I think with that we will stand in recess until 2:30.

(Whereupon, at 12:30 p.m., the subcommittee recessed, to reconvene at 2:30 p.m. the same day.)

AFTERNOON SESSION

Chairman CELLER. The committee will come to order.

Our first witness this afternoon is the Honorable Don Edwards, a member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

TESTIMONY OF THE HON. DON EDWARDS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Mr. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I wish to thank you and my fellow members of the House Judiciary Committee for the opportunity to submit this statement on my views of the pending "Safe Streets and Crime Control Act of 1967" before this committee.

I have introduced H.R. 6250 to cosponsor our honorable chairman's bill, H.R. 5037, on this important matter which affects every citizen of our country. Simply stated, H.R. 6250 would provide the assistance desperately needed by State and local governments to reduce the incidence of crime by increasing the effectiveness, fairness, and coordination of law enforcement and criminal justice systems at all levels of government. The new program would essentially apply updated personnel training, modern equipment, and innovative anticrime techniques to a national problem of mounting proportions.

My bill is in direct response to the recent findings of the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice outlined in an 18-month study of crime in the United States entitled "The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society." The Commission, established by President Johnson to undertake the first comprehensive Federal survey of crime since the Wickersham Commission report in 1931, pointed out that law enforcement agencies fail to make use of the new techniques and equipment and to utilize systems analysis, data processing, modern scientific analysis, and new training procedures. The study found that present State and local efforts against organized crime were "nonexistent or primitive" and even more critically than criminal justice procedures generally had failed to protect society from further violations by the same offenders. In addition, as many of us have known for too long a time, the report found that the roots of crime may be traced most often to poverty:

crime flourishes where the conditions of life are the worst, and that therefore the foundation of a national strategy against crime is an unremitting national effort for social justice.

While the Commission made some 200 specific recommendations to cope with all aspects of crime, I would like to focus on the provisions of my bill, H.R. 6250, which would propose an initial $50 million for fiscal year 1968. This first step would provide: (a) 90 percent of the cost of developing plans to improve police, courts, and correctional systems to States, cities, regional, and metropolitan bodies; (b) 60 percent of the cost of supporting approved programs, provided the State or local government increased its anticrime spending by 5 percent at least, had sole or combined jurisdiction over more than 50,000 persons,

used no more than one-third of the Federal funds for salaries for persons not in the approved program and had a program coordinating all law enforcement agencies; (c) 50 percent of the cost of construction of new types of facilities, such as crime laboratories, community correction centers and police academies; and (d) 100 percent of the cost of contracts with public agencies, institutions of higher learning or other organizations for national or regional research and education projects and for the establishment of institutes to carry out such research.

In order to more effectively implement H.R. 6250 ("Safe Streets and Crime Control Act of 1967") I have introduced H.R. 6249 which would cosponsor with the Honorable James H. Scheuer of New York his bill (H.R. 5652) to establish a National Institute of Criminal Justice in the Department of Justice for the purpose of assisting State and local law enforcement agencies, courts, and correctional institutions in the prevention and control of crime, the administration of justice, and the rehabilitation of offenders. This Institute would provide for the Justice Department a research arm comparable to the National Institutes of Health. The assistance would be given in the form of support and coordination of research activities in the area of crime prevention and control, specifically: (a) research which would involve the selection of police personnel; (b) discovery of better methods for training police and correctional personnel; (c) research to encourage the development of police equipment in tune with our 20thcentury technological capabilities; and (d) to conduct basic behavioral research on the more effective involvement of the public at large in public safety programs. I feel strongly that such an Institute is necessary to fully implement the basic and vital research which is recommended in H.R. 5037 and H.R. 6250 but not specifically earmarked for basic research, as such. The Federal Government is spending 180 times as much on research in the health area (NIH research budget) and 18 and 19 times as much, respectively, on agricultural and interior research as on crime research in the present Justice Department budget. We must update and expand our research efforts through a National Institute of Criminal Justice which would provide the basic research tools, the funds, and the expertise to improve the work of those involved in reducing crime.

