John Walsh plans to name names to get bill named after son reauthorized

9-21-15 Washington DC:

Frustrated by the gridlock in Congress, John Walsh is headed back to Capitol Hill. And this time, the former longtime “America’s Most Wanted” host says he’s ready to name names in order to get lawmakers to reauthorize a bill named after his son.

“The Adam Walsh Act is stuck in that morass of Capitol Hill that’s only focused in on who’s going to be the next president,” Walsh says. “So I’m now going back to what I did since 1981, since my son was murdered: To walk the halls, and get senators and congressmen to get it out of committee and get it reauthorized. It was passed unanimously.”

Former President George W. Bush signed the federal statute, which created a national sex offender registry, in 2006. The bipartisan legislation was named for Walsh’s 6-year-old son, who was murdered after being abducted from a Florida shopping mall.

Walsh plans to lobby lawmakers in the coming weeks to reauthorize the act.

“So I go back to saddle up, because everybody’s so obsessed with this vitriolic gridlock. Republicans hating and dissing Democrats. Vice versa. Government’s ground down to a halt. I think Americans don’t realize how bad it is. It’s the worst I’ve seen it since 1981,” exclaims Walsh.

ITK recently caught up with the television personality and host of CNN’s “The Hunt” at an intimate dinner at the newly opened Cities Restaurant & Lounge in downtown Washington. Publicist Janet Donovan, Hollywood on the Potomac and Cities owner Michael Kosmides hosted the event. Walsh was in town spreading the word about the Justice Network, where he serves as spokesman.

The face of the digital multicast network touts the fact that the outlet airs photos and information about missing children every hour.

“Now that ‘America’s Most Wanted’ is off the air, parents of long-term missing children have no resources. They have nowhere to go,” Walsh recalls of what he told Justice Network execs at their initial meeting. “'I want you to run pictures of missing children every hour. I know it’ll cost advertising time,'” Walsh, the co-founder of the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, told them.

“And they went, ‘That’s a good idea.’”

So far, Walsh says, there have been 27 recoveries of missing kids, whose photos have been shown on the Justice Network since January, including one direct recovery.

Beyond his role with the new network, Walsh says he intends to go on a media blitz, making the cable and network news rounds to get the word out about lawmakers who aren’t on board with the reauthorization of the act.

“I’m going to name your name. I’m going to say, ‘You are Senator so-and-so, or you’re a member of the House, and you’re holding it up.’ That’s the only way to do it, to really call them out.”

Lawmakers, says Walsh, all too often play the blame game when he meets with them at the Capitol. “You’ll go and see them and they say, ‘She’s holding it up. He’s not getting the hearing for it. And he hasn’t called. Thanks for coming, Mr. Walsh. You’re a great guy, an American institution.’”

“And I go, ‘Bullshit. It’s in your committee. You’re up for reelection,’” Walsh exclaims.

When asked by ITK what the solution to the gridlock on the Hill is, Walsh, 69, replies bluntly, “Get them the hell out of there.”

Term limits, he says, could ease the impasse in Congress.

Some lawmakers, he says, “They got people making decisions for them, they’re in a coma. There are guys that have been there too long. It should be based on how much good legislation you can get passed, you know, what you’re really doing up there, not that ‘I want to be senator or congressman for life.’” ..Source.. by Judy Kurtz

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

New Bill in Congress: Rep Sensenbrenner wants $331 MILLION more for the Adam Walsh Act (The Money Pit)

1-21-2012 National:

HR 3796 "Adam Walsh Reauthorization Act of 2012" was introduced by Rep Sensenbrenner, F. James, Jr. [WI-5] (introduced 1/19/2012) Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. (Which he is Chairman of)

Stated Intent: To reauthorize certain programs established by the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006.

The bill states:

SEC. 2. SEX OFFENDER MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE (SOMA) PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION.

Section 126(d) of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. 16926(d)) is amended to read as follows:

`(d) Authorization of Appropriations- There are authorized to be appropriated to the Attorney General $20,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2013 through 2017, to be available only for--

`(1) the SOMA program; and

`(2) the Jessica Lunsford Address Verification Grant Program established under section 631.'.

