sharing, that 90 to 95% of federal cost sharing. i think most parents have abided by that, have implemented that i also think that most airports have not received in return the promise of reimbursements. i think in alaska the anchorage airport, about a $20 million reimbursement for an airport our size. that's a significant amount of money. it's obviously much larger in some of the bigger airports. would you consider making sure that these outstanding reimbursements are part of the president's budget request if confirmed? because right now i believe that that's an issue that hasn't come up in the budget even though there was a reliance by many airports throughout the country on that promise. >> as i understand, i think you're referring to inline baggage systems, in particular in airport and the program that would allow airports to seek

reimbursement or federal matching funding for that. i'm not familiar with that specific case in anchorage. i've been briefed in general on that program. if confirmed i want to understand, first of all how much money has been allocated. what's the appropriation. and -- and are the resources that have been currently appropriated adequate to support the program. and then what are the ways in which that program operate. what's the process for doing that. and how well understood is that process and how well has it been done. what i'd like to do is look at that, i promise to come back to you, senator, and tell you what you found afterwards. >> great. that concludes the hearing. the hearing record will remain over for two week. during this time, senators are asked to submit anytitional questions for the record -- any additional questions for the record. . receipt, the members are requested to submit written responses in answers to the committee as soon as possible. i want to thanks admiral your desire to serve your country.

your great service to your country. i haven't even asked if you served in alaska. have you? >> unfortunately, i never had the chance to be stationed there. >> i won't hold that again -- >> i spent a lot of time in alaska. i was up in barrow about four months ago. >> the coast guard does fantastic work up there. we just want more coasties, not less in alaska. this hearing is now adjourned. thank you very much. >> a reminder that if you missed any of this confirmation hearing this morning you can watch any time the c-span video library. go to c-span.org.

elsewhere on capitol hill today, the senate voted to end debate on fast track trade legislation. and a significant victory to president obama and moving that bill a step closer to passage. the hill writing that a final vote could come as soon as today. senators agreed to limit the final 30 hours of debate. the debate was held open to allow senators to make up their minds. senators on the democrat side, patty murray of washington marie cantwell also of washington state, and gene shaheen of new hampshire, were among the final democratic yes votes. the very final vote was cast by senator rob portman former u.s. tradenive for the bush administration, who is in a tough re-election cycle. he voted yes. 12 democrats voted to end debate to remove president obama from the party. harry reid and elizabeth warren were among his opponents. the senate trying to wrap up work on surveillance and highway bills before departing for a week-long memorial day break. you can see live coverage of the

senate on our companion network c-span2. this weekend, c-span presents commencement speeches from around the country. you'll hear from veterans affairs secretary, robert mcdonald, catherine sullivan head of the national oceanic and atmospheric administration and from south carolina state university, republican senator tim scott. here's a preview. >> back in 1983, when i was graduating from high school, the song that's stuck with me for the last 32 years is called "hold on to your dreams" by a group called ouija. you're all too young to know ouija. maybe somebody out there don't know ouija either. anyway. all right. will you go ahead and start the music, president? oh, he said he forgot the music. never mind i'm going to sick a cappella. will you -- sing a cappella. will you help me out?

thank you very much. ♪ hold on to your dream believe ♪ y'all don't know good music. i'm going to tell you the words. i'm just going to tell you the words. the song simply says hold on to your dreams. believe in love and let love be the light to show you the way. >> you can see that and a number of commencement speeches on saturday starting at noon eastern on our companion network, c-span. later that night editorial cartoonists including "doonesbury's" gary trudeau discuss their role as satirists an event that took place three months after the terrorist attack at "charlie hebdo." >> for he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my

brother. be he so vile, this day shall gentle his condition. and gentlemen in england now abed shall think themselves a occursed that they were not here. >> one drop of blood drawn from thy country's bosom should grieve thee more than streams of foreign gore. >> director of the folger shakespeare library michael whitmore, talk about shakespeare and how politicians use quotes from the famous playwright in those speeches. >> sometimes you have to go with the music of the words. the poetic images, sound of the rhymes. and also the way in which, as senator bird did, you're able to pause and linger over a long phrase, then stop and keep going. i think he's using the rhythms of the language, something that

shakespeare did brilliantly, so he can tick english and put -- take english and put it into high gear and then slow down. that's something shakespeare let you do if you're a politician. >> sunday at 8:00 eastern and pacific, on c-span's "q&a." >> good night, good night, parting is such sweet, sweet sorrow. it really is. >> now the house judiciary committee looks into developing better policing strategies to strengthen relations between law enforcement and community. members discussed the use of police body cameras and the appointment of independent prosecutors for cases involving allegations of police misconduct. witnesses include the sheriff of milwaukee county and the executive director of washington state's criminal justice training commission. this is three hours.

>> good morning, the judiciary committee will come to order. without objection, the chair is driesed to declare recess of the committee at any time. we welcome everyone to this morning's hearing on policing strategies for the 21st century. and i will begin by recognizing myself for an opening statement. policing is an inherently dangerous job. our law enforcement officers deserve our gratitude for the work they do on a daily basis to make sure that our streets are safe, the most helpless in our communities are protected, and those who commit crimes are brought to justice. i am very concerned that force is used appropriately and that police officers are taking appropriate steps to protect innocent civilians when they make encounters.

