Bid to Revamp Crime Bill Sparks Clash : Legislation: Both sides in House trade insults in battle over GOP’s drive to shift focus to more police, prisons. Democrats warn of pork-barrel spending.

WASHINGTON — Opening a new debate on old legislation, House Republicans and Democrats clashed Thursday over whether last year’s hard-fought crime bill should be redesigned to shift crime prevention money to pay for more police, prisons and programs to reform the often unwieldy criminal justice system.

The debate--mirroring the angry exchanges heard over the 1994 crime bill--quickly took a bitter tone as two key members of a House Judiciary panel traded insults and ridiculed each other’s efforts over how crime should be fought as hearings on the issue began.

Rep. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), who until the Republican sweep last November chaired the Judiciary subcommittee on crime and criminal justice, charged that the GOP’s efforts this year to give more discretionary crime-fighting money to local communities would create a real-life version of a dinosaur.

“This Republican crime bill is full of old, worn-out ideas and so stuffed with political fat that it ought to be called Jurassic Pork,” he said.

“The crime bill we passed guarantees 100,000 new police officers on our streets,” he said, plugging the 1994 measure that was pushed by Democrats. “But this crime bill,” he said, referring to Republicans’ proposed revisions in the law, “guarantees pork-barrel spending by cash-starved mayors.”

But his Republican colleague, Rep. Steven H. Schiff of New Mexico, accused the Democrats of stuffing the 1994 bill with pet projects for local communities. And he too invoked a movie theme. Turning to Schumer, he said: “Look who’s talking.”

“The American people know the bill we passed last year was not very good,” Schiff said.

The new panel chairman, Rep. Bill McCollum (R-Fla.), pledged that--despite the rocky start--his subcommittee will vote within two weeks on sending a bill to the House floor. He vowed to meet the 100-day deadline in passing the legislation--the second provision in the GOP’s “contract with America” campaign manifesto, which is titled, “Stop Violent Criminals.”

“The voters spoke loud and clear on Nov. 8 and today, we start business on one of the most important aspects of that contract,” he said.

Last year’s crime bill promised to add 100,000 new police officers in the nation’s cities, but also targeted $7 billion to prevention programs. The programs, roundly decried by Republicans, included after-school activities in tough neighborhoods and other social activities.

But the Republicans--emboldened by their new majorities in both houses of Congress--want to rewrite the crime bill this year and allow local law enforcement officials the latitude to decide whether they need more police officers or prisons.

They also want to shorten the number of appeals for Death Row inmates, to enact “truth-in-sentencing” legislation that would do away with parole and to implement more procedures mandating restitution for crime victims.

Democrats, led by Schumer, argued that crime prevention and drug treatment--not just police and jail cells--are key components of any successful crime-reduction plan.

Schumer said that under the GOP changes local mayors and county officials could use the money for “anything” that they believe will reduce crime. “This,” he said, “is an irresponsible rat hole.”

But the Republicans, led by McCollum, brought their own witnesses into the hearing, including California Atty. Gen. Daniel E. Lungren, a former Republican congressman who once served on the Judiciary panel.

He testified that state and local officials are well suited to combat crime in their own communities. “Washington may not always know best,” he said.

Lungren also specifically argued for reform measures limiting the number of appeals available to Death Row inmates, noting that California now houses 400 condemned inmates.

He also called for an end to “frivolous” lawsuits filed by prisoners, noting that he has had to employ 51 assistants to handle prisoner lawsuits over such grievances as crunchy versus plain peanut butter and prison regulations against talking on buses.

Lungren said that the litigation cost taxpayers $9 million last year alone.