Roanoke Times Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc. DATE: TUESDAY, November 9, 1993 TAG: 9311090199 SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A-4 EDITION: METRO SOURCE: The New York Times DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Medium
The amendment to the $22.3 billion crime package working its way through the Senate is opposed by some liberals in the House, putting its enactment in doubt. But the overwhelming Senate vote of 91 to 1 reflects a strong mood in both chambers to enact a strong crime bill.
The dissenting vote was cast by Sen. Bob Packwood, R-Ore. "This is a step backward," Packwood said in an interview, "because we ought to leave some discretion to judges." He said many liberals agreed with him but voted for the bill because they were in the mood to "one-up each other on crime."
And in another sign of its intolerant mood toward criminals, senators voted, 52 to 41, to kill an amendment sponsored by Sen. Paul Simon, D-Ill., prohibiting death sentences in cases where the offenders committed the murders when they were younger than 18.
The federal government has limited authority over sentencing in criminal cases. The states usually set terms. Under the measure, the life sentence would only be given when the third violent offense was on an Indian reservation, a national park or a military base. The offense has to be a major one, usually with a maximum term of five years or more, before the criminal would go to prison for life.
Despite its narrow scope, the amendment could become important if state legislatures follow the Senate's example, which they often do. Washington state passed a similar provision in a referendum on Nov. 2.
"Putting these crooks behind bars would save millions of dollars and save many, many lives," said Sen. Trent Lott of Mississippi, the Republican sponsor of the amendment. Lott said 76 percent of the serious crimes in the country were committed by "three-time losers."
A similar bill has been introduced in the House by Rep. Robert Livingston, R-La.
by CNB