then they say that federal\nprosecutions are down, but fail to count the most recent statistics.\nThe facts don't lie, and the facts are that: federal gun prosecutions in 1999 were up 16%\nover 1992; combined federal, state, and local gun prosecutions are up 22 percent from 1992\nthrough 1997; and violent crime with guns is down 35%. The NRA's tired old refrain is a trick,\na false choice, and as the numbers show, a bald-faced lie.\n03/22/00 WED 16:36 FAX\n003\nAs to the substance of the McCollum bill, based on drafts that I have seen, it appears to\nonly pay lip service to enforcement by mimicking Reagan-era revenue sharing approaches.\nUnlike the McCarthy-Conyers-Schumer \"ENFORCE Act\", the McCollum bill merely urges\nfederal prosecution of gun crimes but provides no resources to federal gun prosecutors and no\nresources to ATF to enforce gun laws.\nThe bill does nothing to target the one percent of gun dealers who are responsible for\nselling nearly half of the guns traced to crime. It does nothing to plug NRA sponsored loopholes\nthat, among other things, allows criminals to get out of jail and get their guns back.\nIt is time to reject the NRA's posturing. It is time to reject the NRA's false choice\nbetween enforcement or gun safety measures. We want to do both. If the McCollum bill is the\nbest the NRA and its allies in Congress can come up with, they do not want to do either.\"\n#106-96#\nThe McCollum Enforcement Block Grant Bill:\nPaying Lip Service to Enforcement\nWhat is in the bill?\nMcCarthy/Conyers\nMcCollum\n\"Enforce Act\"\nblock grant bill\nBenjamin Smith- Does it prevent kitchen table gun peddlers from selling guns to felons, fugitives or stalkers without\nYes.\nNo.\n03/22/00 WED\nany background check or recordkeeping?\nDay Care Centers- Does it prevent a gun store from being set up next to a day care center?\nYes.\nNo.\nGun Thieves- Does it include measures that prevent \"smash and grab\" thefts by gun traffickers?\nYes.\nNo.\nFAX 16:36\nStolen Gun Shipments- Does it require delivery services (e.g. UPS, FedEx) to alert authorities to thefts of gun\nYes.\nNo.\nshipments?\nDo Your Job But Only Once a Year- Does it remove the NRA-sponsored loophole limiting unannounced ATF\nYes.\nNo.\ninspections to one per year, fewer than we allow for poultry inspectors, that gives bad apple gun dealers a free ride?\nPersonal Collection- Does it remove the NRA-sponsored loophole that lets bad apple gun dealers and traffickers hide\nYes.\nNo.\nfraudulent transactions by claiming the gun sold was from a \"personal collection\"?\nWeak Penalties for Bad Dealers- Does it put teeth into sanctions on bad apple gun dealers?\nYes.\nNo.\nGet out of Jail and Get Your Guns Back- Does it remove the NRA-sponsored loophole that rearms convicted felons?\nYes.\nNo.\nWife Beater Records- Does it give resources to law enforcement to identify batterers and stalkers who are attempting\nYes.\nNo.\nto buy guns?\nOne Hand Tied Behind ATF's Back- Does it add ATF agents and inspectors to remove NRA- sponsored limits that\nYes.\nNo.\nhave kept enforcement resources at 1970's levels?\nSmart Guns- Does it provide funding for \"smart guns\" that will prevent weapons from being used by intruders,\nYes.\nNo.\nchildren and criminals to shoot police officers?\nAnonymous Gun Criminals- Does it include forensic ballistics measures that aid in the identification of gun criminals\nYes.\nNo.\nby using \"gun fingerprints\"?\nFederal Prosecutions without Federal Prosecutors- Does it include funding for federal prosecutors to prosecute gun\nYes.\nNo.\ncrimes?\nUnderfunded Exile- Does it provide funding for expansion of \"Project Exile\" (coordination between federal, state and\nYes. The bill\nYes. But the\nlocal prosecutors to determine whether gun criminals should be prosecuted in federal court and media campaigns to\nprovides $165\nMcCollum bill\npublicize the severe penalties for gun crimes)?\nmillion for this\nonly grants $100\npurpose.\nmillion and only\nto states.\nPrepared by the House Judiciary Committee Democratic Staff based on drans provided to the media.\n004\n03/22/00 WED 16:37 FAX\n005\nU.S. REPRESENTATIVE\nBILLMcCOLLUM\n8th District-Florida\n2109 Rayburn House Office Building\nWashington. D.C. 20515\n202/225-2176\nFor Immediate Release\nDate:\nMarch 22, 2000\nContact:\nSusan Dryden, (202) 225-2176 or pager (800)759-8888 pin 1758916\nMcCollum Introduces \"Project Exile: The Safe Streets\nand Neighborhoods Act of 2000\"\nBill Keeps Children, Families and Neighborhoods Safe by\n\"Exiling\" Criminals Who Use Guns\nWashington, D.C. - Today U.S. Representative Bill McCollum (R-FL), Chairman of the House\nSubcommittee on Crime, introduced \"Project Exile: The Safe Streets and Neighborhoods Act of\n2000.