With Slow Progress on Federal Level, Police Reform Remains Patchwork Across U.S.

[SummerMadness]

With Slow Progress on Federal Level, Police Reform Remains Patchwork Across U.S.

One week ago, people celebrated in the streets of Minneapolis as a judge read the guilty verdicts in the trial of former police officer Derek Chauvin, convicted of murdering George Floyd.

In the days since, the Justice Department announced it would investigate whether the police departments in Minneapolis and Louisville, where Breonna Taylor was killed by police, engage in a "pattern or practice" of discrimination or excessive force.

But even as advocates and family members of those killed by police welcomed those developments, they said the need for structural change to policing has not disappeared — a point underscored, they said, by the police killings of Black people during and since the Chauvin trial in Brooklyn Center, Minn., Columbus, Ohio, and Elizabeth City, N.C.

 

[Fantine]

The Senate needs to pass the George Floyd Act.

 

[mark46]

The Senate needs to pass the George Floyd Act.

No, the Democrats need to STOP posturing and have senators negotiate a law that has the support of 60 members of the Senate.

DOA bills don't help get anything done, unless you think that this bullying will help convince Manchin to cave on the filibuster.

 

[Fantine]

We do need to end the filibuster.

I define posturing as the "thoughts and prayers" many Republicans recite as they wait on line ar the sporting goods store to buy more ammo.

We tried to reform the police by letting the states do what they wanted. Let's call that posture turning your back.

It's time for action.

 

[mark46]

We do need to end the filibuster.

I define posturing as the "thoughts and prayers" many Republicans recite as they wait on line ar the sporting goods store to buy more ammo.

We tried to reform the police by letting the states do what they wanted. Let's call that posture turning your back.

It's time for action.

I strongly agree that it is time for action. And, I agree that the majority of the Senate would support legislation. It does NOT follow that the appropriate strategy is to basically have a Democratic proposal that the Republicans should be expected to approve.

As I said, I want the appropriate Senate committee to draft a bill. That is the only route to 60 votes. Asking for the approval of House drafted bill has little to with passing a law, and everything to do with 2022 and 2024 politics.

 

[mark46]

We do need to end the filibuster.

It is indeed time to end the filibuster. I see only one way for this to happen: elect more Democratic senators. It is really that simple. Manchin (and several others that don't have to speak out now) won't support the end to the filibuster.

That being said, I do believe that Manchin might support no filibuster for the voting bill.

 

[SimplyMe]

I strongly agree that it is time for action. And, I agree that the majority of the Senate would support legislation. It does NOT follow that the appropriate strategy is to basically have a Democratic proposal that the Republicans should be expected to approve.

As I said, I want the appropriate Senate committee to draft a bill. That is the only route to 60 votes. Asking for the approval of House drafted bill has little to with passing a law, and everything to do with 2022 and 2024 politics.

The only route to get to 60 votes is likely to remove Sen. McConnell. He, as the Minority Leader, will not allow any Republicans to vote on any bill -- no matter how much negotiating is done with Republicans.

 

[Fantine]

The only route to get to 60 votes is likely to remove Sen. McConnell. He, as the Minority Leader, will not allow any Republicans to vote on any bill -- no matter how much negotiating is done with Republicans.

And he controls a huge amount of campaign money and will mount primaries against those who defy him.

 

[Fantine]

It is indeed time to end the filibuster. I see only one way for this to happen: elect more Democratic senators. It is really that simple. Manchin (and several others that don't have to speak out now) won't support the end to the filibuster.

That being said, I do believe that Manchin might support no filibuster for the voting bill.

DC statehood would certainly help--and there is no reason why it should fail.

 

[Aldebaran]

DC statehood would certainly help--and there is no reason why it should fail.

The area that D.C. now occupies is spelled out in the Constitution as the seat of government. It was designed specifically as a district, rather than a state, under a complex agreement involving Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. Even its size, “not exceeding ten Miles square,” is specified.

Madison was concerned that if the capital was located in a state, that state could gain too much power and impose restrictions on Congress. So the founders made a conscious decision not to locate the U.S. Capitol in a state.
State debate: Why has DC never become a state? | WTOP

 

[Fantine]

"Not to exceed 10 miles" means it can be much, much, much smaller. The federal sites will still be on a much smaller appropriately sized capitol district.

Did the founding fathers want to deprive 700,000 residents of representation? The insurrection of 1/6, which left residents unprotected and terrified, has shown how urgent statehood is.

 

[Aldebaran]

"Not to exceed 10 miles" means it can be much, much, much smaller. The federal sites will still be on a much smaller appropriately sized capitol district.

Did the founding fathers want to deprive 700,000 residents of representation?

The majority of those "residents" are lobbyists, politicians, powerbrokers, etc. that are there to influence. Them and their families.

The insurrection of 1/6, which left residents unprotected and terrified, has shown how urgent statehood is.

"Insurrection"
As if DC doesn't even have its own police.

 

[Fantine]

You know as well as I do that the Capitol Police was incapable of containing the angry violent mob. But D.C. doesn't have its own guard and the former president refused to authorize the help they desperately needed.

 

[mark46]

The only route to get to 60 votes is likely to remove Sen. McConnell. He, as the Minority Leader, will not allow any Republicans to vote on any bill -- no matter how much negotiating is done with Republicans.

???
McConnell would be replaced by lots worse, by a much more pro-Trump senator.

 

[mark46]

DC statehood would certainly help--and there is no reason why it should fail.

No reason?

It will fail because there aren't 10 Republicans who would vote for it (presuming 50 Democrats).

 

[Aldebaran]

You know as well as I do that the Capitol Police was incapable of containing the angry violent mob. But D.C. doesn't have its own guard and the former president refused to authorize the help they desperately needed.

Well, now it's a military encampment. Be happy.

 

[mark46]

"Not to exceed 10 miles" means it can be much, much, much smaller. The federal sites will still be on a much smaller appropriately sized capitol district.

Did the founding fathers want to deprive 700,000 residents of representation? The insurrection of 1/6, which left residents unprotected and terrified, has shown how urgent statehood is.

The founder would have had no problem with DC not having representation. And you should only count white male landowners, if you want to appeal to the ideas of the the founders.

But, wait a bit. When there are 60 Democratic senators, DC and Puerto Rico will both be states.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

The founder would have had no problem with DC not having representation. And you should only count white male landowners, if you want to appeal to the ideas of the the founders.

But, wait a bit. When there are 60 Democratic senators, DC and Puerto Rico will both be states.

Pretty scathing indictment to make of the Republican Party that they are willingly preventing almost 4 millions American citizens from having representation in the Senate and voting representation in the House.

 

[mark46]

Pretty scathing indictment to make of the Republican Party that they are willingly preventing almost 4 millions American citizens from having representation in the Senate and voting representation in the House.

scathing is in the eye of the beholder.
Almost all Republicans are very proud of their position.

 

[Aldebaran]

Pretty scathing indictment to make of the Republican Party that they are willingly preventing almost 4 millions American citizens from having representation in the Senate and voting representation in the House.

That's nothing! There are over 130 million more people in Mexico who don't have representation in the Senate and voting representation in the House.