I strongly urge favorable action by this committee on both the Safe Streets and Crime Control Act and the National Institute of Criminal Justice.

Chairman CELLER. Thank you, Mr. Edwards. Our next witness is my good friend and colleague, the Honorable Edna Kelly; she is also a member of the New York State delegation.

STATEMENT OF THE HON. EDNA F. KELLY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN ATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Mrs. KELLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of this committee, for granting me the opportunity to appear before the Committee on the Judiciary in regard to one of the most important. problems of our time-the control of crime.

It is indeed a sad commentary on our times when we find the need to enact legislation "to assist State and local governments in reducing the incidence of crime, to increase the effectiveness, fairness, and co

ordination of law enforcement and criminal justice systems at all levels of government." I call it a sad day because, with the many advances in our way of life, we at the same time have found an everincreasing rate in crime. Therefore, it would seem that we have lost something along the road to progress. Where does the fault lie? Perhaps the greatest factor causing this increase in crime is the breakdown of family life. This is reflected by the high percentage of marital failures; illegitimacy; and the lack of parental example, discipline, and authority. This leads to a lack of respect for law and order. To the greatest extent, these causes can only be cured in the home, in our schools, in our place of worship, and by public programs. What must we, as individuals and representatives of our various communities, do to correct this situation? This and many other questions come to mind and must be answered if our people can again walk the streets of this country at any time of night or day without constant fear.

I am not a member of the legal profession and, therefore, I desire to leave some of the more technical aspects of this type of legislation to the honorable members of this committee. However, I would feel remiss in my duty if I did not appear at the hearings in order to express my opinion and my views on this issue as the representative of over 650,000 people in Brooklyn, N.Y.

I believe the prevention, regulation, and control of crime is and should be a local problem and thus remain under the control of the local authorities. However, now that crime has become a nationwide problem, it is up to us in Congress to meet the issue head on. Mr. Chairman, in an article in a weekly magazine, crime was referred to as a "national disgrace." This same article also stated, and I quote, "There is a growing tendency to believe that the Government cannot or will not protect the average citizen." I refute the latter statement, Mr. Chairman. I have introduced a bill identical to yours to prove, if proof is necessary, that we as legislators desire to meet and find a solution to the swiftly expanding problem of crime.

Mr. Chairman, at this point, I want to pay tribute to "New York City's Finest"-the police force of the city of New York and the police commissioner, Howard R. Leary. Recently, Commissioner Leary called for a complete review of the criminal laws and for longer prison sentences for violent crimes. He claimed this action was necessary to reduce crime in New York and other cities. He further stated, and I quote, "If the public wants to stop crime, they must have the laws changed to safeguard the community. The legislative bodies could increase the penalties for burglary, felonious assault, robberies, sex offenses, and other violent crimes. Instead of restricting law enforcement, the laws should restrict criminal activity. We don't think the criminal element is very fearful of the present penalities."

Mr. Chairman, if this is the problem, let us fearlessly give the tools to those who protect us. While I do not advocate the abuse of the civil rights of criminal defendants, there must be a balancing of the rights of those accused of crimes against the right of our society to be protected.

I believe the President has borne his responsibilities in this field, Mr. Chairman. He requested a 19-man Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice to study the problem of U.S. crime. This Commission, after 18 months of review, rendered a report

entitled "The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society." This report recommended reforms in police departments, the courts, and the prison and parole system, where they discovered dangerous deficiencies. I believe we, as legislators, should meet these recommendations. However, I wish to go one step further and state that crime control will occur only if and when the average citizen really cares enough about the matter to do something about it, and I hope that we will have the support and cooperation of individuals and community groups in our efforts to combat crime.

Superior law enforcement is not simply a matter of a police officer walking his beat. Every community has unique problems in coping with criminal activities. To do their job properly the communities must operate in a systematic and coordinated faction. The courts and police must know each other's problems. The social services and correctional institutions must work together to help convicted persons when their sentences are completed. Only overall planning can accomplish these ends. To assist in this area, title I of my bill, H.R. 7214, and similar proposals, would provide Federal grants of up to 90 percent to State and local governments to help them in preparing and adopting plans for improved law enforcement.