\" The bill provides a proven, common sense approach to reducing gun crimes by enforcing the\nlaws already on the books and ensuring tough prison time for criminals who use guns. McCollum's\nbill has the support of Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX), Majority Whip Tom DeLay and House\nRepublican Conference Chairman J.C. Watts (R-OK), all of whom are original co-sponsors of the\nlegislation.\n\"The real heartache regarding gun violence is that it involves avoidable tragedies,\" said McCollum.\n\"The sad truth is violent criminals are back on the streets before they should be, and are committing\nadditional crimes. We must ensure appropriate, tough sentences the first time, so the subsequent\ncrimes - and the subsequent heartache - will be avoided.\"\nIn states and communities around the country where aggressive prosecution of gun crimes has been\ncoupled with tough prison sentences, violent crime has gone down. Project Exile would help make\nneighborhoods and communities safer by providing block grants to qualifying states to strengthen\ntheir criminal and juvenile justice systems if they ensure tough prison sentences for those who commit\ngun crimes.\nThe bill will provide $100 million over the next 5 years as an incentive for states to implement such\nprograms. In order to qualify for grants, states must take three steps: 1) require a mandatory\nminimum sentence without parole for anyone who uses or carries a firearm in any violent crime or\nserious drug trafficking offense, or for a violent convict who is caught possessing a gun; 2) implement\na public awareness campaign to make violent criminals aware of the tough sentences for gun crimes;\nand, 3) work with federal law enforcement authorities to promote federal cooperation to ensure\ncriminals who use guns receive tough sentences.\n03/22/00 WED 16:37 FAX\n1\n006\n\"Project Exile is a proven, common sense approach to stopping these avoidable tragedies by 'exiling'\nviolent gun criminals to prison so our children, families and neighborhoods remain safe,\" said\nMcCollum.\nQualifying states would be allowed to use their funds to strengthen their criminal and juvenile justice\nsystems in a wide variety of ways: hiring and training more judges, prosecutors and probation\nofficers; increasing prison capacity; and developing information-sharing case management systems to\nbuild case files for serious offenders.\n# # #\n03/22/00 WED 16:37 FAX\n007\nI\nProject Exile: The Safe Streets and Neighborhoods Act of 2000\nTo be introduced by Rep. Bill McCollum (R-FL), March 22, 2000\n\"Project Exile: The Safe Streets and Neighborhoods Act\" will help make our\ncommunities and neighborhoods safer by addressing gun violence through the common sense\napproach of ensuring vigorous prosecution of gun criminals. In the last two years a handful of\nstates, including Virginia, have dramatically reduced the level of gun crime in their states by\nimplementing programs that ensure tough prison time for criminals who use guns. This approach\nsimply enforces the laws already on the books, and ensures a minimum prison sentence of at\nleast five years for convicted violators. In states and communities around the country where\naggressive prosecution of gun crimes has been coupled with tough prison sentences, violent\ncrime has gone down. This is because criminals who use guns are the most hardened offenders\nand the ones who commit the most crime. Getting them off the streets leads to a dramatic\nreduction in crime, and sends an unmistakable deterrent message: We will not tolerate gun\ncrimes.\nThe Project Exile Act will provide resources to states that ensure a mandatory minimum\nsentence of five years (without parole) for any person who uses or carries a firearm during and in\nrelation to a violent crime (murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault) or serious drug\ntrafficking offense (an offense under state law involving manufacturing or distributing a\ncontrolled substance, for which a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is\nprescribed by law). Importantly, the Act requires that the mandatory minimum sentence must be\nin addition to the punishment provided for the underlying crime. Alternatively, a state can\nqualify for the Exile funds if it ensures that a person convicted of possessing a firearm and who\nhas a prior conviction for a violent crime serves a mandatory minimum sentence of five years.