there is increasing unrest in our urban communities about policing. protests in ferguson, new york -- ferguson new york and baltimore were the outgrowth of the use of force by police officers stopping a suspect. although no charges were filed against the officers in question in two of those cases, it is clear that there is widespread disagreement about the actions of police in those instances. what started as peaceful protest turned into violent riots where again the police reaction to those riots was brought into question. at the same time, i am increasingly concerned with the repeated targeting for police and law enforcement personnel. last week we learned that two more police officers were killed. officers dean and tate responding to a routine traffic stop in hattiesburg mississippi, were gunned down by a group of five men. this comes on the heels of the more widely known murders of officers ramos and liu in new

york. it's been reported that they were specifically targeted by a man looking to kill a police officer. while i refuse to consider the actions of police officers in ferguson and new york as justifying the responses that befell those cities, t clear that we must find a better way for our police and citizens to interact both in everyday situations and when more difficult circumstances arise. we have a distinguished panel before us today with deep knowledge of police training, tactics, and policies. we have long-standing leaders in the police community. we have instructors responsible for police training, and finally we have those tasked with monitoring those police departments that have not met the standards we require of them. i am hopeful that this will be a constructive and positive hearing that focuses current rules and regulations in place. the training our officers receive and how we can train them better in order to apprehend criminals while

minimizing harm to innocent citizens. i'm especially interested to hear what we can do to raise the level of trust among our police officers and citizens while still protecting both. policing will never be an easy or safe job, but i believe we must do everything we can to ensure that our officers have the tools and training they need to protect themselves and our nation's citizens. i'd also like to thank the gentleman from michigan, mr. conyers, the ranking member, for working with us so closely to arrange this hearing. and i was inspired by the jam from texas ms. jackson lee -- the gentleman from texas, ms. jackson lee, who has been speaking to me for some time on this issue. i thank them both. i want to assure all of you that the purpose of this hearing and the ongoing efforts of this committee following this hearing is to make sure that we are doing everything possible to address the problems that have arisen in recent months, to make

sure that our communities are safer, our police officers are safer, our citizens' rights are protected, and that we will not rest until we make progress in those regards. at this time, it's my pleasure to recognize the ranking member for his opening statement, mr. conyers. >> thank you, mr. goodlatte our chairman. members of the committee and to our distinguished witnesses and to those who have come to this hearing, law enforcement accountability is an issue that is topical given current events but also one that has long been a concern of mine and many other members. as a member of congress, i have stood on the streets of detroit with a bullhorn and appealed for

calm while my city burned around me in 1967. thinking back there was a race riot in detroit in 1943. on too many occasions, i've met with the grieving relatives of those who have lost their lives at the hands of police, but i've also met with the families of police officers who lost their lives in the line of duty. some of these officers were killed by violent criminals, while other officers were inadvertently killed by their colleagues or some of their colleagues who could only see the color of their skin. i have co-chaired town hall meetings with fellow members of

congress and others across this nation in response to policing incidents in chicago miami new york, and los angeles. at these meetings we try to help the residents of these cities make sense of how to respond to their collective sense of loss and to understand the role of the federal government in protecting their civil rights. i've proposed numerous bills to both help protect the safety of police officers and to provide a system of accountability for law enforcement. for example, i worked with attorney general john ashcroft at the invitation of president george bush to craft federal

legislation intended to use to end use of racial profiling and police practices which is currently pending in this committee, house resolution 1933. and next month, we planned to introduce comprehensive legislation dealing with accreditation, data collection, and policing practices. fortunately, no committee has generally approached the issue of policing with a strong bipartisan spirit. we have enjoyed success in passing reform legislation. notably the passage of the pattern and practice enforcement statute which was codified as section 14141 of title 42 of the

united states code in 1994. we twice passed the traffic stops statistic study act under the chairmanship of chairman henry hyde. by scheduling today's hearing chairman goodlatte continues this legacy and is commended for his willingness to face a difficult issue that has divided communities around the united states. any discussion of law enforcement accountability must be premised on the recognition of the dangerous and difficult job that all police officers perform. the vast majority of police officers performed their jobs professionally and without bias.

like any profession there are those who make it difficult for the rest to serve their community s communities. at the outset, i must agree with professor orlando patterson when he says that the complex and confounding questions raised by ferguson, baltimore, and other cities go well beyond the issues of racism and violent police behavior. what occurred in those cities clearly resulted from a vicious tangle of concentrated poverty and culturally disenfranchised youth as well as a counterveiling culture of law enforcement disconnected from their community sies that is lacking appropriate standards and oversight.

yesterday, president obama was in camden, new jersey, to highlight hisonstration's initiatives -- his administration's initiatives to address the challenges of policing in our inner cities. while the support the president's efforts and look forward to working with him to implement his programs, there's no substitute for concrete performance standards for state and local law enforcement agencies that receive billions each year in federal funding. for reform-focused police executives, many of the current administrative programs are merely icing on the cake. probably will not reach many chronically underperforming or

troubled departments. the entire purpose of section 14141 was to add teeth to federal enforcement that was absent in the grant-making process. although pattern and practice enforcement has been effective in cases of individual departments, it is far too resource heavy to reach across the more than 17000 police departments in our country. there must be another way, and i hope that today we could talk about the combination of federal, state, and local measures that are essential to support necessary changes in policing culture. the national outcry that arose after michael brown's death is nothing new to those who are students of policing practices.

