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.
“CONSULTATION REQUEST” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the Senate section on pages S5795-S5796 on July 18, 2013.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
CONSULTATION REQUEST
Mr. COBURN. Madam President, I ask consent that the following letter be placed in the Congressional Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC, July 18, 2013.Hon. Mitch McConnell,Senate Minority Leader, U.S. Senate,Washington, DC.
Dear Senator McConnell: I request that I be consulted before the Senate enters into any unanimous consent agreements or time limitations regarding S. 162, the Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Act of 2013.
I support the goals of this legislation and believe incarcerated offenders suffering from mental illness should have access to treatment. However, I believe the responsibility to address this issue, as it relates to inmates in state and local prisons and jails, lies with the state and local governments that manage these correctional systems. Furthermore, while I do not believe this issue is the responsibility of the federal government; if Congress does act, we can and must do so in a fiscally responsible manner. My concerns are included in, but not limited to, those outlined in this letter.
While this bill is well-intentioned, it authorizes $40 million per year for five years, costing the American people at least $200 million dollars without corresponding offsets. Furthermore, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has not yet scored the legislation. This bill authorizes new permissible purposes for the existing grant program including, among others, funding for veterans' treatment courts, correctional facility programs, and state and local law enforcement academy training. Expansion of services through additional permissible purposes or new grant programs, however, requires the Department of Justice (DOJ) to carry out additional responsibilities. Thus, even if the legislation may be implemented by existing DOJ staff, it is not free of future administrative expenses or costs the CBO may identify that would result in a score beyond the bill's stated funding authorization.
It is irresponsible for Congress to jeopardize the future standard of living of our children by borrowing from future generations. The U.S. national debt is now over $16.7 trillion. That means almost $53,000 in debt for each man, woman and child in the United States. A year ago, the national debt was $15.9 trillion. Despite pledges to control spending, Washington adds billions to the national debt every single day. In just one year, our national debt has grown by
$800 billion or 5%.
In addition to these fiscal concerns, there are several problems specific to this legislation. First, while I recognize both our federal and state criminal justice systems must accommodate mentally ill offenders, which is a difficult and costly task, it is not the responsibility of the federal government to provide funding to treat this population of offenders within state and local prison systems.
In fact, states face a much larger challenge than the federal government, as they incarcerate the vast majority of inmates in this country. According to the Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), of the 1.59 million total inmate population in 2011, 1.38 million are incarcerated in state facilities compared to 216,362 in the federal system. As a result, states also care for the largest population of mentally ill offenders. The most recent BJS data notes 56 percent of state inmates and 64 percent of jail inmates displayed a mental health problem compared with 45 percent of federal inmates. Furthermore, BJS found only 8.9% of federal inmates displayed both a history and symptoms of mental health problems, while over 17% of state and local inmates experienced those problems. Thus, although states have an awesome responsibility in this area, they also have a great opportunity to lead by way of experience and example. Many have done so by developing and funding their own innovative ideas to enhance programs for and treatment of mentally ill inmates.
In September 2009, the Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Human Rights held a hearing entitled, ``Human Rights at Home: Mental Illness in U.S. Prisons and Jails,'' in which we heard testimony from representatives of two state prison systems and a state court judge who outlined the different challenges faced by their states. These states and others have taken action to address their mentally ill prison populations, but often each tackles the problem with a different approach. For example, from 2003-2007, New York legislators and governors engaged in a battle over reforming the slate's policies on this issue, and in 2007, Oklahoma established a program to provide inmates with serious mental illness a comprehensive plan for release, including access to support services and medication. The program set up two intensive care coordination teams in Oklahoma City and Tulsa to help state inmates close to release obtain access to community mental health centers, among other services.
There is significant diversity within the inmate population both among states and between state and federal prison systems, Oklahoma and New York incarcerate different types of inmates with different mental health needs. Indeed, each addressed the problem with diverse solutions--New York focused on in-prison treatment alternatives, while Oklahoma chose to provide post-incarceration support services. Thus, the one-size-fits-all approach to treating mentally ill state and local inmates outlined in this legislation also fails to address the variety of state needs.
Second, Congress should focus instead on its duty to federal inmates within the DOJ Bureau of Prisons (BOP). Over the last several years, BOP costs have significantly increased such that its budget is poised to surpass the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as the largest percentage of the entire DOJ budget. In its FY 2014 budget submission, the DOJ requested approximately $6.9 billion for the federal BOP, an increase of $295.1 million over FY 2012. As a result, the BOP represents 25 percent of the entire DOJ budget ($27.6 billion), with the FBI barely ahead at $8.44 billion, representing 30.5 percent of the DOJ budget. Congress must live up to its responsibility to conduct oversight and set an example to the states by ensuring the BOP's massive budget appropriately allocates taxpayer dollars for all of its programs, including services for mentally ill offenders who are truly in need of treatment.
However, S. 162 ignores the problems within the federal BOP. The bill funds the Adult and Juvenile Collaboration Program grant for state and local governments to use federal dollars to support treatment and services for state and local inmates who are mentally ill. It also expands this grant program to allow funds to be used for services for veterans treatment courts, training for employees of state and local correctional facilities to respond to incidents involving mentally ill inmates, and support for state and local law enforcement orientation programs, continuing education and academy curricula. By failing to address the challenges faced by mentally ill inmates within the federal BOP, Congress exacerbates its misplaced spending priorities.
Finally, I do not believe the federal government has the authority under the Constitution to provide federal funds to state and local governments to provide services to state and local inmates with mental health problems or provide training to state and local law enforcement officers. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution enumerates the limited powers of Congress, and nowhere are we tasked with funding or becoming involved with state and local corrections issues.
There is no question those who suffer from mental illness should be treated appropriately while incarcerated. However, I believe this issue, as it pertains to state and local inmates, is the responsibility of the states and not the federal government. Despite these Constitutional limitations, if Congress does act in this area, like most American individuals and companies must do with their own resources, we should evaluate current programs, determine any needs that may exist, and prioritize those needs for funding by cutting from the federal budget programs fraught with waste, fraud, abuse, and duplication.
Sincerely,
Tom A. Coburn, M.D.,U.S. Senator.
____________________
