Progressives in Congress are pushing a measure to aimed at promoting cultural and diversity trainings for police recruits.
The bill seeks to incentivize state and local law enforcement agencies to employ various trainings ostensibly aimed at addressing bias in policing.
Several former law enforcement officials now serving in Congress have criticized the measure, alleging that it is an attempt to infuse far-leftist ideology using the power of the federal government. Rep. John Rutherford (R-FL), a former sheriff, told Fox News Digital that it is “imperative that law enforcement officers are well-trained on agency policy and procedures and held to the highest standards that keep both officers and the public safe,” but argued that “it is not the role of Congress, nor should it be, to tell agencies what that training should look like.”
The bill was reintroduced by Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) earlier this month after the police killing of Sonya Massey in Illinois.
Rutherford further stated he opposes “any effort to nationalize our law enforcement agencies, which is exactly what Rep. Cohen’s bill does.”
Rep. Pete Stauber (R-MN) characterized the measure as part of a “defund the police” agenda.
"Even after the failures of their extreme ‘Defund the Police’ movement, radical Democrats continue to demonize the brave men and women who protect and serve their communities. These anti-cop politicians don’t want real reform, they want to eradicate law enforcement altogether, and proposals like this continue to incite violence against them," Stauber told Fox News Digital.
The bill, titled the “Police Training and Independent Review Act,” aims to improve police training and accountability. It would authorize the Attorney General to provide grants to states for implementing fair and impartial police training and independent prosecution of law enforcement.
"A State shall require that all individuals enrolled in an academy of a law enforcement agency of the State and all law enforcement officers of the State complete a training session on fair and impartial policing each year,” the bill reads.
Officers and recruits would have to participate in at least eight hours of this training and then four hours each subsequent year they are on the force.
Officers will have to go through "anti-bias training on implicit and explicit bias on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability" as well as "training regarding— cultural diversity; police interaction with individuals with mental illness or behavioral, mental, or physical disabilities; crisis intervention; and de-escalation tactics."
To be eligible for the grant, states must comply with the training requirements within a specified timeframe.
There are several problems with this legislation. To start with, it is a blatant example of federal overreach, as Rutherford argued. It could also be a step toward nationalizing law enforcement. While it does not mandate these trainings, it is certainly using the power of the purse to compel states to implement them. Policing should remain under the purview of state and local governments that are closer to the people, not by officials in Washington, D.C.
Moreover, there is ample reason to be suspicious about progressive measures supposedly aimed at addressing bias. This is likely just another way to infuse far-leftist ideology in more government institutions as they have with federal law enforcement agencies. The progressive version of “woke” has no place among agencies charged with protecting our rights.
To be fair, there could be positive aspects to some of these trainings. Equipping officers to deal with mentally ill people and teaching them effective ways to deescalate when faced with difficult encounters is a laudable goal. However, progressives are the last people who should be entrusted with such a responsibility given that their agenda is more about political ideology than effective solutions.
Yes, there are plenty of reforms needed in law enforcement and criminal justice. But federally imposed measures are not the way to address these issues – especially when they are aimed to expand progressive ideology into other areas of government instead of protecting people’s rights.