from desean bell, abner louima, and the amadue diallo incidents in new york to the eddie maclin shooting in miami, to the timothy thomas over-the-rhine shooting in cincinnati and the donovan jackson beating in englewood, the response is nearly always the same. national outcry followed by well-intentions programs that never quite get to the heart of the matter. out of respect for all of who have lost their lives over the last nine months both law enforcement and civilian, i hope that we can dedicate ourselves to engaging the difficult issues to make lasting change in our

community. i thank the chairman. >> thank you mr. conyers. without objection, all of the members' opening statements will be made a part of the record. we welcome our distinguished panel of witnesses today. and if you would all please rise, i'll begin by swearing you in. please raise your right hand. do you and each of you solemnly swear that the testimony that you are about to give shall be the truth the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? thank you very much. let the record reflect that the witnesses responded in the affirmative. sheriff david a. clark jr. has served as a sheriff of milwaukee county wisconsin, since march 2002, when he was appointed by then-governor. he be was elected in november, 2002, and is currently serving his fourth term as sheriff. sheriff clark holds a bachelor's degree in criminal justice management from concordia

university, wisconsin, a master's in security studies from the naval post graduate school, and has completed various executive education programs with the fbi and at harvard university's john f. kennedy school of government. matthew barge is the vice president and deputy director of the police assessment resource center, parc. among his areas of expertise are use of force policies, officer training, and counseling law enforcement agencies to achieve efficient, constitutional policing. he graduated summa cum laude from georgetown university and holds a j.d. from the new york university school of law. susan rahr is executive director of the washington state criminal justice training commission, a position she has held since 2012. from 2005 to 2012, she served as the first female sheriff in king county washington. she previously spent over 30 years as a law enforcement

officer. she received a bachelor's degree from washington state university and currently serves as a member of president obama's task force on 21st century policing. w. craig hartley jr. is the executive director of the commission on accreditation of law enforcement agencies calea. he began his career with the greensboro police department in 1989 and served in a number of positions within the agency before becoming assistant chief of police. prior to joining calea, mr. hartley worked for the virginia department of criminal justice services where he led the department's public policy planning and research division. mr. hartley holds a bachelor's in criminal justice from appalachian state university and a master's in public affairs from the university of north carolina at greensboro. professor deborah ramirez teaches criminal justice at the northeastern university school of law in boston, massachusetts.

much of her work focuses on strengthening partnerships between law enforcement and communities which is integral to building trust and fair, effective policing. professor ramirez received a bachelor's degree at northwestern university and a j.d. from harvard law school. all of your written testimony will be entered into the record in their entirety. i ask that each of you summarize your testimony in five minutes or less. to help you stay within that time, there's a timing lights on your table. when the light switch from green to yellow, you have one minute to conclude your testimony. i shouldn't say this to law enforcement personnel, but it works like a traffic light. the light turns red, it signals your time has expired. whether it turns yellow first, that means speed up. sheriff clark, you may begin. >> good morning mr. chairman honorable members on the

committee of the judiciary. thank you for the opportunity to state my view which is backed by 37 years of experience from ground level concerning police accountability, aggression toward police, public safety concerns, and what might be the right thing for us to work on now. since the events that led to riots in ferguson, missouri, police use of force has become scrutinized nationally. police use of force should be scrutinized, locally, that is. it should be examined in terms of factual data and circumstances that led to the police action and not from the emotional foundation of false narratives or catchy slogans like hands up, don't shoot no justice, no peace, or black live matter. let's leave that conduct for the public to engage in, not the mainstream media or those elected officials who can't resist the opportunity to exploit the emotions of an uninformed or misinformed public simply for political gain. we will no doubt hear a lot of

statistics thrown about. some distorted to achieve a predetermined agenda. others are legitimate. in 2013, the united states department justice under attorney general eric holder did a study in conjunction with the national institute of just on traffic stop data. they found that when you use control factors that statistics and research require for legitimate findings, any racial disparities are attributed to differences in offending. the studies show that black drivers violated speeding and other traffic laws at much greater rates than whites. that conclusion of the study under eric holder led doj might be ugly to some, but it is what the data and research found. the same study showed three out of every four black drivers said the police had a legitimate reason for stopping them. the same is true with arrest and incarceration data for african-american males. participation rates and violent crime explain the disparity of why so many black males are

locked up in prison. black males are disproportionately involved in violent crime, and this violence is predominantly perpetrated against other black people. it is not the result of a discriminatory criminal justice system. blacks make up 37.5% of the prison population at the state and federal level. if we release those convicted on drug charges alone, the percentage of black males in prison would drop to 37%, a mere .5%. so much for the myth of black lives filling -- black males filling our prisons merely for drug convictions. not to mention that illegal drug use is the scourge of the black community and leads to a great deal of the violence that occurs. the police use of force data also tells a different story than the false narrative propagandaed by cop barbers in the liberal mainstream media. a recent study that looked into police use of force between 2009 and 2012 showed this breakdown.

61% or 915 of the 1,491 people who died from police use of force were white males. while 32% 481, were black males. it is a myth that police kill black males in greater numbers than anyone else. black blackon-black crime is the elephant in the room no one wants to talk about. we can talk about the police use of force, but it doesn't start with transforming the police profession. it starts by asking why we need so much assertive policing in the american ghetto. are police officers perfect? not by any stretch of the imagination are. police agencies perfect? not even close. but we are the best that our community have to offer. instead, the conversation should be about transforming black underclass subculture behavior. the discussion must start are addressing the behavior of people who have no respect for authority, who fight with and try to disarm the police, who flee the police, and who engage in other flawed lifestyle

choices. bashing the police is the low hanging fruit. it's easier to talk about the rare killing fortunately rare of a black male by police because emotion can be exploited for political advantage. the police are easier to throw overboard because they can't fight back politically. this, however is counter productive and will lead to police pulling back in high crime areas where good, law-abiding black people live. black people will be the losers in all this as violent crime rates skyrocket over time. this means more black victims. economist and author thomas sole, a man i admire, said this about police -- if people who are he told they are under arrest and refuse come with police cannot be forcibly taken into custody, then we do not have the rule of law when the law itself is downgraded to suggestions that no one has the power to enforce. he further pointed out that for people who have not tried to take into custody somebody resisting arrest, to sit back in

