April 10, 2019 - Issue: Vol. 165, No. 62 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 1st Session

[Pages S2353-S2355]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                            Debbie Smith Act

  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I would like to start by sharing a story 
about one of my personal heroes, Debbie Smith. Debbie Smith is living 
proof that one person can change the world if they have the courage to 
tell their story and fight for justice.
  In 1989, Debbie was at home doing laundry. Her husband Rob, a police 
officer, was asleep upstairs after working a night shift.
  Suddenly a masked man entered her home and threatened to kill her if 
she screamed. He blindfolded and abducted Debbie and took her outside 
to a wooded area behind her home, where he robbed and repeatedly raped 
her. The man threatened her over and over, saying: Remember, I know 
where you live, and I will come back to kill you if you tell anyone.
  After he finally left, Debbie ran upstairs to tell her husband. She 
begged him not to make her go to the police. But he, as a police 
officer, insisted that she report the crime and go to the emergency 
room for a sexual assault forensic exam, sometimes called a rape kit 
exam.
  Debbie did go for that examination and did report the crime. But for 
Debbie and millions of other survivors there are no immediate answers. 
Because of the nationwide backlog of untested rape kits, it would be 
years before she was able to identify her assailant and find any sort 
of peace.
  Although the exact numbers are hard to estimate, experts believe that 
hundreds of thousands of rape kits remain untested in the United 
States, and, of course, each one of them represents a unique story of a 
sexual assault victim and holds the key to apprehending a violent 
criminal.
  Waiting for that evidence to be tested can be excruciating. Debbie 
said that fear took over her life. She was haunted by the man's voice 
threatening to kill her. She was terrified for herself and her family, 
and she even became suicidal for a time.
  It wasn't until 6\1/2\ years later that Debbie finally got the answer 
she had been looking for when a DNA cold hit revealed the identity of 
her rapist. She later said in an interview that DNA gave her back her 
life.
  Debbie chose to harness her pain and to use it to save others from 
living through years of uncertainty as she did. She has become the 
fiercest advocate in the Nation for eliminating the rape kit backlog. 
She has devoted her life to making a difference for victims of sexual 
violence.

[[Page S2354]]

  The aptly named Debbie Smith Act was originally signed into law in 
2004 to provide State and local crime labs the resources they need to 
end the backlog of untested DNA evidence from unsolved crimes through 
additional funding and increased capacity. Under this law, Congress has 
provided more than $1 billion since then in vital funding to forensic 
labs for analyzing crime scene DNA evidence, uploading the results into 
the CODIS database, which is what happens to the test after it is 
completed, and identifying violent fugitives and taking these violent 
criminals off the street.
  Not only does this sort of testing provide relief for victims like 
Debbie and justice for their attackers, but the evidence is also 
effective in assisting investigations for other crimes. This is 
important because violent offenders will often commit many different 
types of crimes in many different jurisdictions. For example, if a 
criminal commits a burglary in one State, DNA evidence from that 
burglary case can be used later to connect this offender to an unsolved 
rape case in another State.
  The States, thankfully, are following suit. Texas, I am proud to say, 
has led the Nation in passing mandatory rape kit testing laws, 
conducting audits of the backlog, and using Debbie Smith funds to 
analyze untested sexual assault evidence. I am proud to report that 
over the last 7 years we have reduced our statewide rape kit backlog 
from more than 20,000 to just over 2,000. This is an astounding 
achievement, and thankfully it is being replicated all across the 
Nation because of this important legislation and because of the courage 
of one woman, Debbie Smith.
  By ensuring the Debbie Smith Act funds can be used to analyze 
evidence from all types of crime scenes, we can help forensic labs 
address their systemic backlogs and holistically target the cycle of 
violence. The Debbie Smith Act of 2019 will reauthorize the Debbie 
Smith Act program to continue the testing of DNA evidence from unsolved 
crimes nationwide, including rape kits. It will also reauthorize DNA 
training and education for law enforcement, correctional personnel, and 
court officers, as well as forensic nurses who take this DNA evidence 
during these rape kit collections to make sure that all of them are 
prepared to gather the evidence and to test it. Since 2005, Debbie 
Smith Act funding has led to the creation of 43 percent of all forensic 
CODIS profiles. Again, this is the FBI database, where the rape kit 
information can be entered to see if it matches previously entered DNA 
profiles.
  Let me say that again. Since 2005, Debbie Smith Act funding has led 
to the creation of 43 percent of all forensic CODIS profiles as well as 
20 percent of all offender samples in CODIS.
  In total, Debbie Smith DNA grants are responsible for 45 percent of 
all matches made in CODIS, which is truly remarkable. Reauthorizing 
this legislation once again is a top priority for me as we work to 
continue chipping away at the nationwide rape kit backlog and provide 
these victims with the answers and relief they need.
  Over the years, I have had the pleasure of meeting and working with 
Debbie several times, and we have been fortunate to have her share her 
perspective before the Judiciary Committee on multiple occasions.
  I have also worked with two other inspiring victims from Texas--
Lavinia Masters and Carol Bart, who, like Debbie, had the courage to 
come forward and talk about a very difficult event in their lives, but 
to use their pain as a way to help others. Lavinia and Carol have also 
lent their voices in advocating for reforms to reduce the rape kit 
backlog.
  I am grateful to these and countless other survivors who bravely 
share their stories and ideas as we work together to eliminate the 
backlog once and for all. I hope the Debbie Smith Act of 2019 will soon 
be reported out of the Judiciary Committee and will quickly make its 
way to the Senate floor, pass in Congress, and make its way to the 
President for his signature without delay.