\nThe Act will give states the option to prosecute offenders in either federal or state court, so long\nas the states ensure that the mandatory minimum sentence of five years is served.\nThe Project Exile Act will provide a total of $100 million in federal resources over five\nyears as an incentive for states to implement such programs and to help defray costs associated\nwith tougher enforcement against gun criminals. Funds received under the Act will be for\nstrengthening state criminal justice systems in a wide variety of ways, including: hiring and\ntraining more judges, prosecutors and probation officers; increasing prison capacity; and\ndeveloping information-sharing case management systems that ensure that all segments of the\ncriminal justice system are contributing to and using the same case files for serious offenders.\nThe Act will build on the success of the Truth-in-Sentencing program that Congress has\nfunded over the last five years. The Truth-in-Sentencing program created an incentive for states\nto require convicted violent offenders to serve at least 85 percent of their sentences, and helped\nstates defray costs associated with the resulting longer prison terms. This program has helped\nmove the national average time served for violent offenders from 35 percent in 1994 to close to\n50 percent in 1998. It has been a key factor in lowering the crime rate over the last 7 years.\n03/22/00 WED 16:38 FAX\n5\n008\n2\nLegislative Components\nState Eligibility Criteria\n(A) Except as provided in (B), to qualify a state must, at a minimum:\n(1) require a mandatory minimum sentence of five years (without parole) for any person\nwho: (a) uses or carries a firearm during and in relation to a violent crime (murder, rape,\nrobbery, and aggravated assault) or serious drug trafficking offense (an offense under\nstate law involving manufacturing or distributing a controlled substance, for which a\nmaximum term of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed by law), with the five\nyear mandatory minimum sentence being in addition to the punishment provided for the\nunderlying crime; or (b) is convicted of possessing a firearm and who has a prior\nconviction for a violent crime or serious drug trafficking offense.\n(2) implement a public awareness campaign to put violent criminals on notice of the\ntough sentences for gun crimes and develop community support for the state's Safe\nStreets and Neighborhoods program; and\n(3) provide assurances that the state will coordinate with federal prosecutors and federal\nlaw enforcement agencies serving their jurisdictions, so as to promote federal\ninvolvement and cooperation.\n(B) A state can qualify even if it does not have a five year mandatory minimum provided in state\nlaw, pursuant to (A)(1), so long as it can assure that a person convicted for any of the above\nidentified crimes will receive mandatory minimum sentence of five years in federal court for the\noffense. Such an assurance can be in the form of an executive order by the chief executive of the\nstate, or an exchange of letters between the state and the appropriate federal districts.\n[Alternative: Also allow state to qualify if the five cities with the highest crime rate have\nentered into such federal-city task force arrangements; then require that the resources be\ndedicated to those cities]\nAllowable Uses\n- police\n- prosecutors\n- courts\n- probation officers\n- juvenile justice system\n- prison expansion, renovation and personnel\n- criminal history record improvements\n- case management programs involving information-sharing regarding serious offenders\n03/22/00\nWED 16:38 FAX\n1\n009\n3\nFunding Authorization\n$100 million total with $10 million provided the first year (fiscal year '01), $15 million the\nsecond year, $20 million the third year, $25 million the fourth year, and $30 million the final\nyear.\nFunding Formula\nEach state's share is based on its relative amount of violent crime (as a percentage of the total\nviolent crime of all other qualifying states).\nMiscellaneous\n- A state must provide assurances that it will allocate its resources with the aim of addressing\ncrime in its highest crime areas.