the safety and comfort of their homes or offices and second guess people who face the dangers inherent in that process, dangers for the officer and person under arrest, is yet another example of the irresponsible self-indulgences of our time, unquote. thank you very much. >> thank you. mr. hartley, welcome. you need to push that. >> chairman goodlatte -- >> pull it a little closer to you, as well. >> this better? >> yep. that's better. >> can you hear me now? okay. chairman goodlatte and ranking member conyers members of the committee. on behalf of the commission on accreditation for law enforcement agencyings commonly -- eagless commonly referred to as calea, thank you for the opportunity to talk about policing strategies for the 21st century. as parts of this discussion, i think it is important to recognize that every year the over one help police officers dispersed across 18000 agencies

make over 40 million public contacts where they encounter incredibly sensitive and highly emotional situations. these interactions result in millions of arrests annually, and police use force or the threat of force 1.4% of the time. using mostly low-level applications. statistically, this is a strong indication of the adherence to the democratic principles of public safety service in this country. however, this can only occur where there are trusting relationships between the community and the police. recently, the country has observed situations where this confidence has eroded resulting in undesirable outcomes. although there is no single solution, calea accreditation provides a strategy that institutionalizes practices through the best policing standards. the model for most community confidence and instillss accountabilities through

agencies. about 50% participate, which equates to little more than 25% of the nation's law enforcement officers working for enrolled agricultures. given this level of penetration the standards serve as a powerful tool to influence police, policy, and practice. the standards remain relevant through a dynamic process of review by leaders in the public safety industry which include practitioners, judicial officials, and other subject matter experts. additionally, research from leading professional associations is leveraged, and the process considers information from special interest groups on such topics as victims' rights and procedural justice. calea recently launched a review of standards to consider finding from the president's task force on 21st century policing and recent doj investigations of police agencies. all this with a focus on creating service philosophies that balance the need for safety and security with constitutionally protected rights and freedoms.

the process of accreditation also focuses on intended outcomes. this is a -- this is accomplished through a sophisticated system of linking agency policy to standards and ensuring practices complement organizational directives. it is reinforced through data collection, on-site observation, agency reporting community input, and public commission hearings. as examples of those standards participating organizations must develop effective citizen complaint procedures. this must include investigations of all complaints including those of an anonymous nature. the procedures must establish timelines for notification to complainants and result in the posting of summery data for per consumption. from an operational perspective integrity and criminal investigation procedures is included in the accreditation process. this involves accountability with the preservation, collection maintain and

presentation of evidence. policies related to interviews, lineups, and show-ups must be developed and followed. calea accreditation requires agencies to develop community involvement practices to include establishing liaisons with community organizations, the involvement of community members in the development of policy, and publicizing agency objectives. although these are only a few outputs or accreditation, it demonstrates how standards address core issues impacting community confidence while supporting police as an institution. as an association, calea supports reasonable legislation to improve professionalism and build public safety. we support the concept of voluntary participation in accreditation to promote productive relationships with agencies. we support incentives that support agencies pursuing accreditation. and we advocate for stronger interaction with other governmental and nongovernmental entities for standards

development. we value approaches that gradually and systematically transition public safety agencies to programming with reasonable implementation timelines and technical assistance. the more than 1,030 public safety agencies enrolled in accreditation have voluntarily committed to demonstrating provieshlg excellence through -- professional excellence through assessment. i would encourage lawmakers to support accreditation as an important tool for addressing the professional delivery of police services as a part of 21st century policing strategies. thank you, mr. chair. >> thank you, mr. hartley. ms. rahr, welcome. >> mr. chair, members of the committee. it's my honor to be invited to testify today. i'd like you to know a little about my background so you can put my comment in context. i started policing in 1979 as a patrol deputy, and for the next 33 years had the privilege of serving my community in

assignments such as patrol, undercover narcotics. i commanded our gang unit in the seattle metropolitan area for three years and spent a great deal of time working with police conduct cases and training. when i retired as the elected sheriff in 2012, i had the good fortune of coming to our state's police academy where we train all 10,000 law enforcement officers in the state of washington. i've learned a great deal from those recruits. as we embark on this dialogue today, i think it's critically important that we consider a wide range of factors that impact the environment in which police operate and that we consider strategies that are most likely to increase public trust and improve public safety. i'd like to highlight two of these major factors. to add to the context i think we have a tendency to talk about the bad apples. i'd like to talk about the barrel and the people who make the barrels. the first factor is the absence of a national ad to policing.

we have 18,000 individual police departments each with unique cultures and reflecting the policies and practices that are a product of those 18,000 local governments. with a diverse range of values and expectations. agency size ranges from one officer to more than 34,000 officers. about half of those 18,000 agencies have ten officers or less. all of these departments operate in one of our 50 states each with a unique system of justice that dictates how criminal cases are initiated, processed, and adjudicate adjudicated. although many states mandate peace officer certification and standards for hiring and training most states exert limited control over their local law enforcement. outside of consent decrees and the distribution or withholding of federal funds, the influence of the federal government on likely policing is also limited. the bottom line is there is no single description of united states police culture and practice. the environment and the challenges faced by police

