AGAINST THE PERPETRATOR OF A CRIME?" AFTER HE GAVE THE SOMEWHAT
           NONRESPONSIVE ANSWER, I ASKED HIM AGAIN -- QUOTE -- "CAN YOU
           GIVE ME SPECIFIC INSTANCES WHERE THE STATES HAVE FAILED IN
           THEIR DUTY TO INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE HATE CRIMES?" MR.
           HOLDER COULD NOT. HE THEN INDICATED THAT HE WOULD GO BACK TO
           THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, CONDUCT SOME RESEARCH AND THEN PROVIDE
           THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE WITH SPECIFIC INSTANCES FOR WHICH I
           ASKED. IN A SUBSEQUENT RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS, THE
           JUSTICE DEPARTMENT IDENTIFIED THREE CASES OUT OF THE HUNDREDS

           OF THOUSANDS OF CASES IN THIS COUNTRY IN WHICH THE JUSTICE
           DEPARTMENT -- QUOTE -- "FILED CHARGES AGAINST DEFENDANTS AFTER
           DETERMINING THAT THE STATE RESPONSE WAS INADEQUATE TO VINDICATE
           THE FEDERAL INTEREST." IN ADDITION, THE DEPARTMENT IDENTIFIED
           TWO CASES WHERE THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT DETERMINED THAT THE
           STATE COULD NOT -- QUOTE -- "RESPOND AS EFFECTIVELY AS THE
           FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BECAUSE, FOR EXAMPLE, STATE PENALTIES ARE
           LESS SEVERE." THESE FIVE CASES HARDLY SHOW WHOLESALE ABDICATION

           OF PROSECUTORIAL RESPONSIBILITIES BY STATE AND LOCAL
           PROSECUTORS. TO THE CONTRARY THESE CASES SHOW STATE AND LOCAL
           AUTHORITIES ARE VIGOROUSLY COMBATING HATE CRIMES AND WHERE
           NECESSARY COOPERATING WITH FEDERAL OFFICIALS WHO MAY ASSIST
           THEM IN INVESTING, CHARGING AND TRYING THESE DEFENDANTS. DURING
           THE DEBATE YESTERDAY SENATOR KENNEDY INDICATED THAT THE JUSTICE
           DEPARTMENT HAD PRODUCED ADDITIONAL EXAMPLES OF CASES WHERE
           STATE AND LOCAL PROSECUTORS HAVE FAILED OR REFUSED TO PROSECUTE
           HATE CRIMES. THERE ARE THREE OF THESE ADDITIONAL CASES. I HAVE
           TO SAY, HOWEVER, THAT THE THREE ADDITIONAL CASES PRODUCED BY

           THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT AND CITED BY SENATOR KENNEDY DO NOT
           ESTABLISH THAT STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES ARE UNWILLING TO
           COMBAT HATE CRIMES. SO WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE US?
           WE'RE BEING ASKED TO ENACT A BROAD FEDERALIZATION OF ALL
           HATE-MOTIVATED CRIMES THAT HISTORICALLY HAVE BEEN HANDLED WELL
           AT THE STATE AND LOCAL LEVEL BECAUSE IT IS ARGUED STATE AND
           LOCAL AUTHORITIES ARE EITHER UNABLE OR UNWILLING TO PROSECUTE
           THEM. MY AMENDMENT'S GRANT PROGRAM ADDRESSES THE FIRST CONCERN
           THAT STATES AND LOCALITIES, BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF RESOURCES
           ARE UNABLE TO PROSECUTE THESE CRIMES. IF THERE'S NOT ENOUGH

           MONEY, LET'S PUT ENOUGH MONEY INTO THE BILL. I'M NOT AGAINST
           INCREASING THE SUMS. AS FOR THE SECOND CONCERN, WE'RE BEING
           ASKED TO CONCLUDE THAT STATES AND LOCALITIES ARE UNWILLING TO
           PROSECUTE HATE-MOTIVATED CRIMES ON THE BASIS OF EIGHT CASES OUT
           OF THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF CASES THAT ARE BROUGHT EACH
           YEAR. EIGHT CASES, I MIGHT ADD, THAT IN THE VERY LEAST ARE
           EQUIVOCAL ON THE ISSUE OF WHETHER STATES AND LOCALITIES ARE
           FAILING OR REFUSING TO PROSECUTE HATE CRIMES. SUPPORTERS OF THE
           KENNEDY AMENDMENT ALSO CITE THE HORRIBLE BEATING DEATH OF

