development of all of our people. I think this offers as much hope as the other suggested technique of wiping out records. Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I guess some States have tried automatic clemency for certain thefts. I believe I am right on that. I believe Mr. Bunn would known whether that is true. Attorney General CLARK. Clemency of what nature? Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Well, if they have a conviction for joy riding or for auto car theft that they do have an opportunity for clemency for juvenile offenders. I believe that that is correct. I stand to be corrected, but I believe that that is so. I was just wondering if there has been any kind of a study as to what has happened to these people that have received clemency, whether their possibility for jobs has increased or whether there is a higher percentage of them now working than those that have not received clemency. Perhaps this would be worthwhile finding out about. Attorney General CLARK. I am not sure about the statute to which you refer. There are a number of areas where a special effort to restrict dissemination of information about arrests and conviction of juveniles has been made. It is quite possible that a study of employment records of those youths as compared to some other jurisdictions where an employer can call the police department and get a list of arrests would be illuminating. I am not sure. Clemency in itself is hard to evaluate. I think many individual judges, even where there is no statutory provision in effect, provide some clemency, leniency, or light punishment for first offenders and for offenses that do not involve moral turpitude or culpability. Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I believe that one or two States have special provisions for first offenders, so that if they maintain good behavior for a certain period of time, their record is erased. Attorney General CLARK. As to car theft? First offense car theft only? Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. I believe it is only certain classes of crime. I am not sure that it is restricted just to auto theft, but it is a certain sort of crime. Attorney General CLARK. The California Youth Authority, through the 1950's and 1960's, has been providing great leadership in the correctional rehabilitation field for the country. Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Just in a final area to cover, Mr. Attorney General, I think you have made a very telling case for this legislation. I think perhaps a case could be made for the expansion of this kind of program. But when you talk about the question of four out of five felons who have committed some other kind of misdemeanors previously, I think really we are deeply interested and distressed by the whole problem presented by crime in America. But we wonder whether this kind of attempt, even a modest attempt with $25 million which does not include buildings and does not include the kinds of training programs which are provided for under other provisions but which are very modestly financed, whether we are really coming to grips with the job, whether there exists within the administration some kind of a centralized authority or person who is attempting to really give this whole question the kind of priority that I think you have commented on this morning. And to what extent is there interagency coordination and cooperation, and is this whole problem really being given the kinds of priorities which I think I know you believe it deserves. These are the issues which the Crime Commission report raises and, which I think many of us are deeply concerned about. I would be interested in whether you feel that responsibility is fragmented, whether the responsibility for the development of the kinds of comprehensive programs needed in meeting the problems of delinquency, are fragmented. Attorney General CLARK. Life doesn't fit into tidy compartments, particularly in a complex time like ours. I feel that it is essential that an agency such as HEW, and I believe it would be the best suited in Government, take the lead in the preventive area. I think this is the avenue to the most effective prevention. I think we want the resources of our educational experience, the resources of our health and welfare experience, and the resources of our Children's Bureau brought to bear on the prevention side. Prevention is as broad as society. It goes to all of the elements of our environment that create character and can lead people away from lives of crime. When you come to the transgressor, to the person who has offended, who has committed a crime against society, you necessarily change over to the hope for rehabilitation. Here is a person who has shown the capability for criminal conduct, and a more intensive use of different sciences must be brought to bear. And while he needs the impetus and the impact of the preventive experience and background, he needs the law-enforcement disciplines to a greater degree. Therefore, I think the division in the bill, which was made after a study of hours and hours and weeks and weeks, was wisely made and based upon our combined experiences. I think the best approach is to vest in the Secretary of HEW the authority in the preventive and other areas, except for rehabilitation, with only the advice of the Attorney General and other agencies. When it comes to rehabilitation, dealing with the person who has become delinquent, more is needed. I think the concurrence of the Attorney General in this area is important. I think this would be as good a governmentally structured program as can be made to accommodate the variances and diversities that nature puts into the problem. You asked also about the dimensions of the investment. I would only say that, obviously, the bill would just be a beginning, and of course, we are virtually one-fourth of the way through this fiscal year. It is awfully important to begin soundly, to begin in a way that you know you can grow with strength and with a sense of direction. It would certainly be the intention of the administration that this program would be widely expanded as it builds its potential Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Perhaps just one final question, and that is whether youth are becoming involved in organized crime. Is there any kind of a relationship here? Would you care to comment on that? Attorney General CLARK. We have no evidence that youth are being made either the victims of, or brought in as accomplices or actors in, organized crime to a greater degree than heretofore. Youth are frequently the victims of organized crime, as are the poor and the underprivileged; but we have no evidence of any change in the general proportion of youth involvement in the total organized crime problem. Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. What is their general proportion now? Can you give us some idea as to that? Attorney General CLARK. I don't know that you can make a generalization. But the chief source of income for organized crime, at least during its building years before it goes semilegitimate, so to speak, has been gambling. Gambling generally does not involve as high a proportion of youth as some other areas of organized crime. As to gambling itself, I think youth involvement is a fairly small proportion, smaller than the proportion of people who are victims of organized crime. In the area of narcotics, and other related areas, we have to be very much concerned that their use does not spread to our youth who may be more vulnerable, and as to whom protection is of critical importance to society. However, we have no indication that there is any great effort or push to involve more youth, as distinguished from older people. Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Thank you very much, Mr. Attorney General. I appreciate your appearance here and your comments in these other areas as well. You have been very helpful to all of us. I want to thank you. As I understand from earlier questions of Senator Clark, the Department will submit at least opinions about the changes that were made in the House bill. Attorney General CLARK. Yes. My understanding was that we would make an itemized list of the changes and our comments on each. (The material requested and subsequently supplied for the record follows:) Hon. JOSEPH S. CLARK, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Chairman, Subcommittee on Employment, Manpower and Poverty, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR CLARK: On September 26, 1967 I testified before the Senate Subcommittee on Employment, Manpower and Poverty concerning the proposed Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Act of 1967 (S. 1248). During the course of the testimony I was asked to furnish to the subcommittee my views on the changes made by the House Committee in the Administration draft of the Act and also for my views on the amendment to S. 1248 proposed by Senator Dodd. The requested information is forwarded herewith. Since, after my appearance before your subcommittee, the House of Representatives passed the measure with substantial floor amendments, I am also including comments concerning the legislation as approved by the House of Representatives. HOUSE COMMITTEE VERSION OF H.R. 12120 Regarding the provisions of H.R. 12120 as reported by the House Committee on Education and Labor (H.R. Report No. 647), there are several matters which cause me concern. 1. Planning. The House Committee deleted the provisions which would have authorized grants for preparing plans. I feel that careful and detailed planning is the key to a successful program and that such planning cannot be assured if its financial support must come from varied and sundry sources. I strongly recommend that the planning provisions in the Administration's proposal be adopted. 2. Training. The House Committee added specific provisions concerning training as a separate title of the bill. I certainly concur in the importance of training more personnel to deal with the problems of juvenile delinquency and youth offenses. As I stated before your subcommittee, training is a vital factor in attaining improvements throughout the criminal justice field. It is understood, however, that the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare presently has available provisions for training, which, coupled with the training contemplated under the Safe Streets and Crime Control Act, should be adequate. I defer to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare on this question. 3. One year authorization.-The requirement in the measure reported by the House Committee that further authorization be obtained for funds beyond the current fiscal year presents a definite hardship. A one-year authorization is a discouraging limitation which would severely handicap the thrust and direction of the program. 4. Youth Participation. The House Committee left out the provision for participation of youths in the development of preventive services. I feel that youths are vitally aware of their problems and can contribute materially in the development of appropriate and effective programs. 5. Federal share for rehabilitative services.-The House Committee raised the federal grant for rehabilitative services from 60 percent of the cost to 75 percent. The 60 percent federal share for rehabilitation services was intended to parallel the formula for action programs under the Crime Control Act. Since the two authorities tend to join or overlap, it seems appropriate for the funding provisions to be similar. The preventive services under H.R. 12120 more nearly parallel other programs wherein the federal share is 75 percent and thus 75 percent federal funding there is consistent. 6. Involvement of State and Local Government.-The House Committee added a provision whereunder proposed projects or programs under the rehabilitative or preventive services authority would be submitted to the Governor of the state concerned or other proper state authority and to the governing bodies of the political units principally affected. Approval of the grant applications would be withheld until the aforementioned authorities had been afforded reasonable opportunity to prepare and submit evaluations to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare. This new provision appears to be a useful and workable means of involving the appropriate political units in the program and providing for their participation. 7. Consultation.