The legislative process in both chambers the House of Representatives and the Senate is immensely complicated with numerous policies waiting for approval to bring the bill to a vote and to, garner unanimous support for enactment. One bill that passed and enacted by President Clinton was the H.R. 3355 the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Representative Jack B. Brooks (D) sponsored the bill that aimed to reduce crime and protect Americans, and by September 13, 1994, became law (103rd Cong. Rec. 3355, 1994). The majority of Congressional members supported the bill with the House voting yea 235 versus 195 nays and the Senate 61 yea to 38 nays (103rd Cong. Rec. 3355, 1994). Another bill that was introduced eleven years later
…show more content…
3355 and H.R. 1505 are pertinent to national security. Both aim to protect citizens from heinous acts of crime. The H.R. 3355 highlights an increased crime era that in 1990 forty percent of surveyed Americans recognized as a pressing concern for the nation (Brickey, 1995). Statistica reported that the 1990s accrued 730 deaths per 100,000 people ("Reported," n.d.). Hence the reason why Congress enacted the H.R. 3355. Fortunately, crime decreased as of 2016 as a reported 386 deaths per 100,000 ("Reported," n.d.). By this, it seemingly suggests that the implementation of the H.R. 3355 contributed to a reduction in crime as it encompassed a wide range of safety measures. Some measures include increased policing efforts, stricter penalties for three-time offenders, limited semi-automatic assault weapons, and crimes against children (103rd Cong. Rec. 3355, 1994). However so, it is too broad, and the crime against children title XVIII neglects to detail advanced tracking measures for sex offenders. Thus, the reason that the House of Representatives constructed the H.R. 1505 …show more content…
1505 Jessica Lunsford Act was primarily constructed as a repeal to the title XVIII and replace it with stricter penalties for sex offenders due to the abduction, rape, and murder of nine-year-old Jessica Lunsford. It is evident that the H.R. 3355 did not go far enough as the Jessica Lunsford Act would advance measures for sex registry by requiring sex offenders to wear a tracking anklet for a five-year maximum and up to ten years for a violent predator (109th Cong. Rec. 1505, 2005). Thereby, it enhances the H.R. 3355 title XVIII that allows the state to implement child predator laws and instead the law would be recognized on the Federal level and ratified in all the states. For this reason, both the H.R. 3355 and H.R. 1505 are policies useful for comparison because each aim to protect the public by increasing measures to stop criminal activity. But also, because most of the H.R. 3355 portrays a standardized system to correct bad behavior with programs for delinquent minors, convicted felons, and supervised release with drug testing aligns with the H.R. 1505 that emphasizes strict monitoring to encourage rehabilitation (103rd Cong. Rec. 3355, 1994). Congresses interest in addressing crime and criminal activities was due to flaws in the current criminal justice system. For instance, before the H.R. 3355, many sentenced criminals like sexual predators received no rehabilitation in prison. That is, of the 775,000 released sex offenders 75% were untreated while
3355 and H.R. 1505 are pertinent to national security. Both aim to protect citizens from heinous acts of crime. The H.R. 3355 highlights an increased crime era that in 1990 forty percent of surveyed Americans recognized as a pressing concern for the nation (Brickey, 1995). Statistica reported that the 1990s accrued 730 deaths per 100,000 people ("Reported," n.d.). Hence the reason why Congress enacted the H.R. 3355. Fortunately, crime decreased as of 2016 as a reported 386 deaths per 100,000 ("Reported," n.d.). By this, it seemingly suggests that the implementation of the H.R. 3355 contributed to a reduction in crime as it encompassed a wide range of safety measures. Some measures include increased policing efforts, stricter penalties for three-time offenders, limited semi-automatic assault weapons, and crimes against children (103rd Cong. Rec. 3355, 1994). However so, it is too broad, and the crime against children title XVIII neglects to detail advanced tracking measures for sex offenders. Thus, the reason that the House of Representatives constructed the H.R. 1505 …show more content…
1505 Jessica Lunsford Act was primarily constructed as a repeal to the title XVIII and replace it with stricter penalties for sex offenders due to the abduction, rape, and murder of nine-year-old Jessica Lunsford. It is evident that the H.R. 3355 did not go far enough as the Jessica Lunsford Act would advance measures for sex registry by requiring sex offenders to wear a tracking anklet for a five-year maximum and up to ten years for a violent predator (109th Cong. Rec. 1505, 2005). Thereby, it enhances the H.R. 3355 title XVIII that allows the state to implement child predator laws and instead the law would be recognized on the Federal level and ratified in all the states. For this reason, both the H.R. 3355 and H.R. 1505 are policies useful for comparison because each aim to protect the public by increasing measures to stop criminal activity. But also, because most of the H.R. 3355 portrays a standardized system to correct bad behavior with programs for delinquent minors, convicted felons, and supervised release with drug testing aligns with the H.R. 1505 that emphasizes strict monitoring to encourage rehabilitation (103rd Cong. Rec. 3355, 1994). Congresses interest in addressing crime and criminal activities was due to flaws in the current criminal justice system. For instance, before the H.R. 3355, many sentenced criminals like sexual predators received no rehabilitation in prison. That is, of the 775,000 released sex offenders 75% were untreated while