FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MAY 17, 2001
Norton & Congressional Black &
Hispanic Caucus Members Introduce Major Racial Profiling
Bill
Washington, DC–Congresswoman Eleanor
Holmes Norton (D-DC), joined by members of the Congressional
Black Caucus (CBC) and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus
(CHC), today introduced the Racial Profiling Prohibition
Act of 2001 (RPPA). The first-of-a-kind legislation would
require the federal government to withhold federal highway
funds from states that fail to adopt and enforce standards
that prohibit racial profiling in the enforcement of state
laws on federal-aid highways and to retain and report
statistical data. Congresswoman Norton, a senior member of the
Transportation Subcommittee, said she got the idea for the
bill because the threat of conditioning transportation funds
has proved particularly effective in changing behavior, such
as reducing drunk driving among minors, requiring the
revocation or suspension of driving licenses of convicted drug
offenders, and establishing a national minimum drinking age.
"If Congress is serious about eliminating this last
disgraceful scar of overt discrimination in our country, let
us put our money where our mouth is," the Congresswoman
said.
Norton said, "What makes our bill effective is its
sanction: the withholding of federal funds from states that
fail to meet...obligations of the statute. Money for streets,
roads, bridges and other infrastructure is ardently pursued in
the Congress. Each state and locality receives funds that are
indispensable to building and maintaining major parts of its
infrastructure. Next year’s authorization will mean nearly 50
percent more in transportation funding to states and
localities. These funds will either reinforce pervasive racial
profiling or help eliminate it."
The full text of Norton’s statement follows.
***
Today we introduce the Racial Profiling Prohibition Act of
2001 (RPPA). Congress is decades late in doing its part to
insure that law enforcement officers no longer stop or detain
people on the street because of their color or their apparent
nationality or ethnicity.
It was not until 37 years ago that Congress passed the
first civil rights law that had any teeth. The 1964 Civil
Rights Act finally barred discrimination against people of
color in employment, public accommodations and funding of
public institutions. Yet, today, irrefutable, and widespread
evidence from every state confirms racially and ethnically
motivated stops by police officers and shows that Congress has
urgent, unfinished business to update the nation’s civil
rights laws.
This bill, which is overwhelmingly supported by both the
Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) and the Congressional
Hispanic Caucus (CHC) as original co-sponsors, seeks to
eliminate both legal and constitutional problems that arise
when a person is stopped by a police officer because of skin
color, nationality or ethnicity. Title VI of the 1964 Civil
Rights Act (CRA), enacted in part to implement the
14th Amendment requirement of equal protection,
forbids the use of public money for discriminatory purposes.
The bill we introduce today, is based on both the
14th Amendment, which gives power to Congress to
implement its equal protection responsibilities and on the
spending clause of the Constitution, which allows Congress to
put conditions on the receipt of federal funds.
The federal funds that are the focus of our bill today are
the vast sums contained in our transportation legislation. The
last transportation bill, known as TEA-21 (Transportation
Equity for the 21st Century Act) authorized $172
billion for highways in 1998. The new transportation bill,
which Congress will enact next year, will authorize at least
$250 billion in highway funding. By introducing our racial
profiling bill today, we serve notice that Congress must not
authorize another huge highway bill that does not effectively
bar the use of transportation money to fund racial profiling
stops on those highways.
The strength of our bill lies in what it requires and what
it would do. The bill requires three important obligations if
states are to qualify for federal transportation funds. First,
law enforcement officers may not use race, national origin, or
ethnicity in making decisions concerning a stop unless they
are relying on a physical description that may include race to
determine that a particular individual may be the person
sought. Second, states must adopt and enforce standards
prohibiting the use of racial profiling on streets or roads
built with federal highway funds. Third, states must maintain
and allow public inspection of statistical information on the
racial characteristics and circumstances of each stop. Only
three states even prohibit racial profiling today; ten others
require only racial and ethnic data collection.
As important as information concerning who gets stopped is,
what makes our bill effective is its sanction: the withholding
of federal funds from states that fail to meet the three
obligations of the statute. Money for streets, roads, bridges
and other infrastructure is ardently pursued in the Congress.
Each state and locality receives funds that are indispensable
to building and maintaining major parts of its infrastructure.
Next year’s authorization will mean nearly 50 percent more in
transportation funding to states and localities. These funds
will either reinforce pervasive racial profiling or help
eliminate it.
The power of transportation funding to command the
necessary attention and bring quick results has been
repeatedly demonstrated. Congress has successfully used
federal highway funding to compel states to attack some of our
most urgent problems, for example, reducing drunk driving
among minors; requiring the revocation or suspension of
driving licenses of convicted drug offenders; and establishing
a national minimum drinking age. Police stops of people on the
streets because they are black or Hispanic or of any other
non-majority national origin requires the same urgent
action.
Withholding federal highway funds works because it hurts.
The threat of losing highway funds has proven to be a powerful
incentive. We saw the power of this incentive as recently as
last year's Transportation appropriation. Congress enacted a
provision requiring states to enact .08 blood alcohol content
(BAC) laws by 2004 or begin forfeiting their highway funds. In
only the first six months after that provision was enacted,
six states have already passed .08 BAC laws. Many more are
sure to follow in order to preserve precious highway funds. A
racial profiling provision in the 2002 federal highway funding
bill would give the same set of alternatives to the states --
effective enforcement of racial profiling legislation or loss
of federal funds. If Congress is serious about eliminating
this last disgraceful scar of overt discrimination in our
country, let us put our money where our mouth is.
###
|