David Skaggs: “this bill holds out a false hope. It may reduce some juvenile crime by forcing States to impose longer sentences on…”

“this bill holds out a false hope. It may reduce some juvenile crime by forcing States to impose longer sentences on young offenders. But in return, it will guarantee that many of those young offenders will become career criminals. We should not pay that price. Nor should we force the States to forfeit their freedom and ingenuity in how they handle juvenile offenders as the price for Federal assistance in preventing and punishing juvenile violence. Very few Federal crimes are committed by juveniles. Rather, almost all juvenile crime--including almost all violent crime--is State crime. So what this bill really intends is to require the States to prosecute more juveniles as adults. In fact, for most heinous crimes, the States already prosecute most juvenile offenders as adults. I'm somewhat surprised that so many of my colleagues think that we in the House of Representatives know better than the States how to deal with juvenile crime. We've heard for the last several years that State and local officials know best about other problems. What makes this subject so different? Let the States decide how to handle the complex problems associated with juvenile crime. We have supported the States in their juvenile justice efforts, and we don't need to impose our views about when to prosecute children as adults. Nor do we need to push the States to ease States restrictions on incarcerating juveniles separately from adult offenders.”