In this era of science and technology, law enforcement methods become more sophisticated each day. Communications become faster. Police officers must learn to operate new and complicated equipment. Unfortunately, however, many law enforcement agencies have not or cannot avail themselves of the technology that is available. To help furnish State and local police agencies with the tools they need, my bill would provide Federal grants of up to 60 percent of the cost to State and local governments for the development, use, and demonstration of improved methods and equipment designed to increase safety from crime.

Lastly, to provide us with a better insight of the causes of crime and possible prevention measures, my bill would extend grants to institutions of higher education to conduct research in these areas. I view this area as one of extreme importance for, until we better understand the motivations for certain of the crimes which are committed in such great numbers, we cannot develop efficient preventative

measures.

The provisions of this bill are sufficiently important to warrant competent and intelligent implementation. I have, therefore, provided for the appointment of a Director of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Assistance in the Department of Justice. To insure the selection of an individual of proper stature and background for this post the bill calls for his appointment to be confirmed by the other body.

I trust that the provisions as contained in H.R. 7214 will be reported from this committee and acted upon favorably by the 90th Congress. It is also my hope that the Committee on the Judiciary will favorably report the additional recommendations which I and other Members have introduced concerning the problems of criminal justice, crime prevention, and control. I intend to have more to say on the general subject of crime and its prevention during the course of the 90th Congress.

Chairman CELLER. Thank you, Mrs. Kelly.

We will now hear from the Honorable Herbert Tenzer. Mr. Tenzer is a member of the full committee, and I am sure the subcommittee will benefit greatly from his views. Please continue in your own manner, Mr. Tenzer.

STATEMENT OF HONORABLE HERBERT TENZER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Mr. TENzER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this opportunity to testify in support of the proposed Safe Streets and Crime Control Act of 1967, which I have sponsored (H.R. 5354). As a member of the Judiciary Committee, I want to express my support for this legislation which is a natural extension of the Law Enforcement Assistance Act of 1965. The Law Enforcement Assistance Act approved by this committee has been one of the more successful programs to implement the theory of creative federalism. Federal funds have been made available for demonstration programs drafted and administered at the local level. The one drawback to that program has been the inadequacy of funds. The Safe Streets and Crime Control Act of 1967 will provide the needed Federal resources to the States and local communities and encourage expansion of programs in crime prevention and control research and development, demonstration programs and training, education, and recruitment of law enforcement officers.

The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice has done an outstanding job and its report points the way to a comprehensive, long-range program to unify Federal, State, and local efforts to combat crime.

Like many problems facing our Nation, the problem of crime will not be solved overnight. As the President stated in his message to the Congress on crime:

Nevertheless, there are important steps we can take now to affect the incidence of crime and its contamination of our democracy. I have tried to describe several in this message.

Certain of these steps could, if resolutely undertaken by local and national officials, be in effect a year from today.

Other steps, put into effect now, could reduce the costs of crime over the next several years. These involve more than the condemnation of crime, more than spasmodic responses to sensational disclosures. They involve hard work and an unswerving commitment by all levels of government to an intensified, longterm program of action.

Mr. Chairman, the need for approval of the legislation before this committee is best evidenced by the statistics contained in the report of the National Crime Commission. Those statistics are alarming and they spell out a forecast of increased crime which we in the Congress must act to combat as quickly as possible.

The cost of the program submitted by the administration is quite small when compared with the National Crime Commission's estimate of the cost of crime to the economy of our Nation-property losses alone estimated at nearly $3 billion annually.

New and accelerated efforts to improve crime prevention techniques are more urgent when viewed in light of the Commission finding that the incidence of crime is highest in the 15-to-21 age group.

Modern techniques in rehabilitation become of primary concern when we analyze the Commission statistics showing that the majority of