Disapproving the Action of the District of Columbia Council in Approving the Revised Criminal Code Act of 2022

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TILLIS. Mr. President, I rise today to voice my support for the resolution we are talking about on public safety in Washington, DC.

The DC Revised Criminal Code Act is another example of how the far left is so out of touch that they want to reduce penalties for violent crime in DC while residents, Federal employees, Members of Congress, our visiting constituents, and even our visiting diplomats are facing greater risk.

There are a number of concerns I have with the crime bill that the DC Council passed over the objections of the DC Mayor, many of which have already been discussed at length by my colleagues.

But one of the most puzzling to me is why you would ever reduce penalties for carjacking. DC city officials saw from 2019 to 2020, the number of carjackings in DC more than doubled from 152 to 360. They are not following trends either. In 2021, it went up to 425; and in 2022, it went up to 485. Despite the fact that carjackings have more than tripled in the last 4 years, far-left radicals on the DC City Council thought now was the time to reduce penalties for carjacking. That is one of only several examples we can go to that my colleagues have talked about.

That tells me that the DC City Council is blind to crime happening right in front of them--right outside their front door--or that the carjacking industry has some really good lobbyists here in Washington.

Now, to make it worse, only a month ago, President Biden's Office of Management and Budget issued a statement opposing this resolution and in support of letting radical DC activists on the council let the bill go into effect. Not only that, but at least on two occasions, President Biden's U.S. attorney in Washington, DC, expressed support for letting the radical proposal proceed, even while raising concerns about how extreme the policies were.

I am appealing directly to President Biden. First, I want to thank him for agreeing to sign this resolution when we send it to the President's desk after a successful vote. I am also asking the President to prove his commitment to public safety by working with my colleagues and me on commonsense, bipartisan proposals that keep communities safe. I think that I have a track record of bipartisanship here that the President should take as a good-faith offer. We need to get to work.

One of the bills that I would like to get support for is a bill that I filed last Congress--and I am going to file again--called the Protect and Serve Act. We need to get it into law because it creates penalties for those who assault or kill a police officer, the brave men and women in law enforcement.

We need to show our commitment to law enforcement and to law and order in this country, and I believe the Protect and Serve Act will send a clear signal to friends and foes alike that we care about law enforcement. We need the thousands of law enforcement jobs that are not being filled today because law enforcement feels like at least policymakers--I don't believe the American people--are working against them.

But now I also want to talk a little bit about how crime is getting worse. I consider the Presiding Officer a friend.

You are on the other side of the aisle, but I see us having a lot in common. But, Mr. President, I have to tell you, for those of you watching this speech--my mother and maybe a few others--I think it is important to understand how campaign finance works here.

Both the Republicans and Democrats have national organizations that work on supporting candidates. I think that is fine. Here is what I don't think is fine. It is actually something--I just made sure the subpage is still up. It is. I can't lift up my phone and show you all because it is a violation of Senate rules. If you Google ``ActBlue'' and ``all cops are bastards,'' you will go to a fundraising web page on ActBlue--the very same engine that my Democratic colleagues use for fundraising.

I know most of my Democratic colleagues do not embrace that as anything that they would support or contribute to, but it is out there. If you go to their website, you are going to see the 13.12-mile run. They go on to explain why they specifically picked that distance-- because ``1-3-1-2'' translates into ``A-C-A-B.'' Do you know what ``A- C-A-B'' translates into? ``All cops are bastards''--all.

We know that in any area where you have tens of thousands of people, not all of them are angels, but all of them? Our law enforcement folks here on Capitol Hill--all of them? The ones who protected us on January 6? They are raising money to convince people that all cops are bastards--actblue.com.

It will be interesting to see if anybody on the city council in DC has actually provided a contribution.

More recently, I think that this sort of rhetoric is at least in part what occurred in Atlanta just about a week ago, where violent activists attacked a construction site for Atlanta's public safety training. At least 23 of the agitators were arrested and charged with domestic terrorism after conducting what the Atlanta Police Department is calling ``a coordinated attack on construction equipment and police officers.''

Here is what is ironic about that. I have been to several police officer training facilities, and do you know what they train there? They train them to protect themselves and protect innocent victims, but they also train them how to deescalate. They train them how to take a dangerous situation and let someone who may be a criminal be able to go and face justice but not die at a crime scene. They are teaching police officers to be better.

In Atlanta, because of this sort of rhetoric, they are attacking the very people we all want to see at our doorstep when we dial 9-1-1. The violent activists destroyed multiple pieces of construction equipment. Thankfully, no police officers were harmed. These are not your run-of- the-mill ``defund the police'' activists; these are radicals like the radicals who are raising money on it, who are willing to use violence to achieve their ends of abolishing the police.

This DC crime bill that we are going to overturn today is another step in that direction--enabling and encouraging unsafe communities at the expense of the vast majority of police officers and citizens who simply want to live in peace.

It is long past time for the Federal government to say enough is enough when it comes to crime in this country.

I was proud to join President Trump in supporting the First Step Act, by the way. If you want to talk to me about criminal justice reform, if you want to talk to me about reducing sentences for nonviolent offenders, if you want to talk to me about early release of those who look like they have an opportunity to reform and get back to being active members of society, count me in. Do you know why? Because I have already done it. I have done it at the State level, and I have done it up here. That is smart criminal justice policy. This is dangerous.

I want to thank my friend and colleague from a onetime home of mine in Tennessee for moving this resolution.

You should be congratulated. You have done great work, and I think you have opened the eyes of several Members on the other side of the aisle here to why this is a sound bill. I am glad to see you carrying it all the way to the President's desk, and it will be successful.

Thank you, Senator Hagerty.

But let's not end with this vote. Go onto that website and see what we are up against. Talk to your local law enforcement and talk about how many unfilled positions there are and how morale is low, and do your part to thank every man and woman in uniform for their service.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source