           MATTHEW SHEPHERD IN WYOMING AND THE DRAGGING DEATH OF JAMES
           BYRD JR. IN JASPER, TEXAS, AS EVIDENCE THERE IS A PROBLEM
           CONGRESS SHOULD ADDRESS. BUT THE SHEPHERD AND BYRD CASES PROVE
           MY POINT. BOTH WERE FULLY PROSECUTED BY LOCAL AUTHORITIES WHO
           SOUGHT AND OBTAINED CONVICTIONS. IN THE BYRD CASE, THE
           DEFENDANTS WERE GIVEN THE DEATH PENALTY, SOMETHING THAT WOULD
           NOT BE PERMITTED IF THE KENNEDY AMENDMENT PASSES. THIS IS NOT A
           CASE WHERE MY MIND'S MADE UP. FOR NO MATTER WHAT EVIDENCE I AM
           SHOWN OF DERELICTION BY STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN THE AREA
           6 HATE CRIMES, I WOULD SAY THAT IT IS NOT ENOUGH OR IT IS NOT

           SUFFICIENT FOR ME TO BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A PROBLEM. I AM OPEN
           TO THE POSSIBILITY THAT STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES ARE NOT
           DOING THEIR PART. I HOPE THAT IS NOT TRUE, BUT MY MIND IS NOT
           MADE UP ON THAT ISSUE. THAT IS WHY MY AMENDMENT CALLS FOR A
           COMPREHENSIVE STUDY THAT WOULD CAREFULLY AND THOROUGHLY AND
           OBJECTIVELY STUDY THE DATA WE HAVE COLLECTED TO SEE IF THERE IS
           A DISPARITY IN THE INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION OF HATE
           CRIMES. 23 THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH PROSECUTION AT THE STATE
           LEVEL, THEN I AM ON RECORD FOR CALLING FOR AN EFFECTIVE AND

           RESPONSIBLE FEDERAL RESPONSE. TO SUMMARIZE, MY AMENDMENT CALLS
           FOR A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF HATE CRIMES STATISTICS TO
           DETERMINE WHETHER IN FACT ANY STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
           AUTHORITIES ARE UNWILLING, FOR WHATEVER REASON, TO COMBAT THESE
           HORRIFIC CRIMES. EVEN IF THE EIGHT CASES IDENTIFIED BY THE
           JUSTICE DEPARTMENT DID SHOW THAT STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES
           WERE UNWILLING TO INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE HATE-MOTIVATED
           CRIMES, THEY STILL WOULD ONLY BE EIGHT CASES OUT OF THOUSANDS
           AND THOUSANDS OF CASES THAT ARE BROUGHT EACH AND EVERY YEAR.
           THEY SIMPLY DO NOT SHOW THE WIDESPREAD PROBLEM REGARDING STATE

           AND LOCAL PROSECUTION OF HATE-MOTIVATED CRIME. IN FACT, IF YOU
           LOOK AT THEM, IT SHOWS THAT THE SYSTEM IS WORKING AND THAT THE
           TWO BODIES, THE STATE AND LOCAL PROSECUTORS AND THE FEDERAL
           PROSECUTORS, GENERALLY WORK TOGETHER. THEY SIMPLY DO NOT SHOW
           WIDESPREAD PROBLEM REGARDING STATE AND LOCAL PROSECUTION OF
           HATE-MOTIVATED CRIME. WITH THAT, I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY
           TIME.
           
           
           
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA IS RECOGNIZED
           FOR TWO MINUTES.
           