departments vary widely, and the control and oversight of our police is almost exclusively local. the second major factor to consider is that police departments do not operate independently. in most cities police chiefs are hired or fired by mayor or other elected municipal executive. most sheriffs are elected by the voters that they are sworn to protect and serve. when police exert control over citizens, they do so at the behest of an official elected by the people. crime control strategies don't emerge in isolation. nor do decisions about police accountability. those decisions are made by independently elected officials and prosecutors. that often the scrutiny of disturbing incidents begins and ends with the police department with little examination of those factors outside the agency that influenced priorities and practices. the importance of a bradder focus of inquiry was illustrated in the recent examination into

the government practices in the city of ferguson. the findings serve as a powerful example of the influence of governing forces outside of the police department itself. ideas for improving policing in the 2015 century need to consider both of these major factors. most changes in policies and procedures must be adopted by local governments in order to be implemented. for example, the requirement to use body-worn cameras must consider local and state laws related to the gathering, management, and disclosure of data, as well as local and state laws protecting individual privacy. these change will take time, require a great deal of cooperation, and, in some cases the barriers may be insurmount insurmountable insurmountable. there are, however, meaningful steps that can be taken at various levels of government without changing laws. those steps will improve thca 89#c&hc% culture of policing and expand police!d( training éi)÷y contribute to increased public trust and improved safety. the recommendations of the

president's task force range contain a -- contain a full range of actions that can be implemented immediately, and some that are more long-term strategies. one of the areas of focus contained in the recommendation relates to police training. i sent to you a copy of an academic report that i co-authored. it was published by the kennedy school at harvard and co-published by the department of justice. this expounds on the importance of addressing the leadership culture in police departments and suggests a path toward improving culture through effective training. i hope these ideas will be beneficial as this committee explores ways to improve policing in the 21st century. thank you very much. >> thank you. and mr. barge welcome. >> mr. chairman, ranking member conyers, distinguished members of the committee. my name is matthew barge. i'm the vice president and deputy director of the police assessment resource center. for 14 years, parc has provided independent counsel to uppart of

30 police agencies helping incorporate best practices on effective, safe, and constitutional policing. i want to thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. in light of recent events, some have wondered whether local police agencies are capable of transforming or repairing trust with the communities that they serve. i'm here to tell you that police departments can change, and indeed are changing. real reform is difficult and messy work, but agencies can put in place the systems, the policies and the culture necessary to self-manage the risk of unconstitutional policing and enhance community confidence. some agencies affirmatively seek reform. the voluntary implementation of parc's work in portland, organization, led to significant decreases in use of force and complaints about police without increases in crime or officer injury. however, local law enforcement is not always good at self-identifying problems. i work daly with police officers

who represent public service at its most selfless and laudable. but the departments where they work often resemble what might happen if a stereotypical department of motor vehicles ran the u.s. military. an inefficient, inept bureaucracy overseeing a rigid command and control structure. this produces a culture often resistant to new approaches transparency and real accountability. where issues fester, the u.s. department of justice may exercise the authority granted by this body to conduct an investigation into alleged pattern of misconduct. where allegations are substantiated, a federal court overseeing consent decree may result. the process is akin to emergency open heart surgery for police departments. it addresses serious systemic issues and is used selectively and at critical moments. currently doj is enforcing ten consent decrees.÷a)t÷ pa parc's coordinator is addressing the seattle police department where i served as his deputy.

regardless of how reform is initiated, the bedrock of policing in the 21st century must be a strong response relationship between the nation's police departments and the communities that they serve. to that end, a common playbook of specific, real-world reforms is emerging for promoting public and officer safety, efficiency, constitutional rights, and public trust. first, officers need more specific guidelines on using force in the real world. the vague requirements of courts in this area may work for judges in the comforts of their courtrooms, but officers and communities need clearer and more pragmatic rules. second departments needs internal mechanisms sorry critical self-analysis. for instance, the standard doj consent decree reform is a creation of a dedicated board for critically evaluating all uses of force so that a department can continually update policy and procedure and training in light of real-world lessons learned. likewise, permanent civilian oversight mechanisms can give

communities a real-time check and important say in how policing is conducted. third, too many agencies have no idea what their officers are doing. if data see-it-first use of force or -- exists on use of force or stop activity it's often inaccurate or ignored. policing in the 21st century needs to take full advantage of the information systems we take for granted in so many other areas of public and private life. fourth, in the cities where we work, we continually hear from individuals that the weights and burdens of law enforcement are not equally shared. and there is some empirical evidence to support that proposition. the challenge for police departments is to find ways of addressing an issue that at minimum is deeply affecting the police community relationship. forward-thinking departments are providing officers with training on minimizing the effects of implicit bias and on person-based decisionmaking. modern american policing faces an era of unparalleled challenges with too many communities viewing the police

as them rather than us. the challenge that law enforcement agencies must embrace is to implement the common sense steps that might enhance accountability and enhance public trust. with that, i thank you again for the opportunity to be here. >> thank you mr. barge. ms. ramirez, welcome. you want to turn that on. >> thank you, chairman goodlatte, ranking member conyers, and the house committee on the judiciary. the police killing of michael brown and eric garner in july and august of 2014 have triggered protests not only in the cities in which those killings occurred but also throughout this country. since those shootings, there have been others. freddie gray in baltimore, and walter lemire scott in south carolina. it's plain to me, and i expect to all of you today here that

these protests are not just about the willingness to prosecute all but one of these police officers about the shootings but about a long-simmering resentment in the african-american and latino communities. that the criminal law anobel peace prize differently to them than it does to white americans. that the police too often stop and frisk latino and african-american youths with impunity and without reasonable articuable decision. that automobiles driven by african-americans especially in white neighborhoods are too often stopped by police for driving while black. that the death of a black man at the hands of police is seen as more forgivable than the death of a white man. that prosecutors are less willing to see hispanic and