\n- A state may make sub-grants to cities or counties to carry out the purposes of this Act.\nDefinitions\n- \"violent crime\" includes murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.\n- \"serious drug trafficking offense\" is an offense under state law involving manufacturing,\ndistributing, or possessing with intent to distribute, a controlled substance, for which a maximum\nterm of imprisonment of ten years or more is prescribed by law\n03/22/00 WED 16:38 FAX\n010\nProject Exile: The Richmond, Virginia Success Story\nPrior to Project Exile, Richmond, VA, had one of the highest murder rates in the\nworld and an exploding violent crime problem.\nSince 1997, when Project Exile was begun in Richmond:\nHomicides have dropped 46% (the lowest level since 1987)\nCrimes involving guns have dropped by 65%\nAggravated assault $ have dropped by 39%\nAnd the overall number of violent crimes have dropped by 35%\nProject Exile is a proven, common sense approach\nto preventing avoidable tragedies\n03/22/00 WED 16:38 FAX\n011\nA Record to Be Proud of?\nClinton Administration's Record on Prosecution of Gun Law Violations\n1996\n1997\n1998\nProsecutions under the\n0\n0\n1\nBrady Act . Background\nChecks\nProsecutions for the\n9\n5\n6\nTransfer of a Handgun or\nAmmunition to a Juvenile\nProsecutions for\n27\n3\n8\nPossession of a Handgun\nor Ammunition by a\nJuvenile\nProsecutions for\n4\n5\n8\nPossession or Discharge of\na Firearm in a School Zone\nProsecution for Possession\n4\n5\n8\nof Firearm by a Juvenile at\nSchool\nProsecutions for Firearm\n0\n21\n56\nPossession by a Convicted\nSpouse Abuser\nSource: Cases Reported, Executive Office, United States Attorney\n03/22/00 WED 16:39 FAX\n5\n012\nF:\\M6\\MCCOLL\\MCCOLL.086\n[Discussion Draft]\nH.L.C.\n[DISCUSSION DRAFT]\n106TH CONGRESS\n2D SESSION\nH.R.\nIN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES\nMr. McCoLLUM introduced the following bill; which was referred to the\nCommittee on\nA BILL\nTo establish a grant program that provides incentives for\nStates to enact mandatory minimum sentences for cer-\ntain firearms offenses, and for other purposes.\n1\nBe it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-\n2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,\n3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.\n4\nThis Act may be cited as the \"Project Exile: The Safe\n5 Streets and Neighborhoods Act of 2000\".\nMarch 21, 2000 (12:00 PM)\nF:\\V6\\032100\\032100.0A7\n03/22/00 WED 16:39 FAX\nI\n013\nF:\\M6\\MCCOLL\\MCCOLL.086\n[Discussion Draft]\nH.L.C.\n2\n1 SEC. 2. FIREARMS SENTENCING INCENTIVE GRANTS.\n2\n(a) PROGRAM ESTABLISHED.-Title П of the Violent\n3 Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is\n4 amended—\n5\n(1) by redesignating subtitle D as subtitle E;\n6\nand\n7\n(2) by inserting after subtitle C the following\n8\nnew subtitle:\n9\n\"Subtitle D-Firearms Sentencing\n10\nIncentive Grants\n11 \"SEC. 20351. DEFINITIONS.\n12\n\"For purposes of this subtitle:\n13\n\"(1) The term \"violent crime\" means murder\n14\nand nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, rob-\n15\nbery, and aggravated assault, or a crime in a reason-\n16\nably comparable class of serious violent crimes as\n17\napproved by the Attorney General.\n18\n\"(2) The term \"serious drug trafficking crime\"\n19\nmeans an offense under State law for the manufac-\n20\nture or distribution of a controlled substance, for\n21\nwhich State law authorizes to be imposed a sentence\n22\nto a term of imprisonment of 10 years or more.\n23\n\"(3) The term 'part 1 violent crime' means\n24\nmurder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible\n25\nrape, robbery, and aggravated assault as reported to\nMarch 21. 2000 (12:00 PM)\nF:\\V6\\032100\\032100.0A7\n03/22/00 WED 16:39 FAX\n014\nF:\\M6\\MCCOLL\\MCCOLL.086\n(Discussion Draft]\nH.L.C.\n3\n1\nthe Federal Bureau of Investigation for purposes of\n2\nthe Uniform Crime Reports.\n3\n\"(4) The term 'State' means a State of the\n4\nUnited States, the District of Columbia, the Com-\n5\nmonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin\n6\nIslands, American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern\n7\nMariana Islands.\n8 \"SEC. 20352. AUTHORIZATION OF GRANTS.\n9\n\"(a) IN GENERAL.From amounts made available to\n10 carry out this subtitle, the Attorney General shall provide\n11 Firearms Sentencing Incentive grants under section\n12 20353 to eligible States.