Summary

SENATOR DOLE AND OTHER SENATORS MEET ON THE CRIME BILL. ROUGH CUT SHOWS THE PHOTO OP. ROUGH CUT IS UPDATED WITH STAKEOUT MATERIAL.

Source CONUS Archive
Record ID 245575
Story Slug SENATE REPUBLICANS / CRIME BILL (1994)
Location WASHINGTON, DC
Format TVD
Date 8/23/1994
Archive Time 8:31
TRT 3:51
Supers 1) SENATOR ORRIN HATCH, R-UT 2) SENATOR PHIL GRAMM, R-TX
Video Description SENATORS SITTING IN ROOM, STAKEOUT SOUND
Description SENATOR DOLE AND OTHER SENATORS MEET ON THE CRIME BILL. ROUGH CUT SHOWS THE PHOTO OP. ROUGH CUT IS UPDATED WITH STAKEOUT MATERIAL.
Script (SUGGESTED TRANSCRIPT OF AUDIO) :44 We intend to have the votes. Several senators have come out saying there's an alternative strategy, a fallback strategy, and that you all will talk about? Well, basically, it's apparent, we've got to have the votes to sustain the point of order. There's no strategy at all, if we sustained the point of order, then, of course, we're hopeful that the Democrats will sit down in good faith and negotiated with us. There may be some other approaches that we might try. But we're still in the preliminary stages on about a filibuster, there will be no filibuster, as far as I'm concerned. And I don't believe that there will be I think I can stop a filibuster on this matter. The key here is, can we get a crime bill that will really do something against crime in our society. And right now, we've got a bill that's filled with pork, with all kinds of soft language that allows them to do almost anything with this money other than build prisons and do what's right, with a promise to have 100,000 police on the streets, when everybody knows the most you could get out of this bill is about 20,000. And then the states get stuck with the cars. So there's a lot of loose language on this bill that's come from this administration and from the Democrats. And frankly, we're going to have to, we're gonna have to tighten the bill up in order to make it a good anti crime bill. And if we can, you're going to have tremendous Republican support. You're only mentioning pork now, if you got the five men are mentioning pork and inappropriate discretionary. 2:22 Well, let me just say that it's going to be a very close vote. It's going to be a test of wills as to who wants to prevail in terms of getting the pork out of the crime bill, putting minimum mandatory sentencing back into the bill, for those who use guns and violent crimes, for those who sell drugs to children, and then taking out the provision that would eliminate minimum mandatory sentencing for drug felons. Those are things I feel very strongly about. I think we will have a crime bill. The question is, is it going to be a tough crime deal on criminals? Are we going to deal with a violent crime problem in America? I hope the answer to that is yes. We're going to have a very close vote here. At this point, I think that it could be won or lost. From my point of view, and obviously from Senator Mitchell's I think it depends on the final strategy that is decided upon. I think there is there are several schools of thought but it ultimately is going to come down to the willingness of 41 people in the Senate to stand up on the point of order and say, in order for this bill to pass, we want some at least of the $7 billion of pork come out of this bill. And we want minimum mandatory sentencing for selling drugs to children and for possessing a firearm during the commission of a violent crime or a drug felony back in this bill.
Not everything listed in the CONUS Archive is necessarily licensable. Reporter sound/image is not licensable
}