Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

qualifies as experience in "juvenile justice programs." A narrower construction of the statute would appear to exclude a broad range of persons with extensive experience in juvenile delinquency prevention programs and activities from consideration as OJJDP Administrator, whereas juvenile delinquency prevention is a key component of the Office's mandate.

Mr. Sweet's extensive experience dealing with elementary and secondary education programs and policies at the Department of Education; his work at the White House on Federal programs dealing with drug issues, family, and educational policy; his research, writings, and professional experience in the area of literacy; and his experience as a public school teacher, school board leader, and camp counselor are sufficient to satisfy the statutory criteria for OJJDP Administrator.

Mr. Sweet's qualifications were enthusiastically attested to by Mr. Robbie Callaway, Director of Government Relations of the Boys Clubs of America (BCA). BCA was an original supporter and advocate of the OJJDP legislation and has a strong interest in the effective administration of OJJDP. Testifying on behalf of the BCA, Mr. Callaway stated that Mr. Sweet's extensive background in the areas noted above "clearly qualifies him" under the statutory criteria.

Some concerns were also raised regarding Mr. Sweet's performance during his service at the National Institute of Education of the Department of Education. These concerns related to claims that certain aspects of Mr. Sweet's performance at NIE were disapproved by then Secretary of Education Terrel Bell and that Mr. Sweet had been removed from the Department under unfavorable circumstances.

The record revealed that Mr. Sweet actually achieved an outstanding record of accomplishments at NIE and that Secretary Bell himself personally commended Mr. Sweet for these efforts. A personal note from Secretary Bell to Mr. Sweet, dated October 20, 1982, which was introduced into the record of the Committee's hearings, stated as follows:

I just finished reading the 1982 accomplishments of NIE.
You should feel quite proud of this, Bob. I was impressed.
I appreciate all you do to support our endeavors here in
ED (Education Department).

Among the accomplishments achieved at NIE during Mr. Sweet's tenure were extensive cost-savings and personnel efficiency improvements; completion of awards of all but $2,140 of its planned program obligations; improved new procedures for NIE Requests for Proposals; development of an ADP program providing the Institute with a data base of highly qualified peer reviewers to provide recommendations on grant proposals; and development of new projects focusing on literacy and early reading methodology.

After completing his duties as Deputy Director and Acting Director of NIE, he was asked by Secretary Bell to accept the position of Administrator of Management Services, Department of Education, with Department-wide responsibilities. Mr. Sweet declined that position to accept the position of Executive Director of the National Council of Education Research, a body composed of twelve Presi

dential appointees. Once the Council was established with its own offices and staff, Mr. Sweet was offered and accepted his position in the White House Office of Policy Development, where he served until February 1989.

Mr. Sweet was also questioned extensively concerning the adequacy of the Administration's budget request for OJJDP; the manner in which he intended to carry out the Office's programs under possible budgetary constraints; and the strength of his commitment to the Office's mission and programs.

The committee notes that the nominee can not be held accountable for perceived deficiencies in the administration's budget requests for OJJDP. While certain members of the committee believe that the administration's budget request is inadequate, it would be unrealistic and inappropriate to expect the President's nominee to criticize or disavow that budget request. More importantly, Mr. Sweet has given every indication that, whatever the size of the budget ultimately allocated to OJJDP, he will faithfully deploy those resources towards the accomplishment of the Office's statutory programs and objectives. Thus, in response to questioning from Senator Kerry on this subject, Mr. Sweet testified:

Senator, I, of course, have to live within whatever the
budget is. I believe in that program, as I do other pro-
grams that I am aware of that work through OJJDP. On
the other hand, we are all dealing with a major budget
problem here, and hard decisions have to be made. I am a
part of that decision-making process. But when the final
determination has been made by the administration as to
what they feel this office should be provided, then I sup-
port that as well.

Should the Congress in its decision provide funds that are
in excess of that, whatever that might be, then I intend to
administer those funds as effectively and as efficiently as I
possibly can to meet the needs of young people.

Mr. Sweet's responses to extensive questioning from committee members on these issues demonstrated that he is firmly committed to the continued efficient functioning of OJJDP and to the successful achievement of its statutory objectives. The committee notes that Mr. Sweet's extensive career involvement in both professional and voluntary activities related to the well-being, education, and healthy development of juveniles provides further reassurance of his personal commitment to sound policies and programs in the areas of juvenile justice and delinquency prevention. In addition, his record of successful and sensitive interaction with the disabled community during his service at the White House demonstrates that he has the character and the capacity to work effectively with disadvantaged groups such as those young people who are committed to the juvenile justice system.