\n13\n\"(b) ALLOWABLE USES.-Such grants may be used\n14 by a State only for the following purposes:\n15\n\"(1) To support-\n16\n\"(A) law enforcement agencies;\n17\n\"(B) prosecutors;\n18\n\"(C) courts;\n19\n\"(D) probation officers;\n20\n\"(E) correctional officers;\n21\n\"(F) the juvenile justice system;\n22\n\"(G) the expansion, improvement, and co-\n23\nordination of criminal history records; or\nMarch 21, 2000 (12:00 PM)\nF:\\V6\\032100\\032100.0A7\n03/22/00 WED 16:39 FAX\n015\nF:\\M6\\MCCOLL\\MCCOLL.086\n[Discussion Draft]\nH.L.C.\n4\n1\n\"(H) case management programs involving\n2\nthe sharing of information about serious offend-\n3\ners.\n4\n\"(2) To carry out a public awareness and com-\n5\nmunity support program described in section\n6\n20353(a)(2).\n7\n\"(3) To build or expand correctional facilities.\n8\n\"(c) SUBGRANTS.-A State may use such grants di-\n9 rectly or by making subgrants to units of local government\n10 within that State.\n11 \"SEC. 20353. FIREARMS SENTENCING INCENTIVE GRANTS.\n12\n\"(a) ELIGIBILITY.-Except as provided in subsection\n13 (b), to be eligible to receive a grant award under this sec-\n14 tion, a State shall submit an application to the Attorney\n15 General that complies with the following:\n16\n\"(1) The application shall demonstrate that\n17\nsuch State has implemented firearms sentencing\n18\nlaws requiring 1 or more of the following:\n19\n\"(A) Any person who, during and in rela-\n20\ntion to any violent crime or serious drug traf-\n21\nficking crime, uses or carries a firearm, shall,\n22\nin addition to the punishment provided for such\n23\ncrime of violence or serious drug trafficking\n24\ncrime, be sentenced to a term of imprisonment\nMarch 21, 2000 (12:00 PM)\nF:\\V61032100\\032100.0A7\n03/22/00\nWED 16:40 FAX\n5.\n016\nF:\\M6\\MCCOLL\\MCCOLL.086\n[Discussion Draft)\nII.L.C.\n5\n1\nof not less than 5 years (without the possibility\n2\nof parole during that term).\n3\n\"(B) Any person who, having at least 1\n4\nprior conviction for a violent crime, possesses a\n5\nfirearm, shall, for such possession, be sentenced\n6\nto a term of imprisonment of not less than 5\n7\nyears (without the possibility of parole during\n8\nthat term).\n9\n\"(2) The application shall demonstrate that\n10\nsuch State has implemented, or will implement not\n11\nlater than 6 months after receiving a grant under\n12\nthis subtitle, a public awareness and community sup-\n13\nport program that seeks to build support for, and\n14\nwarns potential violators of, the firearms sentencing\n15\nlaws implemented under paragraph (1).\n16\n\"(3) The application shall provide assurances\n17\nthat such State-\n18\n\"(A) will coordinate with Federal prosecu-\n19\ntors and Federal law enforcement agencies\n20\nwhose jurisdictions include such State, SO as to\n21\npromote Federal involvement and cooperation in\n22\nthe enforcement of laws within that State; and\n23\n\"(B) will allocate its resources in a manner\n24\ncalculated to reduce crime in the high-crime\n25\nareas of the State.\nMarch 21, 2000 (12:00 PM)\nF:\\V6032100\\032100.0A7\n03/22/00 WED 16:40 FAX\n017\nF:\\M6\\MCCOLL\\MCCOLL.086\n(Discussion Draft]\nH.L.C.\n6\n1\n\"(b) ALTERNATE ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENT.-\n2\n\"(1) IN GENERAL.-A State that is unable to\n3\ndemonstrate in its application that such State meets\n4\nthe requirement of subsection (a)(1) shall be eligible\n5\nto receive a grant award under this section notwith-\n6\nstanding that inability if that State, in such applica-\n7\ntion, provides assurances that such State has in ef-\n8\nfect an equivalent Federal prosecution agreement.\n9\n\"(2) EQUIVALENT FEDERAL PROSECUTION\n10\nAGREEMENT.-For purposes of paragraph (1), an\n11\nequivalent Federal prosecution agreement is an\n12\nagreement with appropriate Federal authorities that\n13\nensures that 1 or more of the following:\n14\n\"(A) If a person engages in the conduct\n15\nspecified in subsection (a)(1)(A), but the con-\n16\nviction of that person under State law for that\n17\nconduct is not certain to result in the imposi-\n18\ntion of an additional sentence as specified in\n19\nthat subsection, that person is prosecuted for\n20\nsuch conduct under Federal law.