                               H.R. 1585

  Mr. President, on another matter, earlier this week the House passed 
a bill to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act. Our Democratic 
colleagues keep saying how important it is to quickly pass this 
legislation to restore funding to VAWA as it is known, but I think it 
is important to back up for a moment and remember why that funding 
lapsed in the first place.
  Earlier this year our Democratic colleagues allowed VAWA to get 
caught in the crosshairs of our funding debates, and they insisted we 
should not fund this vital program because it was overdue for updates. 
Their argument was this: We want to reform or update VAWA, so we are 
going to let funding for it lapse. It just didn't make any sense at 
all.
  It is no secret that folks on the other side of the aisle think it is 
time we made some changes to the program. It is something I support, 
but we don't need to let the funding lapse in order to do it.
  This is an issue that our friend and colleague Senator Ernst 
continues to champion here in the Senate. But the approach taken by our 
Democratic colleagues to get those changes is a head-scratcher, to say 
the least.
  There were, as I see it, two options on how to solve the problem. One 
was to provide an extension for the previous funding to the end of the 
fiscal year. That would have allowed us to work on the long-term 
reauthorization under the regular processes in the Senate, which, in my 
experience, is always the preferred action to take.
  The second option our Democratic colleagues chose was to do nothing 
and let this important legislation expire without a plan to replace it. 
For whatever reason, that was the option that Democrats in the House 
chose.
  In the nearly 2 months since, we have tried to negotiate a short-term 
extension to fund these vital programs. As recently as last week, our 
Democratic colleagues had a chance to support the restoration of 
funding while our negotiations continued.
  The supplemental appropriations bill introduced by Senator Shelby 
would have funded the Violence Against Women Act through the end of the 
fiscal year--again, giving us time to negotiate changes in the law that 
Democrats obviously want. But our Democratic colleagues simply refuse 
to support even a procedural vote that would have allowed us to get on 
the bill and debate it and then amend it. It seems increasingly clear 
to me that rather than providing the funding for victims of sexual 
assault and other violence, rather than finding solutions, what is 
happening here is that politics is creeping in and rearing its ugly 
head.
  It is clear to me that this isn't about finding a solution; this is 
about political game playing. Now, rather than going through regular 
order to create a long-term reauthorization that includes feedback from 
both sides, House Democrats are trying to jam a one-sided piece of 
legislation through the House and then through the Senate. I think this 
is very shameful.
  Our Democratic colleagues first refused to fund the Violence Against 
Women Act. They allowed it to expire, and now they are using victims of 
violence as leverage to push through their rushed, one-sided piece of 
legislation. Throwing a temper tantrum and holding the Violence Against 
Women's Act hostage until you get what you want is not a responsible 
way to legislate.
  I would encourage our colleagues across the aisle to put politics 
aside for just a moment and work with us to pass a short-term extension 
for VAWA while we use the regular order to discuss long-term solutions.
  There is a good way and a bad way to do this, and, unfortunately, our 
Democratic colleagues have chosen the bad way, but we would ask them to 
reconsider and work with us--not for us, but for the victims of 
domestic violence who are suffering as a result of their game playing.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  All time has expired.
  The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the Stanton 
nomination?
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

[[Page S2355]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker) 
and the Senator from Minnesota (Ms. Klobuchar) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Lankford). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 53, nays 45, as follows:

                       [Rollcall Vote No. 70 Ex.]

                                YEAS--53

     Alexander
     Barrasso
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Braun
     Burr
     Capito
     Cassidy
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Cramer
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Gardner
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hawley
     Hoeven
     Hyde-Smith
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Lankford
     Lee
     McConnell
     McSally
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Paul
     Perdue
     Portman
     Risch
     Roberts
     Romney
     Rounds
     Rubio
     Sasse
     Scott (FL)
     Scott (SC)
     Shelby
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Wicker
     Young

                                NAYS--45

     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Coons
     Cortez Masto
     Duckworth
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Gillibrand
     Harris
     Hassan
     Heinrich
     Hirono
     Jones
     Kaine
     King
     Leahy
     Manchin
     Markey
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Murphy
     Murray
     Peters
     Reed
     Rosen
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Sinema
     Smith
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Udall
     Van Hollen
     Warner
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Booker
     Klobuchar
       
  The nomination was confirmed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motion to 
reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table. The President 
will be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

                          ____________________