SEC. 3. REAUTHORIZATION OF FEDERAL ASSISTANCE WITH RESPECT TO VIOLATIONS OF REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS.

Section 142(b) of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. 16941(b)) is amended by striking `such sums as may be necessary for fiscal years 2007 through 2009' and inserting `$46,200,000 for each of the fiscal years 2013 through 2017'.

.

Rep Sensenbrenner is a genius when it comes to getting what he wants, he is sly like a fox, here is his carrot, the reason why no one will vote against this bill:

SEC. 4. DURATION OF SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN JUVENILES.

Subparagraph (B) of section 115(b)(2) of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. 16915(b)(2)) is amended by striking `25 years' and inserting `15 years'.

.

Currently that subsection (42 U.S.C. 16915(b)(2)) regarding juveniles says:

(2) PERIOD.—In the case of—

(A) a tier I sex offender, the period during which the
clean record shall be maintained is 10 years; and

(B) a tier III sex offender adjudicated delinquent for
the offense which required registration in a sex registry
under this title, the period during which the clean record
shall be maintained is 25 years.

Lets discuss this for a minute. Does anyone remember my Nov. 2011 post "Adam Walsh Act - Second Chance Act and More Receive Appropriations through Agriculture Bill." Within that sneaky appropriation, couched as an Agriculture Law, was a ton of money for the Adam Walsh Act (the way its constructed, it is hard to figure an exact number, mostly because grants are issue for AWA out of the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant program, which received $470 MILLION then).

OK, AWA has been around now for 5-years, and has sucked up multiple tons of money, and there isn't one ounce of proof that it is doing anything but providing jobs for police. i.e., sucking up taxpayer funds under the guise of public safety.

NOTE: From the original Congressional Budget Office report for the Adam Walsh Act in 2005: "Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 4472 would cost about $1.5 billion over the 2006-2011 period." then "The bill also would add requirements for state, local, and tribal governments to receive full funding from three existing grant programs to track sex offenders. Assuming appropriation of the estimated amounts, CBO estimates that over $900 million would be available for fiscal years 2006 through 2010 for those governments to meet the new requirements for tracking sex offenders and to participate in other grant programs. Any additional costs to those governments would be incurred voluntarily as a condition of receiving this federal aid."

Verification of Registration by Sex Offenders. H.R. 4472 would require states, Indian tribes, and U.S. territories to verify the residence of sex offenders at least once a year. Based on information from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), CBO estimates that about 450,000 sex offenders nationwide would be affected by this provision. Because of the large number of offenders affected, we expect that about 40 states would need to hire additional staff to handle this duty. Assuming that each of those states would need two additional staff members whose annual salary and benefits would be, on average, $50,000, we estimate this provision would require funding of about $10 million over the 2006-2008 period. This total also includes amounts necessary to cover the costs of postage to contact offenders.

U.S. Marshals. The bill would require the U.S. Marshals Service to assist states in finding and apprehending sex offenders who violate registration requirements. According to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, there are about 100,000 sex offenders whose whereabouts are unknown to local law enforcement. According to the U.S. Marshals Service, in fiscal year 2004, the agency received almost 95,000 total warrants and resolved close to 90 percent of them. The agency expects that it would need to hire 350 new Marshals to take a lead role in executing a significant number of additional warrants for unregistered sex offenders. CBO estimates that the additional Marshals would cost $25 million in fiscal year 2007 and $220 million over the 2006-2011 period, including costs for space, training, supervision, and support staff.

And the list goes on and on, consider, we've spent -and- will spend, what in the future? Is there any question as to whether AWA is a money pit that needs to be closed?

AWA has been amended several times over the past 5-6-years, and not one amendment for some kind of study to prove its value, prove it is accomplishing public safety. The hypothetical belief that it does, doesn't cut it any more, time for proof. Time to put a cover on the Money Pit, and close it for good, simply repeal it (wishful thinking)!

As to his Juvenile CARROT, forget it, whether a juvenile has been on the registry 15 or 25 years no longer matters, his/her life was destroyed when they were FIRST put on the registry. See video "True Life: I'm A Sex Offender" as an example. Juveniles should not be on the registry at all!