\n21\n\"(B) If a person engages in the conduct\n22\nspecified in subsection (a)(1)(B), but the con-\n23\nviction of that person under State law for that\n24\nconduct is not certain to result in the imposi-\n25\ntion of a sentence as specified in that sub-\nMarch 21, 2000 (12:00 PM)\nF:\\V610321001032100.0A7\n03/22/00 WED 16:40 FAX\n1\n018\nF:\\M6\\MCCOLL\\MCCOLL.086\n[Discussion Draft]\nH.L.C.\n7\n1\nsection, that person is prosecuted for such con-\n2\nduct under Federal law.\n3 \"SEC. 20354. FORMULA FOR GRANTS.\n4\n\"(a) IN GENERAL.-The amount available for grants\n5 under section 20353 for any fiscal year shall be allocated\n6 to each eligible State, in the ratio that the number of part\n7 1 violent crimes reported by such State to the Federal Bu-\n8 reau of Investigation for the 3 years preceding the year\n9 in which the determination is made, bears to the average\n10 annual number of part 1 violent crimes reported by all\n11 eligible States to the Federal Bureau of Investigation for\n12 the 3 years preceding the year in which the determination\n13 is made.\n14\n\"(b) UNAVAILABLE DATA-If data regarding part 1\n15 violent crimes in any State is substantially inaccurate or\n16 is unavailable for the 3 years preceding the year in which\n17 the determination is made, the Attorney General shall uti-\n18 lize the best available comparable data regarding the num-\n19 ber of violent crimes for the previous year for the State\n20 for the purposes of allocation of funds under this subtitle.\n21 \"SEC. 20355. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.\n22\n\"(a) AUTHORIZATIONS.-There are authorized to be\n23 appropriated to carry out this subtitle-\n24\n\"(1) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2001;\n25\n\"(2) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2002;\nMarch 21, 2000 (12:00 PM)\nF:\\V6\\032100\\032100.0A7\n03/22/00 WED 16:40 FAX\n019\nF:\\M6\\MCCOLL\\MCCOLL.086\n[Discussion Draft)\nH.L.C.\n8\n1\n\"(3) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;\n2\n\"(4) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2004; and\n3\n\"(5) $30,000,000 for fiscal year 2005.\n4\n\"(b) LIMITATIONS ON FUNDS.-\n5\n\"(1) USES OF FUNDS.-Funds made available\n6\npursuant to this subtitle shall be used only to carry\n7\nout the purposes described in section 20352(b).\n8\n\"(2) NONSUPPLANTING REQUIREMENT.-Funds\n9\nmade available pursuant to this section shall not be\n10\nused to supplant State funds, but shall be used to\n11\nincrease the amount of funds that would, in the ab-\n12\nsence of Federal funds, be made available from\n13\nState sources.\n14\n\"(3) ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.-Not more than\n15\n3 percent of the funds made available pursuant to\n16\nthis section shall be available to the Attorney Gen-\n17\neral for purposes of administration, research and\n18\nevaluation, technical assistance, and data collection.\n19\n\"(4) CARRYOVER OF APPROPRIATIONS-Fnds\n20\nappropriated pursuant to this section during any fis-\n21\ncal year shall remain available until expended.\n22\n\"(5) MATCHING FUNDS.-The Federal share of\n23\na grant received under this subtitle may not exceed\n24\n90 percent of the costs of a proposal as described in\n25\nan application approved under this subtitle.\nMarch 21, 2000 (12:00 PM)\nF:(VE\\032100\\032100.0A7\n03/22/00 WED 16:41 FAX\n020\nF:\\M6\\MCCOLL\\MCCOLL.086\n[Discussion Draft)\nH.L.C.\n9\n1 \"SEC. 20356. REPORT BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL\n2\n\"Beginning on October 1, 2001, and each subsequent\n3 July 1 thereafter, the Attorney General shall submit to\n4 the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the\n5 Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representa-\n6 tives a report on the implementation of this subtitle. The\n7 report shall include information regarding the eligibility\n8 of States under section 20353 and the distribution and\n9 use of funds under this subtitle.\"\n10\n(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.-The table of contents\n11 in section 2 of that Act is amended—\n12\n(1) by redesignating the item relating to sub-\n13\ntitle D of title II as subtitle E of such title; and\n14\n(2) by inserting after subtitle C of such title the\n15\nfollowing:\n\"Subtitle D-Firearms Sentencing Incentive Grants\n\"Sec. 20351. Definitions.\n\"Sec. 20352. Authorization of grants.\n\"Sec. 20353. Firearms sentencing incentive grants.\n\"Sec. 20354. Formula for grants.\n\"Sec. 20355. Authorization of appropriations.\n\"Sec. 20356. Report by the Attorney General.\".\nMarch 21, 2000 (12:00 PM)\nF:\\V6\\032100\\032100.0A7"
}