Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, the CR's proposal before us proposes to cut $190 million from juvenile justice programs. That cut is shortsighted and misguided. Cutting effective crime prevention programs is penny wise and pound foolish because we have reams of research and demonstration programs to show that evidence-based crime prevention programs save a lot of money in avoided law enforcement, victim, incarceration, and other expenditures and actually save more than the programs cost.

The current Justice Department is making excellent progress in assuring that crime prevention programs and funding are only used for those programs that have proven their effectiveness through vigorous evaluation and study and programs that have shown their effectiveness. I can see that cutting unproven programs as a result of earmarks that haven't gone through that vigorous demonstration would be appropriate, but the programs in the Justice Department should not be cut.

Mr. Chairman, there are a lot of organizations that have written in opposition of the cuts in the juvenile justice programs. They include the National Disability Rights Network, the Campaign for Youth Justice, the Children's Law Center, the National Council for Community Behavioral Healthcare, The Afterschool Alliance, the Campaign for Fair Sentencing of Youth, and the Coalition for Juvenile Justice.

Mr. Chairman, last month we passed a tax bill that increased the deficit by $400 billion a year for 2 years. Now, we obviously need to cut the budget to pay for those tax cuts, but cutting funding for juvenile justice programs that are proven to save more money than they cost is not the right thing to do. We need to defeat this bill and come back with a bill that fully funds the juvenile justice programs so that we can save money and reduce crime.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Tennessee for offering the amendment and the gentleman from California for his remarks.

Legal Services Corporation programs are forced to already reject over half the cases that come before them. This cut found in the CR only makes matters worse by requiring the firing of hundreds of Legal Services Corporation attorneys.

Mr. Chairman, our justice system promises fairness to all litigants; but when people are unable to afford a lawyer, they are vulnerable to being ripped off in consumer transactions, vulnerable to unnecessary evictions, or unable to afford a divorce or resolve child custody disputes.

Mr. Chairman, we need to make sure that justice is more than just an idea. One Supreme Court Justice suggested that the kind of justice one gets should not depend on the amount of money they have. Two months ago, we passed a tax cut that gave significant tax relief to multimillionaires. It would be tragic if Legal Services Corporation funding for legal aid lawyers was cut to help pay for those tax cuts to multimillionaires.

Mr. Chairman, the Legal Services Corporation needs to be fully funded. We should defeat this CR and come up with a continuing resolution that fully funds the Legal Services Corporation. Again, I thank the gentleman from Tennessee and the gentleman from California.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source