U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee - Larry E. Craig, Chairman - Jade West, Staff Director

November 5, 1997

S. 10, the Juvenile Offender Act

The facts are gruesome (see the back of this page for some of them), so it is no wonder that reducing juvenile crime is a top priority for Republicans. A bill to address the problem was one of the top ten priorities when this Congress opened, and that bill, S. 10, has been reported from the Judiciary Committee and is now pending on the Senate Calendar for action next year.

There are three key goals behind this bill:

There are three essential components to the bill:

Some of the Gruesome Facts on Juvenile Crime

A murder is reported to the police every 21 minutes, a forcible rape every 5 minutes, a robbery every 48 seconds and an aggravated (serious) assault every 28 seconds. A motor vehicle theft is reported to the police every 20 seconds, a burglary every 11 seconds and a larceny-theft every 4 seconds. Many of these offenses are being committed by juveniles.

The past decade has witnessed a dramatic increase in both the number and seriousness of the crimes committed by juveniles. Juveniles today commit murder, rape, robbery, and drug trafficking offenses at a rate unimagined when the juvenile justice system was adopted. There was a 50-percent increase in the rate of juvenile arrests for violent crimes between 1988 and 1994. Juvenile courts handled 98 percent more cases in 1994 than in 1985 that involved violent crimes (homicide, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault).

The number of juveniles committing homicide increased nearly threefold from 1984 to 1994, with more than 2,800 juveniles committing homicide in 1994. The number of 12- to 14-year-old homicide offenders rose 174 percent from 1984-94. From 1980 through 1994 there have been more than 26,000 known juvenile homicide offenders. From 1980 through 1994, juveniles killed 27,000 people. More than 2,300 people were killed by juveniles in 1994 alone, which was more than 2.5 times the number in 1984.

Juveniles commit other serious crimes. From 1985 to 1994, 50 percent of the increase in robberies is attributable to juveniles. Nearly one-third of all persons arrested in 1994 for robbery were below the age of 18. Juveniles accounted for 55 percent of all arrests in arson-related cases and 36 percent of burglaries. In the decade preceding 1994, juveniles were responsible for 48 percent of the increase in forcible rapes.

Juvenile criminal gang activity also has seen a considerable increase. For example, the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office estimated that in May 1992 there were 1,000 gangs with 150,000 members in Los Angeles County and that gangs had been responsible for virtually all of the growth in the number of homicides since 1984. In Chicago in 1995, 212 of the 827 murders (26 percent) were attributed to street gangs.

To be sure, juvenile murder arrests declined 14 percent from 1994 to 1995, and the number of juvenile arrests for murder in 1995 was 9 percent below the level in 1991. However, that number was 90 percent above the number of juvenile murder arrests in 1986. Moreover, juvenile arrests from property crimes did not change from 1991 to 1995, and the decline in juvenile burglary arrests (11 percent) and motor vehicle theft arrests (17 percent) were offset by the 6-percent increase in juvenile arrests for larceny-theft, the highest volume offense category for juveniles. Juveniles were involved in 13 percent of all drug arrests in 1995, a 138-percent increase since 1991. Recent figures therefore do not supply a sound basis for believing that juvenile crime has peaked.

Many observers believe that we have not yet seen an end to the growth in violent juvenile crime. Juvenile arrests for murder are projected to increase 145 percent from 1992 to 2010; aggravated assault rates would increase 129 percent. The Department of Justice predicted that, if current trends continue as they have over the past 10 years, juvenile arrests for violent crime will more than double by the year 2010.

[Note: All information in this paper was taken from Senate Rept. No. 105-108, pp. 61-67.]