Unanimous Consent Request--H.R. 1652

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, last week, I told the story of a mother who received critical support from an organization called Life Span in Chicago after her daughter was sexually assaulted by the mother's husband. The services provided by Life Span were paid for by the Victims of Crime Act, VOCA.

This week, I want to tell you another story that is even more troubling, but it dramatizes the need for us to act today, this afternoon. I am going to use the name ``Sasha,'' not the real name of the woman involved. She is a mother of three kids, and she was living with a man who was unpredictable and dangerous.

He tried to kill her--not once but three times. He tried strangling her, and the third time, she passed out. When she woke up with the kids nearby, she knew that was it. She couldn't take it anymore. So she went to a hospital. She was scared to death. She heard about a group called Harbor House. Harbor House is basically a domestic violence survivors center.

I would tell my colleagues in the Senate, if you have ever visited a domestic violence survivors center and met with any of the victims, you will never forget it. I swear, you will never forget it. I can remember the first time I met with one of the victims in one of the shelters. She was crying. Her eyes were red, one eye was blackened, and she choked back the tears and told me the story of what she lived through. For some reason--and I am not a psychologist; I can't explain it--she blamed herself. And it happens so often.

What happens to these women who are the victims of domestic violence abuse? Where do they go? Some of them can't find anywhere to go and end up dying as a result of it. What happens to their kids who witness these acts of violence in the home when mom is getting strangled by this man? What happens to them? Well, luckily, we care enough in America to do something about it. Through VOCA and the Crime Victims Fund, we send money to Harbor House and Life Span and other agencies and say: Do your best. Help them put their lives back together again. Protect them.

Well, I want to fast-forward and tell you that 6 months after Sasha's experience, things are much better. She lives safely in an apartment. She still works with adult counselors and youth counselors to get herself and her kids through this, and she knows that she is not alone. These VOCA-funded advocates stepped into her life at just the right moment and saved her life. They may have saved the lives of her children too.

So when we cut back on funding for whatever reason, we are jeopardizing the services that I just described that are so critical.

With decreased VOCA funding--if we do nothing today, with decreased VOCA funding, Harbor House will have to cut its staffers, exactly the types of professionals who helped Sasha and her family.

The executive director said:

If VOCA is cut, imagine being Sasha and having to go through all of that alone.

That is why we have to pass this bill. That is why it is so critical.

As I noted last week, VOCA passed in 1984 to establish the Crime Victims Fund. We can't even count the number of people who have been helped over the years. Three thousand applicants come through my State Attorney General's Office in Illinois, and every State has a similar story to tell of thousands of victims helped by service providers, victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, child abuse, trafficking, and drunk drivers.

And the Crime Victims Fund doesn't receive a dime of taxpayers' dollars. How about that? What I just described for you doesn't come out of the Treasury. It is funded through criminal fines, penalties, forfeited bail bonds, and special assessments collected by the Federal Government.

Historically, most of the money comes from criminal fines, but in recent years, deposits have dropped off significantly. That is why we are here at this moment. They need help, and they need it now.

Monetary penalties from deferred prosecutions and nonprosecution agreements are currently deposited in the Treasury instead of the fund. As a result, the shift has had a devastating impact on the fund. That is why a bipartisan, bicameral group of Members of Congress, working with advocacy organizations, have come up with this VOCA fix. Our bill would stabilize the depleted fund by redirecting monetary penalties from deferred prosecutions and nonprosecution agreements to the victims and service providers who need the help.

The reduced deposits into the fund have already had a devastating impact. Victim assistance grants have been reduced by more than $600 million in this year. And more cuts are coming if we don't do something today.

Like Harbor House, advocates across the State and across the country are begging for help. We don't have any time to waste. Every day that goes by, we miss an opportunity to help replenish the fund and to put these services on the street.

So far this year, the fund has already missed out on a total of nearly $550 million in deposits that could be helping these agencies, and we are not even halfway through the year. That is why it is imperative that we pass this bill. The House already did it in March, 3 months ago--broad bipartisan support. Here in the Senate, we have a broad bipartisan coalition of Senators--36 Democrats and 21 Republicans. We all get it. We are all for crime victims. But we have been stopped because of an objection on the floor.

Let's end this today. Whatever the merits of any budgetary argument, for goodness' sake, lives are at stake here. Unfortunately, this objection about moving forward was made last week, and it probably will be made again today. It involves Senator Toomey's concern about a budgetary issue. It is a complicated issue about something called CHIMPs, for goodness' sake, which he can explain, and I am sure he will.

But after last week's argument on this, I went to the advocates who are telling us that we should send this money as quickly as we can and said: Is he right? Is this designed, without his amendment, so that this money will not go to the people who need it?

They said he is wrong. This is not going to happen.

Here is their statement: ``During floor remarks for the unanimous consent [last week], it was represented the VOCA Fix Act fails to correct certain structural issues that prevent the funds from reaching victims and their advocates. The premise of this statement--that these structural issues impact the distribution of VOCA funds to survivors and advocates--is not accurate.''

This is from the actual agencies themselves.

``While the use of CHIMPS (Changes in Mandatory Programs) as budget offsets continues to be a contentious issue, the claim that Appropriators hoard money rather than releasing it to victim service providers is false.''

Inaccurate and false.

``In reality, Appropriators have substantially decreased the size of the budget offset by releasing far more than the amount required by the proposed substitute, and the proposed substitute intended to restructure the entire appropriations process is incredibly controversial.''

In other words, we are going to dive into the deep end of the pool on budget process, budget rules, and budget regulation while people are literally drowning in violence--victims of domestic abuse.

For goodness' sake, isn't there a better time and place and a better group to hold hostage? It shouldn't be these domestic violence cases.

I yield at this point to the Senator from Rhode Island.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. I thank the Senator from Rhode Island.

1652, which was received from the House and is at the desk; further, that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DURBIN. There is a suggestion that this money for the Crime Victims Fund is being spent for another purpose. You never heard that, did you? It said it could be, maybe it will be, it might be--but it hasn't been.

Listen to what they say, these people in the advocacy groups are jealously watching every penny. They want every dollar, just as you do and I do. And what do they say about your argument?

The premise of your statement that these structural issues impact the distribution of the victims funds to survivors and advocates is not accurate. It goes on to say that the claim that appropriators hoard the money rather than releasing it to victims services is false. This is from the very agencies receiving the money.

Are they in on the deal, Senator?

I don't think so. They are desperate for these funds, and without them, they are going to have a serious cutback in services.

The proposed substitute intended to restructure the entire appropriations process is incredibly controversial, and you know it and I know it as a member of the Appropriations Committee. Yet you are tangling up this relief for the victims of crime, victims of domestic abuse, women who are seeking shelter and hospital care and trying to care for their children and what they are going through. You want to hold back on the possibility--the possibility--that somebody is going to spend this on something else, even though you have no proof that it has been done--none.

And the people who are the advocates for these groups are saying to you: What you are saying is inaccurate and false.

And you won't give it up.

I would suggest: Pick another target. Find some other group to make your budget point of order. Please don't take this out on these people who are in the most desperate situations in their life. This is not the time and place to raise this budget debate. I seriously hope that you will think about them for a moment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source