           MR. ROBB: THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. MR. PRESIDENT, I RISE TO
           SUPPORT THE SMITH-KENNEDY LEGISLATION. THIS LEGISLATION WILL
           SIMPLY STRENGTHEN EXISTING HATE CRIMES LAWS BY ENHANCING THE
           FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S ABILITY TO ASSIST STATE AND LOCAL
           PROSECUTIONS. IT'S A LITTLE BIT LIKE PROJECT EX-SIDE OF THE
           AISLE, WHICH IS SO MUCH IN VOGUE AND WHICH HAS BEEN PRACTICED
           SO SUCCESSFULLY IN VIRGINIA. THIS WILL ALLOW THE RESOURCES OF
           THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TO BE MADE AVAILABLE WHERE
           APPROPRIATE, TO INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE THOSE IN OUR SOCIETY
           WHO COMMIT ACTS OF BRUTALITY BASED ON HATE. THE DRAGGING DEATH

           OF JAMES BYRD JRX AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN MAN IN JASPER, TEXAS, THE
           TORTURE AND DEATH OF MATTHEW SHEPHERD, A HOMOSEXUAL MALE IN
           LARAMIE, WYOMING, SHOCKED THE NATIONAL CONSCIENCE. HATE CRIMES
           HAVE OCCURRED IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA AS WELL. IN 1999
           A MAN WAS SENTENCED TO LIFE IN PRISON AND FINED $100,000 FOR
           HIS ROLE IN THE DEATH OF AN AFRICAN-AMERICANAN MAN BEHEADED AND
           BURNED IN INDEPENDENCE, VIRGINIA. AND A HOMOSEXUAL MAN WAS
           MURDERED AND HIS SEVERED HEAD LEFT ATOP A FOOD RIDGE NEAR THE

           JAMES RIVER IN RICHMOND, VIRGINIA. IT IS HARD TO IMAGINE THE
           PAIN AND SUFFERING OF VICTIMS AND THEIR FAMILIES. MR.
           PRESIDENT, THIS LEGISLATION DOES NOT PROSECUTE INDIVIDUALS FOR
           THEIR THOUGHT. RATHER, IT PUNISHES VIOLENT CONDUCT THAT IS NOT
           PROTECTED BY THE FIRST AMENDMENT. THE WILLFUL CAUSE OR ATTEMPT
           OF BODILY INJURY TO ANOTHER DUE TO BIAS IS NOT PROTECTED FREE
           SPEECH, MR. PRESIDENT. WITH THAT, MR. PRESIDENT, I RESERVE ANY
           TIME REMAINING TO THE SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS.
           
           
           
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WHO YIELDS TIME?
           THE SENATOR FROM OREGON IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.
           

           MR. SMITH: MR. PRESIDENT, I RISE TODAY AS A COSPONSOR OF THE
           KENNEDY-SMITH AMENDMENT. I ALSO RISE TO ANNOUNCE MY SUPPORT FOR
           THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY SENATOR HATCH. BUT I ASK MY COLLEAGUES
           IN VOTING FOR SENATOR HATCH'S AMENDMENT TO VOTE FOR SENATOR
           KENNEDY'S AS WELL. I THINK IT'S FINE TO STUDY, BUT I THINK WE
           KNOW ENOUGH. WE KNOW THAT HATE CRIMES ARE COMMITTED ALREADY IN

           OUR SOCIETY. AND WHEN I AS A HUMAN BEING WAKE UP TO READ
           HEADLINES OF A BLACK MAN DRUG TO DEATH, A GAY MAN BEATEN TO
           DEATH, I WANT TO DO SOMETHING. AND I BELIEVE IN THE SEPARATION
           OF STATE GOVERNMENTS AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. I UNDERSTAND
           ALL OF THAT. BUT DOGGONE IT, I THINK IT'S OKAY FOR THE FEDERAL
           GOVERNMENT TO SHOW UP TO WORK. I THINK IT'S TIME FOR US TO SAY

           AS REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS WE WANT TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE HERE.
           WE WANT OUR POLICE OFFICERS TO HELP NOT PRIMARILY, BUT
           SECONDARILY AND TO BE THERE TO TEACH, TO PROSECUTE AND TO
           PURSUE THOSE WHO WOULD COMMIT THE MOST MALIGNANT OF CRIMES.