Accordingly, I urge everyone to contact their Washington DC, Representatives and Senators, telling them to vote NO when this bill comes before them; STOP the INSANITY (AWA).

For now, have a great day and a better tomorrow.
eAdvocate

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Most States Find Joining National Sex Offender Database Not Cost-Effective

Suggestion: Read the comments at the end of the original article...

1-13-2012 National:

Less than a third of all U.S. states are complying with the federal law intended to protect children from sex offenders, with most states choosing not to invest in sharing their information with Washington.

Congress adopted the so-called Adam Walsh Act in 2006 that established a national sex offender registry and required states to report the names and locations of convicted child molesters to the federal government. The purpose of the database was to make it more difficult for sex offenders to avoid apprehension by moving from state to state.

To date, only 16 states (Correction: 15 states) have signed the law, even though the legislation mandated the entire country do so by 2011. Last year, the Obama administration issued new guidelines to encourage more cooperation from states in implementing the act; the move helped a dozen states become compliant.

Many states continue to view the Adam Walsh Act as an unfunded mandate requiring them to spend millions of dollars to collect sex-offender information, which means using their own limited resources on new equipment, such as technology to gather digital fingerprints, palm prints and DNA.

If states do not comply by the end of FY 2012 they will lose 10% of their justice assistance grants. However, most states still find non-compliance more cost-effective.

Adam Walsh was six years old when he was abducted from a Sears store in Hollywood, Florida, in 1981 and later found murdered. ..Source.. by -Noel Brinkerhoff, David Wallechinsky

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Trouble from the start with Walsh Act

Small minority: States in compliance with the Adam Walsh Act: Michigan, Nevada, Wyoming, Ohio, Delaware, South Dakota, Florida

6-13-2011 Tri-State:

A federal mandate to create a national sex offender registry passed by Congress left many states wondering whether it was necessary when it as passed in 2006.

The Adam Walsh Act was "an unfunded mandate and states were not part of the discussion when the bill was considered," said Susan Frederick, federal affairs counsel for the National Conference of State Legislatures. "We were told here's what we've done for you and we're not happy about that."

The result is that only seven states have met the law's requirements, some have given up entirely and others are scrambling to meet a July 27 deadline.

The act was named after a murdered 6-year-old boy whose father, John, went on to become host of "America's Most Wanted." John Walsh and law enforcement lobbyists spent years pushing for a sweeping bill that would create a national net through which sex criminals couldn't slip. The Adam Walsh Act was more than an update of earlier federal sex offender laws, it was meant to be a new structure that created a uniform front against the sex offender menace.

But it ran into trouble in statehouses across the country, where over the previous decade lawmakers had implemented a wide variety of laws to create their own sex offender registries.

Ask the officials who run those registries about the Adam Walsh Act, and in many cases their first response will be to delve into the history of their state's work that predates the federal mandate.

"Maryland was one of the first states, back in the late 1990s, to retroactively go back and require sex offenders coming in from other states to register here," said Elizabeth Bartholomew, who manages the state's sex offender registry, citing a component of the Adam Walsh Act that requires states to do just that. "Maryland wanted to get away from being a haven state for offenders."

Lawmakers in Maryland, however, are pushing back against strict registry requirements for juvenile offenders, and in that light they're joining several other states that are refusing to implement every piece of the federal law.

In response, the U.S. Justice Department loosened some its guidelines in January.

"We're working closely with every jurisdiction to bring them in compliance," a Justice Department official said. "We do have some flexibility." ..Source.. by Freeman Klopott

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Region resists fed sex offender rules

Sticking points
Parts of Adam Walsh Act that have slowed states' compliance:

-- A requirement to create a non-public list of youths 14 years or older convicted of violent sex offenses and leaving them on the list for at least 25 years.

-- The law requires states to rely on the level of offense -- from violent to nonviolent sex crimes -- rather than assessments of how the risk each offender carries to society in determining how long the offender will stay on the registry. States like Texas assess every sex offender to determine the length of stay on the registry.

-- The cost of implementing the law has kept some states from moving forward. The law requires significant changes to how states check on offenders and changes to the software states use to track and alert the public to sex offenders in their area. Although the Justice Department provides some of the software and some grant money for the changes, it doesn't cover it all.

6-13-2011 Tri-State:

Virginia, Maryland and the District are struggling to comply with a five-year-old federal mandate to create a national sex offender registry and critics say their failure could cause them to attract violent sex criminals to the region.

Despite two one-year extensions, only seven states have met the requirements of the Adam Walsh Act. With a final, July 27 deadline looming, some jurisdictions are scrambling to get in compliance. Maryland and Virginia have passed laws in recent years that keep better track of sex offenders through stricter reporting requirements. But lawmakers have been reluctant to require violent juvenile offenders to register for at least 25 years and aren't happy with being stuck with a multimillion-dollar tab, either.

The District is furthest from compliance in the Washington region and jurisdictions that fall behind the others could become havens for sex offenders, officials said.

"All jurisdictions are concerned that they will be perceived as having a laxer registration requirement than other jurisdictions and that this perception will encourage sex offenders to relocate," Deputy Mayor for Public Safety Paul Quander recently told a D.C. Council committee.

"We've seen evidence that sex offenders move from one jurisdiction to another because they may not be as closely monitored," Linda Baldwin, who runs the U.S. Department of Justice office that determines whether states are compliant with the Walsh Act, told The Washington Examiner.

"[The Adam Walsh Act] was designed to eliminate gaps and loopholes among states' sex offender registration regulations," she said. "Gaps and loopholes allow registered sex offenders to fall off the radar."

A major sticking point for many areas, including Maryland and D.C., is the federal requirement that youths 14 and older found guilty of a violent sex offense by the juvenile justice system be put on a sex offender registry for at least 25 years. The youth registry does not have to be public, but must be available to law enforcement agencies. "The existence of a permanent registry for young people may have a chilling effect on reporting [sex offenses]," Daniel Okonkwo, head of D.C. Lawyers for Youth, recently told the D.C. Council. "Families may be more reluctant to report abuses to avoid further court involvement."

The cost of implementing the Walsh Act has also slowed states' progress. Jurisdictions deemed by Baldwin's office to not have met the mandate by the deadline could lose 10 percent of a Justice Department grant that many states use to purchase equipment and provide training. The dollars at stake -- about $200,000 for D.C., and $500,000 for Maryland and Virginia each year -- often don't outweigh the costs of meeting the mandate. In Virginia, it could cost $10 million to fully implement the federal law. D.C. has not yet priced legislation introduced last month and cost isn't an issue in Maryland, which is nearly compliant.

At-large D.C. Councilman Phil Mendelson, who is "working on the bill," said "the cost of implementation is likely to exceed the dollars at risk, and the dollars at risk may evaporate with budget cuts in Congress."

He added, "the idea that we might become a haven for sex offenders if we don't meet the requirements sounds like rhetoric to me. ..Source.. by Freeman Klopott

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Down to the Wire: As the deadline approaches to comply with federal rules on sex offenders, some states are saying “no thanks.”

May 2011:

“Our system has been developed, refined and reworked over the course of more than a decade and a half.” REPRESENTATIVE PAT COLLOTON, KANSAS

While some states scramble to comply with portions of the federal sex offender registration law by its July deadline, others think the law’s rewards are just not worth the costs. The new requirements are extensive. The Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA)—a portion of the Adam Walsh Act that passed in 2006—expands the categories of offenders that states and tribes must register to include juveniles who commit certain serious crimes and some adult offenders convicted before the law was enacted. Some consider the amount and kind of information that states must now collect, regularly verify and share as onerous.

The legislation sets requirements for which offenses and offenders must be classified, lengthens how long they must stay registered, adds a requirement for periodic appearances by offenders for verification, and sets the penalties states must impose on those who fail to register. States that don’t meet what the U.S. Department of Justice terms “substantial implementation” will lose 10 percent of their Byrne law enforcement assistance grants.

Some policymakers, however, question the value of all these requirements. State sex
offender registries already contain names, addresses, photos, vehicle, job and other identifying information on hundreds of thousands of convicted sex offenders. If public safety is the goal of maintaining all these public registries, it’s not clear if all the information makes communities safer or if the most dangerous predators become lost among a growing swell of electronic information.

State lawmakers have enacted some 250 bills related to SORNA since 2007, but to date only Delaware, Florida, Ohio, South Dakota and two tribes have met “substanial implementation” standards. Although it’s likely more states will comply by the July deadline, lawmakers in other states have studied SORNA and believe their current sex offender registration policies and processes best address the needs in their states.

“Our system has been developed, refined and reworked over the course of more than a decade and a half,” Representative Pat Colloton of Kansas told members of a U.S. House subcommittee in February. “Legislative committees like mine have worked exhaustively with researchers, public safety professionals and community members to make our laws respond to the specific and unique needs of Kansas.” Colloton also points out that states have not really had several years to implement the SORNA rules because final, supplemental federal guidelines were not issued until earlier this year.

STATE SYSTEMS ARE BETTER:
A recent study by the Texas Senate Criminal Justice Committee found the loss of 10 percent of federal justice funding is an inadequate incentive to comply with SORNA. State officials estimated it would cost $38.7 million to comply, but the state would lose only about $1.4 million in Byrne funds if it refused. The costs would come from adding more offenders to the registry, some for longer periods of time, and needing more law enforcement personnel to verify information at required, frequent intervals.

Even so, the Senate recommendation in Texas not to comply was based on public safety,
not cost. Senator John Whitmire, chairman of the Criminal Justice Committee, says the federal mandates are no better than Texas’ laws that restrict parole and commit or supervise offenders based on their dangerousness.

“No one needs to show Texas the way to deal with sex offenders,” he says.

For the remainder of this paper: by Donna Lyons who directs National Conference of State Legislature’s Criminal Justice program.

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Congress plans hearing on ignored sex-offender law (An erroneous claim)

Reality is, States have not "Ignored" the Adam Walsh Act, instead they have given it serious consideration. Additionally, states have found that a goodly portion of AWA will actually violate many state laws, and rights of those registered. We need to look no further than Ohio, where there are thousands of lawsuits in the courts, and where its highest court has already declared AWA a constitutional violation as to many of Ohio's registrants. In addition, being an unfunded mandate, and that fact that states have found, the cost of implementing AWA (if they were to ignore rights of registrants) would be greater than the federal funding that Congress used to penalize states (National Conference of State Legislatures reasoning and figures), if they do not implement AWA.

Further, this was not an issue when the author of AWA, Rep Sensenbrenner, was not in a position of power. It now appears that the false claims which enacted AWA are again being used to claim states are ignoring AWA. Congress needs to recognize, states have valid reasons for what they are doing, unlike the -sounds good reasoning- of some in Congress.

12-9-2010 National:

WASHINGTON - Congress intends to examine why most states have failed to adopt a federal law meant to help track the nation's 700,000 convicted sex offenders, including 100,000 who have fallen off the radar screen.

The newly named chairman of the House Judiciary Committee said Wednesday that he wants to hold a hearing on why 46 states have busted deadline after deadline set in the 2006 Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act.

The law was intended to tighten oversight of the nation's convicted sex offenders by, among other things, requiring states to adopt uniform reporting standards.

Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, an original co-sponsor of the measure who will chair the powerful committee when Republicans take over in January, said the delays in implementing the law are troubling. Ohio, Florida, Delaware and South Dakota have complied with the law. The other 46 states have missed 2009 and 2010 deadlines. A third deadline is now set for July 2011.

"As we near the 2011 deadline for jurisdictions to comply with the Act, I am concerned that only four states have achieved this goal," Smith said in a statement.

Smith's call for a congressional hearing comes weeks after a Scripps Howard News Service investigation found that most states have failed to implement the Adam Walsh law.

That failure hinders law enforcement from keeping tabs on offenders, backers of the law say. Some 100,000 convicted sex offenders are currently considered AWOL, according to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

Responding to the Scripps report, the law's chief sponsor, Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis, told SHNS that he planned to demand an accounting from Attorney General Eric Holder, whose U.S. Department of Justice is in charge of implementing the law.

After the Scripps report was published, another original sponsor of the law, Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., also called on Holder to step up efforts to implement the law.

The law seeks to plug a crucial gap in oversight: State sex-offender registries don't sync well with each other. That means sex offenders can cross state lines and sometimes evade oversight. The 2006 law addressed this, issuing uniform standards for keeping track of sex offenders. The goal was to transform a patchwork of oversight into a lock-tight national system for tracking sex offenders.

But the law requires states to bear the cost of implementation. (The Justice Department has provided $30 million to help meet the law's requirements, but states must spend millions more.)

Another obstacle: The Walsh act forces the vast majority of states to pass new laws to allow these details of the offenders and their crimes to be released to the public.

Ernie Allen, president and CEO of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, a private group that works with law enforcement to protect communities, said he was confident more states would meet the law by the July 2011 deadline.

"Our sense is a lot of states out there have made serious efforts, and there are a lot of states that are very close to becoming compliant," Allen said.

Smith said that protecting children from sex predators is one of his top priorities, and he has worked to secure funding to implement key parts of the Walsh act to keep kids safe.

"We must continue to work with the states and the Justice Department to reach full compliance with the Act and to protect the most vulnerable among us, Smith said. ..Source.. by Issac Wolf

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Sponsor of sex offender law blasts Obama administration

Folks should never forget how the Adam Walsh Act was morphed into a law by Sensenbrenner who got it passed "under suspension of the rules" when such is NOT SUPPOSED to be used for such a issue (".. this procedure is usually used only for expedited consideration of relatively noncontroversial measures." No issue in this century has been more controversial than sex offender issues; reality which Sensenbrenner refuses to face! Now that his party will be in control they will play the sex offender card, again, again and again!

11-24-2010 National:

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The chief sponsor of the Adam Walsh Act blasted the Obama administration for failing to make states implement the landmark law tracking sex offenders.

Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., on Tuesday blamed Attorney General Eric Holder for the fact that 46 states have failed to meet uniform federal standards to track sex offenders. After missing the July 2009 deadline, they were given extensions to complete the work without the risk of losing millions of dollars in federal grants.

"The only people who benefit from that are sexual predators who hide," Sensenbrenner said. He suggested states would have no problem complying with the law -- as soon as they face a penalty for not doing so.

Linda Baldwin, director of the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering and Tracking, said states might not get further extensions beyond the revised July 2011 deadline. But even if they miss that deadline, they could ask the Justice Department for grant money to work on tracking sex offenders.

Only four states -- Delaware, Florida, Ohio and South Dakota -- have met the sex offender oversight requirements. But that doesn't mean the rest are not trying to meet the law, Baldwin said. "It doesn't show the full picture when you're looking (only) at all the states that have crossed the finished line. There's a lot of activity going on."

Along with changes to data systems, the "vast majority" of jurisdictions need to pass laws changing the type of sex offender records they keep, Baldwin said. Contentious issues include retroactively registering sex offenders, adding juveniles to the lists and categorizing offenses.

To help states shoulder the cost of reworking their sex offender registries, the Justice Department has provided $30.2 million, a department spokeswoman said. Baldwin said she wasn't sure how much it costs states to implement the law.

Sensenbrenner's comments came two weeks after a Scripps Howard News Service investigation found that 100,000 convicted sex offenders in the United States are AWOL, sometimes congregating in states thought to have lax oversight, including Michigan and Washington.

This claim of 100,000 missing (a ficticious number) has gone one for years way before any news agency did any research.

Prior to the Walsh law, individual states kept sex offender records, but the information wasn't uniformly organized across the nation. The law's intent was to synchronize bookkeeping to help keep sex offenders from slipping under the radar of police and parents.

Sensenbrenner also blamed states -- including his home of Wisconsin -- for not taking the law seriously. "There's no excuse for this," he said. "I'm sorry that people at the state level haven't gotten serious. I wonder how many more tragedies have to occur before they will."

Sensenbrenner sits on the House Judiciary Committee, which Republicans will take over in January. He plans to push Holder to end the extensions during a committee hearing next year. "I'm going to confront him face to face," Sensenbrenner said. "He really hasn't cracked the whip." ..Source.. by Isaac Wolf

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...