The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“POLICE, FIRE, AND EMERGENCY OFFICERS EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1998” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H10459-H10461 on Oct. 10, 1998.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
POLICE, FIRE, AND EMERGENCY OFFICERS EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1998
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 3046) to provide financial assistance for higher education to the dependents of Federal, State, and local public safety officers who are killed or permanently and totally disabled as the result of a traumatic injury sustained in the line of duty, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 3046
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Police, Fire, and Emergency Officers Educational Assistance Act of 1998''.
SEC. 2. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR HIGHER EDUCATION TO
DEPENDENTS OF PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS KILLED OR
PERMANENTLY AND TOTALLY DISABLED IN THE LINE OF
DUTY.
Part L of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796 et seq.) is amended--
(1) in the heading for subpart 2, by striking ``Civilian Federal Law Enforcement'' and inserting ``Public Safety'';
(2) in section 1211(1), by striking ``civilian Federal law enforcement'' and inserting ``public safety'';
(3) in section 1212(a)--
(A) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ``Federal law enforcement'' and inserting ``public safety'';
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``Financial'' and inserting the following: ``Except as provided in paragraph
(3), financial''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) The financial assistance referred to in paragraph (2) shall be reduced by the sum of--
``(A) the amount of educational assistance benefits from other Federal, State, or local governmental sources to which the eligible dependent would otherwise be entitled to receive; and
``(B) the amount, if any, determined under section 1214(b).'';
(4) in section 1214--
(A) by inserting ``(a) In General.--'' before ``The''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(b) Sliding Scale.--Notwithstanding section 1213(b), the Attorney General shall issue regulations regarding the use of a sliding scale based on financial need to ensure that an eligible dependent who is in financial need receives priority in receiving funds under this subpart.'';
(5) in section 1216(a), by inserting ``and each dependent of a public safety officer killed in the line of duty on or after October 1, 1997,'' after ``1992,''; and
(6) in section 1217--
(A) by striking paragraph (2); and
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs
(2) and (3), respectively.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble) and the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble).
General Leave
Mr. COBLE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from North Carolina?
There was no objection.
Mr. COBLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, as we were all so painfully reminded this past July, law enforcement officers are at risk for serious injury or loss of life every time they don their uniform.
The United States Capitol serves as an international symbol for peace and justice, and yet on July 24 this year a violent and angry gunman shattered that image and took the lives of two heroic and dedicated police officers. It is a national tragedy, but the sacrifices made by Officers Gibson and Chestnut were not the first and will not be the last.
Even as we work to further secure the lives of our law enforcement officers, we can and must seek out new ways in which to express our gratitude. This legislation provides such an opportunity. Nationwide, police departments offer emotional, spiritual and financial support to spouses and children of deceased officers.
The Federal Government, too, offers several benefits and assistance programs. For example, the program we are amending today as a result of a bill we passed in the last Congress provides educational assistance to dependents of Federal officers who are permanently disabled or killed in the line of duty.
H.R. 3046, the Police, Fire and Emergency Officers Act of 1998, extends the Federal educational assistance benefits to dependents of State and local law enforcement officers killed or permanently injured in the line of duty. Thankfully, there is a small number of persons who are eligible under the program at the Federal law enforcement level.
The Bureau of Justice Assistance, within the Department of Justice, anticipates that additional funding for other public safety officers' dependents should not pose any new financial changes.
Specifically, the costs to Federal law enforcement dependents assistance program are estimated to be $515,000 in 1998, including the estimated number of new survivors. That number includes, Madam Speaker,
$182,000 for 30 Federal survivors, plus $333,000 for an estimated 55 new survivors under the extension this legislation proposes.
Madam Speaker, this legislation can have an enormous impact on the quality of life for a child whose mother or father may have died while in service to the public. The Congress should pass this legislation as an expression of thanks to those public safety officers who have given their lives for the good of our citizenry.
{time} 1700
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3046, the Federal Law Enforcement Dependents Assistance program, an important change in Federal law that we should all be focused on today and proud to see enacted into law.
I know that the ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fox), the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie) and other Members who are cosponsors originally of this matter stand proud for its coming forward today.
This legislation, spearheaded by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), my colleague, of the Subcommittee on Crime, would amend the law to extend Federal educational assistance benefits to dependents of State and local law enforcement officials killed in the line of duty.
We can all hope that the number of eligible beneficiaries of this change will, one day, be zero. But sadly, that will probably not be the case. It is the least that we can do to say to law enforcement officers, Federal and State who give their lives in the line of duty, that we will help take care of their children.
