A tentative deal on police funding and accountability reached by Congressional Black Caucus leaders Thursday night surprised and disappointed progressive CBC members, according to two senior CBC member aides.
“Really, the Congressional Black Caucus made a deal that was not in line with what the civil rights community wanted to do, and that was not in line with what many, many, many of their caucus members wanted” , a senior assistant told a CBC member, who requested anonymity for professional reasons, told HuffPost.
Earlier Thursday, CBC President Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio) reassured caucus members that a vote on the bill to dramatically increase federal funding for the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program ) would not take place for at least another few weeks, according to the two aides. The additional delay was intended to address progressives’ insistence on attaching stricter police accountability clauses to funding increases. Several CBC members then returned home to their constituencies, believing there would be no more major votes until the weekend.
Now, House Democrats hear that Beatty reached an agreement on accountability provisions with centrist Reps. Josh Gottheimer (DN.J.) and Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.) in conjunction with House Democratic leaders Thursday evening, according to the two main assistants. . Democratic leaders are trying to secure a vote on the two police defunding bills tomorrow by tying a vote on banning assault weapons to a vote on the first two bills. The CBC is scheduled to meet early Friday morning to discuss the bill.
Progressive CBC members feel betrayed and plan to work with other progressive lawmakers to block the passage of the rule allowing a vote on the police defunding and firearms ban bills. assault, according to the two main aides. Progressive Opposition to Letting the Votes Happen Already helped postpone a vote on the rule earlier this week.
“Why is the CBC working really hard to achieve this and using the CBC cachet to get police funding with little accountability to black people?” a senior assistant to a second CBC member, who requested anonymity for professional reasons, told HuffPost. “There’s a feeling that once again the CBC is being used to do something for leadership and not necessarily centering black interests.”
Progressives believe tougher negotiations could still produce police funding bills with credible accountability provisions, such as a national police misconduct registry and a ban on no-knock warrants .
Hoping to buy the extra time needed to negotiate those provisions, progressives could try to derail the leaders’ plans to hold a vote on the existing legislation.
Every House Republican expected to vote against the rule allowing a vote on police defunding bills and an assault weapons ban due to GOP conference opposition to a gun ban. assault.
This opposition gives progressives additional leverage, as the rule would then only go through a party-line vote. And given their narrow majority in the House, Democratic leaders can only afford to lose four Democratic votes on a party measure.
Progressive lawmakers are confident they have the votes to block a vote on the police funding bills, the two top CBC aides said. A senior aide to a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus who is not at the CBC agreed.
With victory within their reach, the three aides said they were speaking out nonetheless because they did not want to be unfairly blamed for standing in the way of an assault weapons ban. Progressives are instead calling for a stand-alone vote on the assault weapons ban, which would see it pass quickly in the House.
“For some reason, management really wants these [federal police funding] bills to pass, so they tied them to the ban on assault weapons,” said the senior aide to a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, who is not at the CBC. “If this deal falls through, they’ll say progressives are to blame for the lack of an assault weapons vote. That’s incorrect.
Moreover, with the assault weapons ban virtually guaranteed not to advance in the Senate, progressives envision a nightmare scenario where they get next to nothing in return for acquiescence. By helping pass a rule that allows a vote on banning assault weapons, they set the stage for bills increasing police funding to pass the House and Senate with Republican votes.
Meanwhile, the assault weapons ban and other progressive public safety bills that would come to a vote through their cooperation would never become law anyway.
Progressive lawmakers believe House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and her deputies are pushing for a vote on those bills at the behest of Democrats in swing seats. The mostly centrist Democrats in those fringe seats want extra protection from Republican accusations that they are soft on crime.
Democratic leaders are also reacting to signals from President Joe Biden. Last week, Biden introduced a public safety plan which proposed funding 100,000 additional police officers.
But progressives note that the House has already voted to pass microchip legislation designed to offer vulnerable members a tangible victory.
They fear House Democratic leaders will use the CBC, which holds the moral authority on policing issues, to discipline progressives and marginalize more committed members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
“They’re adhering to the demands of people like Josh Gottheimer and using the CBC to do that,” said a senior CBC member’s first assistant. “It’s manipulation.”
The Huffington Gt