For all the reasons indicated above, we conclude that Robert Sweet is qualified to serve as Administrator of OJJDP and has the personal qualities which will enable him to serve well in that capacity. We therefore support his confirmation to that position.

IV. ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF SENATORS DECONCINI, HEFLIN, AND KOHL

We wish to express our views separately from the Majority Report on the nomination of Robert W. Sweet, Jr. to be Administrator for the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention ("OJJDP"). We voted to favorably report Mr. Sweet out of the Judiciary Committee for several reasons: first, because of the personal assurances of Senators Hatch, Humphrey, Armstrong, and by the administration that Mr. Sweet could adequately administer OJJDP; second, because Mr. Sweet assured us that ideology would not play a role in the functioning of the office; and third, because of the pressing need to have a permanent Administrator at OJJDP. Mr. Sweet's nomination did receive a considerable amount of opposition from the juvenile justice and education communities. Furthermore, although Mr. Sweet's background arguably fulfills the "experience" requirement of the JJDP Act, his background in juvenile justice and delinquency prevention is by no means extensive. Nevertheless, based on the above-mentioned assurances and the fact that this agency has been without an administrator for 15 months, we voted to report Mr. Sweet's nomination to the full Senate.

V. MINORITY VIEWS OF SENATORS BIDEN, KENNEDY,

METZENBAUM, LEAHY, AND SIMON

We found the nomination of Robert Sweet to be Administrator of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention very difficult to resolve, and a very close call.

This is a very important nomination, because it is for a very important office. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) can play an important role in addressing some of the most serious problems plaguing our Nation's children-drug abuse, child abuse, gang violence, and the crisis facing our juvenile justice system itself.

We are particularly interested in this office, because we have strongly supported it for many years. Each time that President Reagan or Bush proposed abolishing the office, we were deeply involved in the effort to keep the office alive.

The nominee comes to us strongly endorsed by some Senators whom we know very well, and in whom we have confidence and trust. These colleagues have known Mr. Sweet and worked with him for a number of years, and they told us that based on their personal experience with and knowledge of him, they are confident that Mr. Sweet will do an exceptional job in this position.

By all accounts, the nominee is an honorable and intelligent man; one who could do a fine job serving in a number of different positions in this administration.

Nonetheless, we voted against the nomination. We have two concerns that we feel are still unresolved. First, we are not convinced that Mr. Sweet has enough juvenile justice experience. The Juvenile Justice Act requires that the Administrator of this office be drawn from among those individuals with experience in juvenile justice programs, and we believe that some such experience is needed for a new administrator to be effective. Although the nominee has some relevant experience, we are not convinced that it is enough to enable him to "hit the ground running" once confirmed. Second, we have concerns about the extent of the nominee's commitment to the purpose and mission of this office. We understand that any person who is nominated to this position in a year when the President has proposed to dramatically scale back the office is in a quandry: He must try to convince the Senate that he truly cares about the office's programs, but he cannot contradict the President's budget. It is too much to ask a nominee to contradict an administration's budget request, but it is not too much to ask that nominee to leave the committee with the sense that he will work within the administration to see that the office's budget is boosted next year. After listening to the nominee's testimony for several hours, however, we are still not convinced that he will truly be an advocate for the important programs at OJJDP. We are also troubled by the nominee's tenure at the National Institute of

Education in the early 1980's, where he worked-with the blessing of the President-to greatly scale back the program over which he presided. If this is any indication of how Mr. Sweet will take on this job, it is deeply troubling.

We would like to believe that these concerns are unfounded, and therefore support the nominee, but we cannot. As long-time supporters of OJJDP, however, it is our fervent hope that we will be proven wrong, and that Bob Sweet will be dynamic and effective advocate for juvenile justice programs.

We also hope that the administration will reconsider its efforts to defund the office and will give it the funds it needs to fulfill its mission.

Finally, we pledge to closely oversee the office in the years to come. At several points during his nomination hearing, Mr. Sweet promised to aggressively and effectively address a number of problem areas. We intend to work with him to help fight these problems, but also to watch over him to ensure that he keeps these promises.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »