mr. chairman , i yield myself such time as i may consume . 
mr. chairman , i rise in opposition to the scott amendment . 
it strips all of the mandatory minimum penalties out of the bill . 
the amendment seeks to strip the core provisions of the bill . 
let me remind everyone of the nature of the problem we face today . 
more than 57 , 000 law enforcement officers were assaulted in 2003 , or one in every 10 officers serving in the united states . 
the numbers have been increasing since 1999 , even as every other crime has decreased or held steady . 
the executive director of the fraternal order of police noted recently `` there is less respect for authority in general and police officers specifically . 
the predisposition of criminals to use firearms is probably at the highest point of our history. '' the secure access proposal addresses this problem by sending a message of deterrence . 
the existing penalty for assaulting a law enforcement officer is 8 years , 15 if with a weapon . 
under current criminal law , a false statement made to an fbi agent in a terrorism investigation carries the same penalty as a violent assault of a police officer . 
federal , state , and local judges have suffered from rising threats , and deadly attacks have been directed against judges as well as courthouse participants . 
according to the administrative office of united states courts , there are almost 700 threats made a year against federal judges , and in numerous cases federal judges have had security details assigned to them for fear of attack by members of terrorist organizations , violent gangs , and disgruntled litigants . 
h.r. 1751 provides a reasonable penalty structure for assaults against judges , prosecutors and public safety officers , as well as members of their families . 
the bill adopts a penalty structure requiring 1 to 10 years for an assault that results in bodily injury , such as a cut , abrasion , bruise , burn , disfigurement , pain or illness ; 3 to 12 years for substantial bodily injury , temporary but substantial disfigurement , temporary but substantial loss or impairment ; and 10 to 30 years for serious bodily injury , substantial risk of death , extreme physical pain , protracted and obvious disfigurement , or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member , organ or mental faculty . 
these penalties roughly correspond to existing guideline ranges and simply ensure that federal judges impose the required penalty , but can exercise discretion to a higher penalty if warranted . 
law enforcement officers deserve our fullest protection , brazen criminals show less and less regard for the police and the hard work that they do . 
our message is simple : if you attack a police officer or kill a police officer , you will be going to jail for a long time . 
as revised , the mandatory minimums are commensurate with existing federal sentencing guidelines , but in the absence of a mandatory minimum guideline system , there is too much at risk to leave the sentencing to judges who have already demonstrated their willingness to depart from the guidelines when presented with a case . 
mandatory minimum penalties are effective for ensuring consistency in sentencing . 
since the supreme court 's decision in united states v. booker , judges now have virtually unlimited discretion to ignore the federal sentencing guidelines and impose whatever sentence they like , all to the detriment of public safety and fairness and sentencing through consistent and clear punishment schemes . 
judges are now completely unaccountable . 
congress has a duty to set sentencing policies for federal crimes and to make sure that judges impose such sentences . 
unfortunately , that has not been the experience since the booker decision . 
once freed from mandatory sentencing schemes , federal judges are now starting to ignore the guidelines : in one of every 10 criminal cases , they are imposing sentences below the previously mandated guideline range . 
in a recently released report , the sentencing commission data confirmed that this trend is continuing , and specifically broke out such data by circuits , which showed that judges in the second and ninth circuits followed the guideline ranges in imposing sentences in a substantially lower percentage than the other circuits . 
sentences now for similar crimes are being handed in disparate fashion , depending on the region where the offense occurs . 
this is not equal justice under the law in the federal system . 
those judges , when they go to the supreme court , ought to look at the motto that is underneath the roof of the court at the main entrance when they walk in . 
for these reasons , i urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment . 
mr. chairman , i yield back the balance of my time . 