-The House Committee substituted a general consultation section applicable to all of Title I of the proposal. In so doing, the requirement in the Administration's proposal that the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare obtain the concurrence of the Attorney General on rehabilitative service programs was dropped. The purpose of the provision in the Administration's bill was to recognize the equal interest and responsibility of the Department of Justice in the rehabilitative area. I feel the concurrence of the Attorney General is important on rehabilitative service grants. SENATOR DODD'S AMENDMENT TO S. 1248 Senator Dodd's Amendment covers three basic areas: (1) specific involvement of the Nation's school system in the prevention of juvenile delinquency; (2) creation of a controlled experiment in juvenile correction; and (3) specific authority and emphasis concerning training of professional personnel to work in the delinquency control field. 1. Delinquency Prevention by Public Educational Agencies.-I defer to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare on this item. It should be noted that several pilot and demonstration projects along this line have been undertaken under the Law Enforcement Assistance Act and under state auspices with promising and enthusiastic reception. Whether an expanded program on a large scale should be undertaken at this time can more properly be determined by Secretary Gardner and his staff, who would administer the program. 2. Model Juvenile Correctional System.-This proposal would authorize the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare to plan, establish (including the construction of necessary facilities), and operate a juvenile correctional system. Included would be authority for the Secretary to accept delinquent youths from Federal, State, or local juvenile courts or correctional institutions and to provide care, treatment, rehabilitation, and supervision of such youths. It appears that this authority would largely duplicate and overlap authority and functions of the Bureau of Prisons of the Department of Justice. As I indicated in my letter to the subcommittee of September 25, 1967, the Department of Justice has an active program within its Bureau of Prisons and through the efforts of the Parole Board to rehabilitate youthful offenders in Federal custody. New programs and experiments should build upon the experience and expertise of these agencies rather than creating a new activity in this field. 3. Training of Personnel.-As indicated in the foregoing remarks concerning the training provisions added by the House Committee, training is an important factor in achieving improvements in effectiveness of professional personnel in the delinquency control field. The only question is whether authority is needed in the present bill to supplement authority presently in force or contained in other proposals. As I stated previously, I defer to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare on this point. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES-PASSED VERSION OF H.R. 12120 While there are numerous differences in the House-passed version of H.R. 12120 from the version reported by the House Committee, the most important change involves the added requirement that grants under Title I (Rehabilitative Services and Preventive Services) and Title II (Training) be made to States. Any State which desires to receive a grant under Title I or Title II must submit a comprehensive juvenile delingency plan. Provision is made for direct grants to public or private agencies if a state fails to apply or its plan is not approved within nine months after the date of the enactment of the Act. A State receiving a grant must, in turn, distribute at least 80 percent of it in the form of grants within the State for purposes described in Titles I and II. There is also an overall formula whereunder approximately 75 percent of the funds appropriated to make grants under Titles I and II shall be allocated among the fifty States and the District of Columbia according to their respective populations and 25% shall be allocated as the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare shall determine. The provision for channeling grants through the States parallels the Cahill amendment to the Crime Control Act which the House adopted. I firmly believe that in both bills it is a mistake to thrust the State into the pipeline. I recognize the interest of the State executive concerning activities within his State, but believe that the State role can be most efficiently and effectively discharged through an arrangement similar to that provided by Title I, Part C of the House Committee version of H.R. 12120. Such provision gives notification to proper State authorities of grant applications and prevents approval of the grants until reasonable opportunity has been afforded for preparation and submission of evaluations. While the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare has primary cognizance regarding S. 1248 and H.R. 12120, the subject matter, as you know, is also of great interest and concern to the Department of Justice. I am anxious to cooperate without in any way I can assist on this legislation. I strongly feel that legislation on this subject is necessary at the earliest feasible time. Sincerely, RAMSEY CLARK, Attorney General. SEPTEMBER 15, 1967. Hon. RAMSEY CLARK DEAR MR. ATTORNEY GENERAL: In connection with the subcommittee's hearings on the Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Act of 1967 and your testimony which is scheduled for Tuesday, September 26, the subcommittee requests that Justice Department representatives from each bureau or division which has responsibility for activities related to delinquent youth accompany you at the hearing. Prior to the hearing, I would appreciate it if your department would prepare and deliver to the subcommittee a report listing all legislative authority giving the Justice Department responsibility for and all activities related to the prevention, control or treatment of juvenile delinquency, youth offenses, and the problems of disturbed or delinquent youth in which the Justice Department is presently engaged. At our hearings the subcommittee will inquire into each of these activities particularly with respect to their relationship to each other and their relationship to activities in other Federal departments and agencies. Sincerely yours, JOSEPH S. CLARK, Chairman, Subcommittee on Employment, Manpower, and Poverty. 86-260-67-8 |