african-american defendants as candidates for rehabilitation who deserve and need a break. and therefore, they are more willing to press for mandatory sentences against them. that more black men age 18 to 21 are in prison or in jail, than in college. you can and should debate how accurate the statistical studies are and how accurate these perceptions are. and whether they're more accurate in some states and municipalities than in others. but i think we can agree that these perceptions are accurate more often and in too many places than we would want them to be. and that the perception itself is a reason for great concern because beyond the statistical studies we cannot be one nation

if a significant percentage of our community members believe they are receiving an inferior equal of just or no justice at all. the protests have provided an impetus for interchange but they can't produce change by themselves. we need to ensure that these protests are different from previous protests and that they don't merely cry out for justice but actually lead to more justice. and to accomplish that, we need a road dszmap to change and need to press our leaders in congress and elsewhere to follow that roadmap and travel to a place where justice is more and fairer. to move past these tragedies we need to do some concrete things. first, we need to strengthen

police-community relations by creating community policing models focused on the development of partnerships between police organizations and the communities they serve. how? new infrastructure and architecture. infrastructure and architecture that might provide the co-heirens we need -- coherence we need and coherence we need to bring to this entertain prize. we need to create in every state federally funded community policing institutes dedicated to creating the tools, templates training, and best practices for bringing the police and the community members to the table for discussions on how best to keep their communities safe and strong. and we need to increase police transparency by letting the public know what the police are doing.

and that can only occur when state and local police departments are required to keep data regarding police stops, searches, and shootings, and to record the race of persons stopped, searched, or shot. why? because you can't possibly manage what you don't measure. transparency also means requiring police to install cruiser cameras, to wear body cameras, and to monitor police discretion to turn those cameras off. my last point is about accountability. which means that allegations of police misconduct or situations in which a police officer shoots a civilian should be handled by an independent inspector general.

the investigation and prosecutorial decision should not rest in the hands of a district attorney dependent on that police department for its criminal investigations past and future. so we need police-community partnerships, a state institute to support them, cameras, data collection, and an independent inspector general to investigate police misconduct. the road map doesn't end here today at this table. the next part is the most difficult. how do we implement it? the system is broken. we need democrats and republicans to come together to craft a road map to justice and figure out how to fund and implement it. only then will we be able to create stronger and safer communities. >> thank you, ms. ramirez. i'll begin the questioning and start with you, sheriff clark. when you talk with citizens in your office -- do they want more

or less of a police presence? [ audio feedback ] >> do they complain more about the actions of the police or the inactions of the police? >> they ask for more. they complain about both. and i think that's human nature. they want safer neighborhoods. they want safer communities. they know they're going to have to have assertive policing in some of these high-crime areas to get that done. it's situational. they complain about slow calls for service responses, things like that, which can have an effect on a person's trust in their law enforcement agency. in other words, we call but they don't come. so it's a moving -- it's fluid. and like i said, situational. we deal with it on a situational basis. >> do your officers generally feel -- i don't know what the right word is.

welcome, comfortable in these tougher communities to police. >> without a doubt. it's one of the hallmarks i believe of my administration, to create a relationship -- we talk about trust. i believe in the milwaukee area anyway, that's what i can speak to personally. there's a great relationship. we do not have -- we meaning law enforcement officers do not have a great relationship with the criminal element. there's no doubt about that. but i think sometimes this is -- i believe it exists, this lack of trust within segments of the community, but not as a whole within the minority community. i just -- i bristle at that perception. >> good. i'm glad to hear that. mr. hartley, you wrote in your testimony that only 5% of the nation's law enforcement agencies participate in

accreditation. that really surprised me. what's the biggest obstacle you face in terms of getting other agencies accredited? is it leadership, cost, or something else? >> i will tell you, i think it's a combination of all those things but i think it really starts with leadership prerogative about what those organizational leaders think is important to them and the delivery of leadership across their organizations itself. we do hear concerns that the cost of accreditation is too much. we also hear that the cost associated with involvement in the process is difficult because our accreditation process requires them to do things that they otherwise may not do. i can tell you that the process is really structured around key and fundamental sound principles of police service delivery. and so the process of accreditation doesn't increase accountability that's already there. it measures accountability and serves as a yardstick and a framework to keep organizations focused on key and fundamental areas. but again, it does relate to

cost in some places and in-con services and management of the process, mr. chair. >> ms. ramirez, is there a problem with current legal precedents as they relate to the use of force? [ audio feedback ] >> i don't know what's wrong with our microphones. does it result in second-guessing of officers? >> i'm sorry. is the question whether or not -- >> i'll repeat it. is there a problem with current legal precedents as they relate to the use of force? and does it result in second-guessing of officers' decisions? >> i don't think this is primarily a legal problem. i think it's a problem with the community not fully understanding all of the pressures, procedures, protocols that the police are engaged in, and the police not discussing and educating the community about the things that the police

have to take into account as they go through a stop and search process. but i don't believe this is a legal problem. i think it's a training problem. i think it's a problem that involves -- that would be solved with better community policing. >> thank you. and mr. barge, i'll let you answer that same question, but i also want to add, you mention in your testimony that after your organization was called into portland there was a sharp drop in officer-involved shootings, use of force, and citizen complaints without any increase in officer injuries. what do you think most directly causes that? >> as the legal precedent, you know, question i think that, as i said in my testimony, judges in courtrooms use a very different set of standards and rules to guide fairer and efficient decision-making.