           COLLEAGUES, THERE'S ONE -- TWO CRITICAL WORDS IN MY VIEW
           MISSING IN SENATOR HATCH'S AMENDMENT. THE WORDS ARE "SEXUAL OR
           YEBITATION" AS IT APPLIES TO MAKING IT A FEDERAL CRIME -- THE
           WORDS ARE SEXUAL ORIENTATION" AS IT APPLIES TO MAKING IT A
           FEDERAL CRIME. I NEVER THOUGHT I'D BE ON THE FLOOR SAYING THIS
           UNTIL I SAW MATTHEW SHEPHERD, THE REPORT OF HIS DEATH. AND I
           BEGAN TO ASK MYSELF WHAT I COULD DO. I THINK MANY IN THE SENATE

           ARE REFLEXIVELY INCLINED TO VOTE "NO" ON THE KENNEDY AMENDMENT
           BECAUSE OF FEELINGS OF RELIGIOUS RELUCTANCE. I UNDERSTAND THAT
           BECAUSE I SHARED THOSE FEELINGS FOR A LONG, LONG TIME. THEN I
           HAPPENED UPON A STORY IN A BOOK THAT I REGARD AS SCRIPTURE.
           IT'S IN THE EIGHTH CHAPTER OF JOHN. WHEN THE FOUNDER OF THE

           CHRISTIAN FAITH WAS CONFRONTED BY THE PHARISEES AND THE
           SAGISEES OF HIS DAY WITH A HATE CRIME, A WOMAN WHO WAS CAUGHT
           IN THE VERY ACT WAS TO BE STONED TO DEATH. WHAT DID HE DO?
           HIS RESPONSE WAS TO SPEAK IN SUCH A WAY TO SHAME THE

           SELF-RIGHTEOUS AND THE SANCTIMONIOUS TO DROP THEIR STONES, AND
           HE SAVED HER LIFE. I THINK WE SHOULD DO THE SAME. AND I DON'T
           BELIEVE THAT ON THAT DAY THAT HE ENDORSED HER LIFESTYLE ANYMORE
           THAN I BELIEVE ANYONE HERE WOULD BE ENDORSING ANY LIFESTYLE IF
           THEY VOTE FOR THE KENNEDY-SMITH AMENDMENT. I BELIEVE WHAT YOU
           WOULD BE DOING IS FOLLOWING AN EXAMPLE, AN EXAMPLE THAT SAYS
           WHEN IT COMES TO VIOLENCE AND HATRED WE CAN STAND UP FOR ONE

           ANOTHER ANOTHER. NO MATTER OUR DISTINCTIONS, NO MATTER OUR
           UNIQUENESSES, NO MATTER OUR PECULIARITIES, NO MATTER HOW WE
           PRAY OR HOW WE SIN, WE CAN STAND UP FOR EACH OTHER AND WE CAN
           STAND UP AGAINST HATE. AND SO I SAY TO MY COLLEAGUES VOTE FOR
           SENATOR HATCH'S AMENDMENT. IT'S FINE. BUT IT DOESN'T GO FAR
           ENOUGH, IN MY VIEW. AND IT'S TIME TO GO FAR ENOUGH TO INCLUDE

           THIS GROUP OF AMERICANS WHO ARE NOT NOW INCLUDED IN A CURRENT
           FEDERAL LAW.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE TIME ALLOCATED TO THE SENATOR HAS
           EXPIRED.
           

           MR. SMITH: MR. PRESIDENT, I CONCLUDE WITH THIS PLEA. PUT DOWN
           THE STONE AND CAST A VOTE BASED ON LOVE. CAST A VOTE AGAINST
           HATRED AND VOTE FOR THE KENNEDY-SMITH AMENDMENT.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WHO YIELDS TIME?
           
           

           MR. HATCH: MR. PRESIDENT, HOW MUCH TIME DOES THE SENATOR FROM
           UTAH HAVE?
           
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR HAS 2 MINUTES AND 52 SECONDS
           REMAINING.
           

