Following is another of occasional profiles of members of Congress who are former prosecutors.

Before her election to Congress in 1998, Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-OH) was prosecuting attorney of Cuyahoga County (Cleveland), Ohio, and an active member of NDAA. Before that she served as a judge at two judicial levels in the county. Both experiences have served her well so far in her congressional career, giving her expertise and an authoritative voice on a broad range of criminal justice issues.

Married to business executive Mervyn L. Jones, Sr., and mother of a teenage son, Mervyn, Jr., Jones explains that she’s comfortable being called either Tubbs Jones or Jones, but that she’s listed as Jones on the House voting board.

She says her experience as a prosecutor has been “very useful” in debates over such issues as gun control and federalization of local crimes. She has strong views on each, opposing so-called instant record checks on gun purchasers and taking a dim view of federalization.

On the latter issue, she declares, “Those of us who were local prosecutors have pointed out to our colleagues that often a law (federalizing a local crime) will be passed for the moment, and after the hype and the moment have passed, it’s the local prosecutor who ends up prosecuting the crime anyway, and the feds never become involved.”

She was the original sponsor of the Child Abuse Protection and Enforcement Act of 1999, which provides child protection service organizations with funds to train child protection workers who often are under-trained and underpaid. The bill won bipartisan support through the co-sponsorship of a fellow Ohioan, Republican Representative Deborah Price.

Jones is a member of the House Banking and Financial Services Committeee and the Small Business Committee. When asked why she didn’t go on the Judiciary Committee, she explains, “I just made a decision that if I was going to change careers I was going to change what I was involved in, and that’s why I went to the Banking and Financial Services Committee and the Small Business Committee, because these committees handle issues that are important to my constituents.

“But let me also say that although I’m not on the Judiciary Committee, I’m called upon on numerous occasions by the Judiciary Committee to discuss legislation from that committee on the floor. I have also testified before the Judiciary Committee and have been asked on a number of occasions to speak on criminal justice issues, based on my background and experience.”

Asked what, from her perspective in Congress, she regards as the major challenges facing the nation’s state and local prosecutors, Jones says, “Being heard by those who make the laws on criminal justice, especially members of Congress.” She adds: “So often we’re so busy doing our day-to-day work that it’s difficult for people to believe that we want to hear their positions and opinions on issues. We do want to hear your positions.”

Jones says she would encourage prosecutors, in conjunction with their state associations and NDAA, to make known to members of Congress their positions on criminal justice issues and on “innovative ways to deal with issues in their communities.”

In Jones’s view, the best thing that Congress can do to help prosecutors carry out their responsibilities more effectively is to “provide more funding to prosecutors for prevention and enforcement.” She adds that she does not like legislation with strings attached, such as requiring that “so many more jails be built” in a jurisdiction as a requirement for receiving crime-fighting funds. This presumes, she says, that jail is the only option and ignores such other options as alternative sentencing.

“As a former judge,” she continues,” I am opposed to mandatory sentencing. As a prosecutor I opposed it and now, as a member of Congress, I oppose it. My reason is that I don’t believe that mandatory sentencing allows prosecutor discretion and it clearly denigrates the judge’s ability to impose appropriate sentences. I continue to push this issue in Congress because of the impact it has on communities across the nation, especially because a greater number of African Americans are incarcerated in this country than anyone else.”

Jones admits she still misses some aspects of being a prosecutor.

“One of the things I miss most about being a prosecutor,” she says with a hint of wistfulness, “is that I was in charge. As a member of Congress, I am not in charge. I cannot say that in six months I’m going to accomplish this objective or that objective, that I’m going to get this bill or that bill passed. And that’s a dilemma for me. When you have 435 people administering and dealing with the issues that face this nation, it’s difficult to be in sync.”

Jones says she also misses knowing how her time would be regulated and having “some consistency to the hours I would be required to be available. Here in Congress, you don’t know when your schedule is going to begin and it’s going to end. I also miss the opportunity to be in touch with my constituents as much as I was as a prosecutor. I was in the community every day, talking with people. Now as a member of Congress living in two cities, I don’t have that opportunity.”

Apparently the constituents back in the 11th Congressional District of Ohio think that their representative in Congress is doing just fine They re-elected her to her second term in November, giving her 84 percent of the vote.