Comprehensive Policing and Justice Amendment Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. KLOBUCHAR. Mr. President, I rise today as the Senate considers this week the resolution to rescind the Comprehensive Policing and Justice Amendment Act, passed by the DC City Council on January 19, 2023.

As a general matter, I believe that the people of Washington, DC, and their elected representatives should have the autonomy to govern themselves. For years, I have cosponsored and fought to pass the Washington D.C. Admission Act, which would admit the District of Columbia as a state.

I have also long supported funding for the police, as well as reforms, to help ensure that our justice system works for everyone. That includes being the lead sponsor of the COPS Reauthorization Act to provide Federal funding to law enforcement departments across the country to hire and retain police officers. I also support police reform measures focused on holding officers who break the law accountable for misconduct, increasing transparency in police practices, and improving police conduct and training.

The DC City Council's bill included many changes to strengthen accountability measures and improve conduct, including reforms to prevent the use of chokeholds, limit the use of force, and expand the use of de-escalation tactics. The bill also takes steps to prevent officers who have committed serious acts of misconduct or were fired for disciplinary reasons from serving on the DC police force. I support these efforts, which is why I oppose the resolution.

It is also important to note that the Comprehensive Policing and Justice Amendment Act does not include changes to qualified immunity. As Congressman Jim Clyburn has said, as we work toward common ground on police reform, we cannot ``sacrifice good on the altar of perfect'' and let disagreements about qualified immunity stand in the way of reform. The men and women in law enforcement who risk their lives every single day must have the confidence to make split-second decisions that can make the difference between life and death. I would not support this measure if changes to qualified immunity were made that put law enforcement officers who act in good faith at risk.

While there are a significant number of critical reforms included in DC's police reform bill, I am not in agreement with the provisions that prevent the unions that represent DC police officers from including disciplinary procedures in their collective bargaining agreements. All other unions that represent public servants in the District of Columbia negotiate for fair disciplinary proceedings, and while police officers serve a unique role that requires oversight, we should not deny police unions the same opportunity. The DC Council should ensure that police officers who break the law are held accountable, but it should not do so by undermining the right of law enforcement to collectively negotiate.

I also think changes could be made to provisions that set a fixed timetable for the release of data related to incidents involving the use of force. Law enforcement, working with City officials, should have some measure of flexibility to determine the appropriate timing for releasing information to protect public safety.

It is my hope that DC government officials will address these issues as they continue to work with law enforcement and other interested parties to make needed reforms to their justice system.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source