E9B1AE7C-6322-4480-A83A-58D36BEDADE3.png
 

Democrats push to defund police... again.


The Democrats campaigned hard against the Republican view point that Democrats want to defund the police. This was something most Democrats brushed off as the most absurd talking point of the right. For example, here is a quote from a business insider article from June 11 2020,


"The former vice president has actually called for even more funding to go toward law enforcement to "reinvigorate community policing." He views this as a path toward reform. "I've long been a firm believer in the power of community policing—getting cops out of their cruisers and building relationships with the people and the communities they are there to serve and protect," Biden wrote in a USA Today op-ed."

This would seem contrary to the new bill, HR 1280, a partisan bill that 2 Democrats in the house ended up voting against. According to the Democrats HR 1280 claims to: Ban the use of choke-holds and no-knock warrants, Establish a national database on police misconduct, Make lynching a federal hate crime, Bar racial, religious and discriminatory profiling, Require the use of body cameras, Limit the transfer of military-grade weapons to police, and Condition federal aid on training/policies designed to quell racial profiling and bias.


However, it would seem this just glosses over the nature of the bill and an overall lack of input from the other side of the aisle. Representative Jim Jordan's (R-OH) office stated the democrats failed to receive any Republican input, specifically ignoring requests from republicans to add simple "common sense" changes: such as: strengthen the anti-lynching provision, ensure our Border Patrol has the necessary equipment to fight dangerous cartels, prevent unions from shielding bad cops in collective bargaining agreements, and require that federal law enforcement agencies record interviews.


The largest criticism for HR1280 is the financial impact to local law enforcement agencies. Jason Smith (R-MO), Ranking Member on the Budget Committee, and Jim Jordan (R-OH), Ranking Member on the Judiciary Committee detailed the budgetary concerns in a letter to the Congressional Budget Office Director Phillip Swagel. It reads "“It is our understanding that H.R. 1280 contains provisions that significantly violate the current Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) threshold of $85 million,” the letter stated. “It is further our understanding that these provisions may in fact result in additional costs to state, local, and tribal governments totaling in the hundreds of millions of dollars which would deprive these localities of the resources needed to provide adequate policing and public safety services in their communities." “We respectfully ask that CBO provide a detailed estimate of the total cost that the mandates included in H.R. 1280 would impose on state, local, and tribal governments if it were enacted into law,” the letter concluded.


The mainstream media seem to be rejecting the idea that this is in any way a partisan or questionable bill, soft-balling the criticism but still pointing out a hard line position from the left, further proving the absurdity of HR 1280. A New York Times article titled "These Top Democrats Go Further Than Biden on Diverting Police Funds" states in the opening line "Interviews with superdelegates and members of a Biden-Sanders task force found near-unanimous sentiment for redirecting money away from policing, with positions beyond what Joseph R. Biden Jr. has proposed." but proceeds to claim "Very few advocate fully defunding or abolishing the police, as some activists have called for. But they are aligning themselves, as have city councils in Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Denver, Portland, Ore., and other cities, with an increasingly popular movement to drastically rethink the priorities surrounding law enforcement." This seems to indicate that when the Republicans say the Democrats are for defunding the police it somehow is equivalent to the abolition of police departments through the funding levers of government. This was never the case and is a blatantly partisan argument to shift the lens away from what they are trying to do by making it seem that Republican objections to the bill are unfair and overbroad.


Republicans have been steadfast in their opinion that when you advocate for reallocation of funding from police departments to other areas of community development this requires the shrinking of police departments and a lessened ability of the the departments ability to respond to issues ongoing in these cities. The NYPD and LAPD are already critically undermanned and are unable to respond to calls they receive on a daily basis. This has already caused problems in the communities in which they serve and have only gotten worse during the past year where crime rates have sky-rocketed in these cities because of law enforcements inability to keep pace with what is happening. This would indicate a need for more funding, not less. However, according to House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) “The unfunded mandates in their bill, H.R. 1280, would cost police departments hundreds of millions of dollars—the equivalent of taking 3,000 cops or more off the streets. Our men and women in uniform deserve better.” There is no doubt in my mind that this will lead to more unrest and destruction in the cities if this is able to make it through the Senate.


"I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose."

Galatians 2:21

Citations:


https://www.dailywire.com/news/democrats-pass-bill-critics-say-defunds-police-and-reject-proposal-to-condemn-calls-to-abolish-police


https://www.businessinsider.com/democrats-reject-calls-to-defund-the-police-from-blm-protesters-2020-6


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/us/politics/defund-police-protests-democrats.html

5 views0 comments