officers on the street, i think as all of us can attest to, you don't have the luxury of examining all of the facts as they turned out to be and have to make split-second judgment calls. i think one thing that police agencies can do right now is to ask themselves how do i want our police officers to react in these emerging use of force situations and craft more specific, clearer guidance where appropriate? and hold their officers rigorously accountable to those policies. the policies can do what the courts cannot as a condition of an officer being employed in that department. as to portland, i think, you know, what we did there was to institute a number of reforms that are very tested. they've been implemented in places where the d.o.j. has gone in the consent decree process. in portland we had an opportunity to implement those reforms in a voluntary sort of

capacity. the city wanted us there and the police department wanted us there. and it was about sort of instilling mechanisms whereby the police asked themselves difficult questions, asked what we could learn from incidents that went wrong, what could we do different in the future. and i think that kind of culture just by the numbers that the city auditor found there really had changed -- changed the department for the better. >> thank you very much. the gentleman from michigan mr. conyers is recognized for his question. >> thank you. i appreciate the different contributions from each of the five panelists, and i think we're off to a good discussion. i'd like you to know that thanks

to the chairman and mr. scott and sensenbrenner we've been having hearings on overcriminalization. they started out for six months, and the chairman, goodlatte, added six more months to it, it was so effective. this moves us further along. but the fact of the matter is how do we change this culture? this goes back a long ways. this isn't something, a recent phenomenon at all. and so i'm thinking about how we get into this infrastructure and architecture that we're trying

to move to, and i'd like to look at that for just a moment. but before we do i'd like to raise the question of police prosecutions. we all know the conundrum, the prosecutor and the police work together much of the time, and then all of a sudden the prosecutor's got to decide whether to prosecute one that he's been working with a long time. professor ramirez and any of the rest of you, police, let's look at that for a moment. >> as a former federal prosecutor i've worked with law enforcement and i know firsthand the difficult and dangerous work that they do. but i also believe that when

there has been a civilian who's been shot or police misconduct it is very hard for a prosecutor who works day in and day out with these law enforcement officers and knowing they worked with them in the past and in the future to make an independent decision, which is why i think the process that we have now. so i talk about having an independent inspector general make the decision. >> yes. >> but also we need more transparency in the decision-making process. grand jury process. maybe we need something more like an inquest process or some kind of new process in which in these instances we can develop a way to be more transparent about that pretrial investigation that takes place now by a prosecutor in the grand jury context. and i wanted to say one more

thing about reducing use of force. the studies have shown that in departments where they've used cameras, body cameras and cameras in the car that there has been a significant decrease in use of force. and it gives us the opportunity to learn from the recorded instances about best practices for de-escalation. so when we have cameras and there is an incident whether the officer succeeded or failed to escalate, we could learn more about it. >> what's been your experience in terms of this problem of more or less where do we go from here? mr. hartley, what do you think? no, we can go wider than that. >> i think just to kind of

parlay that discussion into a little more broad sense i think the most important thing for any organization to do is to prepare for that bad event. we know that regardless of the best planning you're still going to have people that are engaged in fundamental decisions around the enforcement of law that have impacts on communities. but the reality of it is that if the preparation takes place in the proper way with the proper folks around the table it relieves those expectations of negativity, if you will, and it promotes organizational confidence in how the process will be managed. i don't feel comfortable saying that one size fits all for each agency because i think each jurisdiction brings on different attributes in the development of those types of things. but for the public's consideration and for the officers' consideration confidence in the process is important and it has to do with planning for the event from start to finish and include community contacts, media engagement, and other processes related to the legal system. >> thank you very much. miss rahr, just in closing do

you see some hope in president obama's recent statements on the subject when he was in camden yesterday? >> i do. i think there are a number of recommendations that will be helpful to every police department in the nation. for some departments they'll be able to follow many of those recommendations. i hope that as time goes on the distribution of federal funding and resources will take into account the cooperation of agencies that are doing their best to follow those recommendations. >> thank you. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from south carolina, mr. gowdy, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. professor ramirez, you mentioned a couple of cases in your opening statement. and i know that time is short when you only have five minutes and you were not able to address other cases.

i wanted to ask you whether or not you were familiar with a few other cases. sandy rogers and scotty richardson from akin, south carolina. are you familiar with that case? >> no, sir. >> how about roger dale rice from lauren, south carolina? are you familiar with that case? >> no, sir. >> eric nicholson or marcus whitfield from greenville, south carolina? are you familiar with that case? >> no, sir. >> russ sorrow from greenville, south carolina. >> no, sir. >> or kevin carper from spartanburg, south carolina. >> no, sir. >> professor, those are just a handful of the more than 340 police officers who were killed in the line of duty in south carolina. in kevin carper's case it's most instructive because his partner did cpr on the suspect that killed kevin, trying to save his life. let me ask it another way. are you familiar with the case of ricky samuel? >> no, sir.

>> how about tamika houston? >> no, sir. >> how about nell lindsay? >> no, sir. >> miranda all. >> no, sir. >> santiago rios. >> no, sir. >> those are all folks that were the victim of intraracial homicides in south carolina. and i hasten to add there were not protested with any of those police officer killings or any of the intraracial killings. and i'll suspect you agree with me, professor, that all lives matter, whether you're killed by a police officer or your next-door neighbor, you're every bit as dead, aren't you? >> yes, sir. i actually, as a former prosecutor and someone who's worked with police officers, have the deepest respect for them. >> so do i. and despite that deep respect, professor, i still maintain the objectivity of prosecuting police officers who engaged in misconduct. we have a process in place if