This legislation comes too late for a police officer friend of mine named Reuben in Miami, Florida, who will be buried on tomorrow. His children, Rashedra, Jeanette and Shelton, would be beneficiaries that if this law were retroactive it would benefit. I stand to memorialize it in his name and the name of all officers that have died in the line of duty who have preceded this particular legislation.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation and enact it into law today.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COBLE. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fox).
Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his leadership in this regard and in all public safety matters, as well as the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) for his assistance in this regard, and our subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), for bringing us to this point.
I also want to make strong mention that on the Democratic side of the aisle, the person who has led the leadership on this bill is the gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie). We thank him for his efforts in bringing this bill forward and making sure that it becomes a reality.
As well, on this side of the aisle, the gentlewoman from New York
(Mrs. Kelly) has been steadfast in making sure that we brought this bill to this point.
Also, in our efforts to bring it to reality, we have to thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) and the gentleman from Minnesota
(Mr. Ramstad), who chair the Law Enforcement Caucus, and who, working together with the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Weldon), helped to see its passage.
H.R. 3046, the Police, Fire and Emergency Officers Educational Assistance Act, expands that bill of the Former Federal Legislation Officers Assistance to one that will take care of State officials as well.
As my colleagues know, the Degan Act, named for U.S. Deputy Marshal Bill Degan who died in the Ruby Ridge shoot-out in 1992, was legislation to bring about Federal assistance to the heirs and to the survivors and children of Federal law enforcement officials.
Well, this Degan Act has been established within the Department of Justice to provide educational assistance to the dependents of Federal law enforcement officials killed or injured in the line of duty. I was proud to work for the enactment of this legislation in the waning days of the 104th Congress, which at that time, for my local circumstance, Madam Speaker, recalls the importance of the FBI's Special Agent Charles Reed from my district, who was the first Philadelphia-area FBI officer ever killed; and it was inspirational for me to have that Federal law originally passed to commemorate his outstanding work.
But this bill is both the local level and State level. As a former Assistant DA, I know that police officers and firefighters lay their lives down on a daily basis, and sadly, too often, many of them have passed on, but at least their families should know that they have the educational assistance which is so necessary.
In Charles Reed's situation, he was the 46th agent that died in the line of duty, and he leaves behind his wife, Susan and three sons, Joshua, 21, Todd, 18, and Kelley, 17.
The Department of Justice supports this bill and they currently have the administrative mechanisms in place to expand it and to make sure that it provides on the State level the same educational benefits we have given to Federal officers.
I want to thank, besides Senator Specter who introduced the companion bill, Paul McNolty from the Committee on the Judiciary staff and Brian Tynan from my own staff as legislative director.
I strongly believe that this bill is the least we can do to support the families of law enforcement and emergency officers that made the highest sacrifice on our behalf. I believe this is a logical extension to place this benefit on the State level as well as the Federal level.
So I urge my colleagues, Madam Speaker, to reach out to the families of our fallen public safety officers, firefighters and police and pass this important legislation.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from Hawaii (Mr. Abercrombie), one of the hardest-working Members of the United States House of Representatives.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Madam Speaker, first, may I express my gratitude to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fox) for his leadership. I think it is probably commonplace, Madam Speaker, that we extend gratitude to one another on the floor and, on occasion, it may seem to be almost perfunctory in nature. But as has been indicated by all of the speakers to this point on this bill that we are dealing here with issues of life and death. We are dealing with the most profound emotions, we are dealing with points of finality that go beyond philosophy, rhetoric or ideology.
In that context and speaking as one who has been an officer of the court in my past professional life as a probation officer, having seen daily what police officers and what firefighters go through in terms of the anxiety brought to themselves and to their families, with the sure knowledge each time that they go from their homes and families that they face instances and circumstances, contexts and situations which may require of them literally the ultimate sacrifice of their life.
Knowing that that is the milieu within which they conduct themselves, we find ourselves, I think, often supposedly dealing with ultimate things, if you will, and very heavy and profound matters at hand, but none of us can place ourselves in that position, except possibly only intellectually, until we recognize that this is something that is faced every day, every hour that someone is on the job.
Madam Speaker, this bill, which was put forward by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fox) and with the very able assistance of the gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum), who has also been acknowledged by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fox), as being crucial to getting us to this point. This bill expands the Federal Law Enforcement Dependent Assistance program to public safety officers. As has been indicated, it was established in 1996, and there are now, as the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble) indicated, some 30 individuals under the Federal law which are now benefiting.
It is an interesting word also, ``benefiting.'' This is a benefit that is hardly sought by any of these individuals or these families, and they all wish most deeply that they were not the recipients of what otherwise is seen as a solicitous term, ``beneficiary.''
There are some 55 others now, because we are extending this to the State and local level. We have talked often on this floor over the past several years about trying to extend the opportunity to the local level of decision-making. But as the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fox) indicated to me when we first began to talk about it, not every jurisdiction has the financial means to enable them to see to the education of the children of those who may have fallen in the line of duty.