           MR. HATCH: MR. PRESIDENT, I THINK THE DISTINGUISHED SENATOR
           FROM OREGON MADE MY CASE. I DECRY WHAT HAPPENED IN THE MATTHEW
           SHEPHERD CASE. I DECRY WHAT HAPPENED IN THE JAMES BYRD CASE.
           AND BOTH OF THEM WERE PROSECUTED BY STATE AND LOCAL
           PROSECUTORS. BYRD TO THE EXTENT THAT THE BYRD -- THE BYRD
           DEFENDANTS TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY HAVE BEEN CONDEMNED TO DEATH
           BECAUSE OF THEIR ACTIONS DONE BY A LOCAL AND STATE PROSECUTOR
           IN A STATE THAT'S OFTEN BEEN MALIGNED FOR NOT BEING FAIR. I

           THINK UNJUSTLY MALIGNED IN MANY WAYS. WITH REGARD TO THE
           MATTHEW SHEPHERD CASE, THE DEFENDANTS IN THAT CASE WERE GIVEN
           LIFE IMPRISONMENT BY STATE AND LOCAL PROSECUTORS. IN ALMOST
           EVERY CASE THEY BRING UP, IT'S BEEN DONE BY STATE AND LOCAL
           PROSECUTORS. THAT'S WHY, MR. PRESIDENT, MY AMENDMENT IS
           STRONGLY SUPPORTED BY THE NATIONAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S
           ASSOCIATION, THE MAJOR ORGANIZATION THAT REPRESENTS STATE AND
           LOCAL PROSECUTORS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY. THE NATIONAL SCRTICTL
           ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION HAS ENDORSED MY AMENDMENT BECAUSE STATE
           AND LOCAL PROSECUTORS BELIEVE THAT THE ASSISTANCE OFFERED IN MY

           AMENDMENT WILL BE VERY HELPFUL TO THEM AS THEY SEEK TO FIGHT
           HATE-MOTIVATED CRIME. AND LIKE I SAY, IF WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH
           MONEY IN THERE, I'M VERY OPEN TO PUTTING MORE IN. IN A LETTER
           OF SUPPORT, THE NATIONAL DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION ALSO
           STATES THAT IT STRONGLY ENDORSES MY AMENDMENT BECAUSE MY
           AMENDMENT -- QUOTE -- "APPROPRIATELY RECOGNIZES THAT LOCAL LAW
           ENFORCEMENT HAS THE PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY TO SAFEGUARD THEIR
           CITIZENS WHILE WORKING AS A TEAM WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT."
           MY PROBLEMS WITH THE KENNEDY AMENDMENT ARE, NUMBER ONE,

           CONSTITUTIONAL ONES. A CASE JUST DECIDED, THE MORRISON CASE,
           JUST A MONTH AGO I THINK RULES THE KENNEDY AMENDMENT
           UNCONSTITUTIONAL. AND NUMBER TWO, IT IS SO BROAD THAT IT
           FEDERALIZES ALL HATE CRIMES. AND BECAUSE IT INCLUDES GENDER IN
           THERE, WHICH IS INCLUDED IN ALMOST ALL STATE LAWS, THE PROBLEM
           IS IT WOULD FEDERALIZE ALL RAPE CASES. CAN YOU IMAGINE WHAT
           WOULD HAPPEN IF OUR FEDERAL COURTS ARE CLOGGED WITH ALL THE
           RAPE CASENESS THIS COUNTRY THAT ARE CURRENTLY BEING HANDLED
           VERY WELL BY THE STATE AND LOCAL PROSECUTORS?

           THAT'S WHY THE NATIONAL DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION IS
           SUPPORTIVE, VERY STRONGLY SUPPORTIVE OF WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO
           HERE TODAY. NOW THERE ARE OTHER REASONS WHY I OPPOSE THE
           KENNEDY AMENDMENT IN THIS MATTER, BUT I DO COMMEND HIM AND
           THOSE WHO ARE SUPPORTING HIS AMENDMENT IN THE SENSE THAT ALL OF
           US SHOULD BE AGAINST THIS TYPE OF TYRANNY, THIS TYPE OF
           CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, THIS TYPE OF MEAN, VENAL, VILE AP PROFRPSE
           TO OUR SOCIETY. BUT NOBODY SHOULD MAKE THE MISTAKE OF NOT
           UNDERSTANDING THAT I DON'T THINK THE CASE HAS BEEN MADE WITH --

           CERTAINLY NOT WITHOUT A
{END: 2000/06/20 TIME: 16-00 , Tue.  106TH SENATE, SECOND SESSION}