Jack Brooks: “I oppose this amendment. I think it is well intended, but the fact is it is an intrusion into the States, which normally…”

“I oppose this amendment. I think it is well intended, but the fact is it is an intrusion into the States, which normally do all the regulating of security guards. It is overly broad in its definition of what a security officer is. As I read the definition, it might include a lawyer or a legal secretary; it certainly includes an electronic alarm company employee whose duties involve servicing or installing an alarm system. I know that industry is something we do not want to get into Federal mandates and regulating. It ties the requirements that States have these regulations to block grant moneys available under a 1968 crime bill by saying the Attorney General can cut up to 10 percent of the block grants if the States do not comply. It is an unfunded mandate on the States. We are providing no money to the States to do this. And, quite frankly, there have been no hearings held on this, as I understand it. We have had no opportunity to have the committees of jurisdiction look at this, the Labor Committee or our committee.”