Crackdown on protests has state lawmakers jazzed, while police reform has them yawning

This week’s shooting of an unarmed Black man in Minnesota, and the subsequent unrest, are like a Rorschach inkblot test.

One person might see the shooting as more evidence of the need for police reform and better training.

Another person might see the protests that followed as evidence that tougher penalties are needed to discourage rioting and violence.

This much is certain: The Florida Legislature falls squarely — and solely — into the second category.

Lawmakers are forging ahead with a sweeping bill (HB 1) that cracks down on protests. The bill passed the state House on March 26 and is headed for likely passage in the Senate this week.

Meanwhile, bills that propose commonsense police reforms, like mandatory body and car cameras, can’t even get a committee hearing.

If Florida’s Legislature was acting in good faith to solve problems, House and Senate leaders would at least debate the police reform bills, give them a fair hearing alongside the protest bill.

Politics, not good faith, is what steers the ship these days.

Ron DeSantis first trotted out a protest crackdown proposal in September, surrounding himself with legislative leaders and uniformed, stony-faced sheriffs for dramatic effect. They said they wanted to make it clear that assaulting police officers is against the law, even though existing Florida statutes already make that abundantly clear.

The governor acts like someone who’s building a resume for future elections, and few things appeal to the Republican base like a juicy crackdown on lawbreakers.

We would be less inclined toward cynicism if the governor, and the legislative leaders that serve as his mouthpieces in the House and Senate, had shown even a grain of interest in the source of problems that sometimes lead to the violent protests they’re fixated on. Fat chance. Separate bills in the House and Senate (SB 452 and HB 569) propose making it mandatory for law enforcement agencies to equip officers with body cameras and cars with dashboard cameras.

Both bills are straightforward and, at least in theory, should be noncontroversial. Cameras could even help police successfully prosecute all those law-breaking rioters that Tallahassee politicians are so worried about.

Many police agencies already have cameras on their cops and cars.

Chiefs and sheriffs generally recognize the value a recording has for both the public and the cops.

An example of that was the search last December of Rebekah Jones’ home by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

Jones, who analyzed COVID-19 data for the state Department of Health before she was fired, posted a 31-second home security camera clip on Twitter showing FDLE agents entering her home with guns drawn.

The FDLE then released a much longer video taken with a body camera that included footage of agents’ multiple attempts to contact Jones before they entered. FDLE Commissioner Rick Swearingen said the video showed agents were professional and patient throughout. Without the video, all he would have had to defend his agents are words.

But some agency heads aren’t all that interested in accountability. Brevard County Sheriff Wayne Ivey, who fiercely opposes equipping his deputies with body cameras, repeated that position late last year after two teenagers were shot to death by a deputy — who wasn’t wearing a camera.

Ivey is not given to changes of heart. He’s one of the reasons why Florida needs a state law.

Two other bills (SB 942 and HB 647) offer more sweeping reforms that would include setting standards for police in areas such as serving no-knock warrants for minor offenses; requiring officers to intervene if force is being used inappropriately by another officer; and using force against suspects, specifically the type of knee-onthe-neck restraint that killed George Floyd.

None of these proposals are outlandish, and all of them have roots in real situations around the nation where lack of training or standards or discipline have contributed to tragedy.

There may be good reasons why these specific proposals won’t work or need to be altered. That’s what legislative debate is supposed to accomplish.

The debate over the anti-protest bill is nearly over. We expect it’ll pass easily in the Republican-dominated Senate and will be signed by an eager DeSantis, who can then wave the bill around like a flag when he campaigns for re-election as governor in 2022 and possibly for president in 2024.