What we are trying to do here is kind of equalize, if you will, the opportunity for us to show the gratitude that we all feel towards those who have put their lives literally on the line for us. This bill then provides a means to meet this vital need.
In effect, what happens is that it provides educational assistance to the survivors of Federal law, that is to say the Federal law as it now exists is extended to provide assistance to the children of those killed or permanently and totally disabled in the line of duty. It was created to help these dependents of those killed in the line of duty or disabled to afford higher education, and it is, in fact, administered by the Bureau of Justice Assistance within the Department of Justice.
We have worked very, very hard to see to it that this does not place any financial burden, as such, or more than has already existed to this point.
In Hawaii, we have had only three police officers killed in the line of duty since 1991. We are fortunate that not more law enforcement officers and others have been killed to this time. Other jurisdictions have not been so lucky.
So then, Madam Speaker, my point is, in expressing my gratitude, that this is not necessarily a noble goal, absent from a funding mechanism. The changes made to the bill enable the program to be properly funded so that children of fallen officers can receive higher education assistance.
We can never compensate the children for the loss of a parent who died in the line of duty. The least we can do is have a program in place to assist them in meeting their educational goals.
I, too, then, in conclusion, would like to thank the staffs, particularly those working with the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fox) in his office, Laura Gerum in my office who has done absolutely superb work on this issue, unstinting in their dedication and focus. We are very, very grateful to those who see us to this point today.
Madam Speaker, it but remains for me to thank all of those who will be voting for this bill. I hope it will be unanimous by this body.
Mr. COBLE. Madam. Speaker, I have no additional requests for time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. KELLY. Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support for H.R. 3046, which provides support to the family members of public safety officers who are killed or disabled in the line of duty.
I would also like to commend Congress Fox for all of his hard work on this critically important issue. This issue is a top priority of mine, and I have worked hard to see that it is addressed by Congress this year.
H.R. 3046 is very similar to H.R. 2088, a bill I sponsored this year that was unanimously approved as part of H.R. 6 to establish a similar system of financial support for these families.
Police officers and firefighters lay their lives on the line on a daily basis, Madam Speaker, and sadly, all too often they make the ultimate sacrifice in the service of their communities.
These are our friends, our neighbors, our loved ones, and they leave behind families who must continue on. The death of a father or mother takes an obvious emotional toll, but it also impacts the financial security of the family, particularly when it comes to meeting educational expenses.
This bill seeks to address this particular problem by authorizing the Department of Justice to offer higher education assistance to the families of State and local public safety officers killed or disabled in the line of duty.
Last Congress, Congress adopted legislation to award education assistance to family members of Federal law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty. I was pleased to support that legislation, which passed both the House and Senate by voice votes.
I am proud to support H.R. 3046, which takes the next logical step and extends this benefit to the families of all public safety officers who are killed while serving their communities.
Our public safety officers deserve our respect, gratitude and support. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this important legislation.
Mr. COBLE. Madam Speaker, I too yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3046, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Mr. COBLE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be discharged from the further consideration of the Senate bill (S. 1525) to provide financial assistance for higher education to the dependents of Federal, State, and local public safety officers who are killed or permanently and totally disabled as the result of a traumatic injury sustained in the line of duty, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the Senate bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from North Carolina?
There was no objection.
The Clerk read the Senate bill, as follows:
S. 1524
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Public Safety Officers Educational Assistance Act of 1998''.
SEC. 2. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR HIGHER EDUCATION TO
DEPENDENTS OF PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS KILLED OR
PERMANENTLY AND TOTALLY DISABLED IN THE LINE OF
DUTY.
Part L of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796 et seq.) is amended--
(1) in the heading for subpart 2, by striking ``Civilian Federal Law Enforcement'' and inserting ``Public Safety'';
(2) in section 1211(1), by striking ``civilian Federal law enforcement'' and inserting ``public safety'';
(3) in section 1212(a)(1)(A), by striking ``Federal law enforcement'' and inserting ``public safety'';
(4) in section 1216(a), by inserting ``and each dependent of a public safety officer killed in the line of duty on or after October 1, 1997,'' after ``1992,''; and
(5) in section 1217--
(A) by striking paragraph (2); and
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (6) as paragraphs
(2) and (3), respectively.
Motion Offered by Mr. Coble
Mr. COBLE. Madam Speaker, I offer a motion.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Coble moves to strike out all after the enacting clause of S. 1525 and insert, in lieu thereof, the provisions of H.R. 3046 as passed by the House.
The motion was agreed to.
The Senate bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
A similar House bill (H.R. 3046) was laid on the table.
____________________