you don't think you can be fair. it's called recusal. which is what some of us did in every single one of our officer-involved shootings. we recused it to another prosecutor so he or she could make that decision. so there is a process in place. you called for a process. there is one. it's called recusal. do you know as a former prosecutor, or can you deign what may have been the biggest impediment to our being able to successfully prosecute homicide cases, particularly homicide cases involving victims of color in my criminal justice jurisdiction, do you know what the biggest impediment was? >> in massachusetts one of the biggest impediments is trying to get witnesses to come forward. >> you're exactly right. you're exactly right. you have a victim of color, and

we had trouble getting witnesses to cooperate with law enforcement and prosecutors, which then as you know diminishes the quality of that case and your ability to prosecute it, which may result in a lesser plea bargain because you don't have the facts, which may then result in what you said in your opening statement, which is people have the tendency to treat black lives differently than white, when the reality is the case wasn't quite as good. isn't that a possibility too? >> for every prosecutor who's out there this is a serious problem and you are correct in pointing that out, sir. >> and it wasn't just me pointing it out, professor. i happen to have a fantastic chief of police when i was the d.a. fantastic man by the name of tony fisher. who happened to be an african-american chief of police. and he lamented the exact same thing you and i are talking about. is the loss of life in his community and the refusal of people to cooperate even in a drive-by shooting of an 8-year-old at a birthday party.

a drive-by shooting outdoors where the whole world saw the car drive by and nobody would cooperate with the prosecution. in the murder of an 8-year-old. so i hope that part of this 21st century police strategies conversation that we're having includes getting people to cooperate with law enforcement so you can hold people to the exact same standard regardless of the race of the victim. and i want to say this too. i want to thank my friend ced richman and hakeem jeffries and others who are working on this issue because they want a justice system that is colorblind. after all, it's represented by a woman wearing a blindfold. so let's go ahead and make it colorblind. and both of those guys have worked really, really hard and will continue to do so. because let me tell you what my goal is. my goal is for witnesses to feel comfortable cooperating.

but here's my other goal. and i'm out of time, but i'm going to share it with you. i want us to get to the point where we lament the death, the murder of a black female like nell lindsay just as much if it's at the hand of an abusive husband, which it was, if it had been at the hands of a white cop. i'd like to get to the point where we're equally outraged at the loss of life. and i hope we can get there. with that i would yield back. >> the chair thanks the gentleman, recognizes the gentleman from texas, ms. jackson-lee for five minutes. >> mr. chairman, thank you so very much. and let me thank both you and the ranking member, my ranking member, for listening and engaging and leading. and i was delighted to participate in the process. and i'd like to say to my colleagues that this effort of criminal justice reform was going to be a committee effort.

every member's input and assessment and analysis and legislative initiatives will stand equal in the eyes of the chairman and certainly those of us who serve as the chairperson and ranking member of the crime subcommittee, as i do. america will not be responded to unless this committee works together. and that efforts are in unison and collective, responding of course to the many witnesses that will come before us. so this is the first year. and i think america should recognize the very large step that we are making. sheriff clark, let me thank you for your service. we may agree to disagree, but there is no disagreement with your service and the sacrifice you that represent. as you indicated, we met a couple of weeks ago.

just may 15th i was on the west side of the campus of this great congress dealing with the many families who had lost loved ones in law enforcement. so my tone today will be that we do ill when we take each other's pain lightly. the pain of black lives matter. the pain of hands up, don't shoot, the pain of i can't breathe. that is pain. and it is equally the pain of mr. greer, who was on the steps of his house august 2013 and was shot in virginia. he happened to be an anglo or caucasian male. what we have to do to make a legislative step of monumental change that gives our officers the confidence of their work, further enhance their training is to be able to work together.

my line of questioning will be how do we fix these problems and how do we get the 5% number? that is a lot of officers. to be 25%, 50% accreditation. that's what the american people i think are looking at. i don't want anyone's pain to be diminished, and i sit here today recognizing that pain. so let me just quickly say this regarding statistics. james comey the director of the fbi, said the following about the fbi crime report, the now 3-year-old source that was cited in the sheriff's testimony. said the following -- demographic data regarding officer-involved shootings is not consistently reported to us through our uniform crime reporting program. because reporting is voluntary our data is incomplete and therefore in the aggregate unreliable. mr. hartley, i have thought that data is important.

introduced a bill called the cadet bill to gather statistics on shootings by police and by individuals against police. because i believe in fairness. and so if this was required, would that be an asset to calea as you do your scientific work of providing insight for training? >> miss jackson -- >> microphone. >> is your mike on? >> sorry about that. ms. jackson-lee let me start by saying that i think data helps drive decision making and it helps drive it in an important way because you don't know what you don't know sometimes. and what we find is organizations that engage with calea in accreditation discover data during the process that really helps them make fundamental decisions that drive the organization in a responsible way toward community service. >> do you have enough money to accredit all of the police departments across america? would you need some incentivizing, some funding to help you do that? >> well, we don't need the incentivizing or funding to help that occur. those organizations sometimes do. organizations that participate with us range in size from 10,000 to 10. >> so funding to them would be a

helpful component of police accountability? >> i think that would support agencies in this mission. >> i've got a series of questions. on the calea standards on body cameras, police arrests and transport and independent review of lethal force by police enforcement. one of the issues i'm now concerned about because when the issue came out in baltimore, it wasn't sort of put aside. the police departments were saying all over, some of the things we do. but do you have standards on that use of illegal force? >> we have standards on all those subjects. the one related the transport didn't particularly trace the issue in baltimore, however, there is a standard that encourages a safe transport of individuals. >> we need to help enhance that and make that a noticeable part of policing across america. >> i think the standards are a dynamic living pool and as we encounter new issues, we have to be ready to make those adjustments. >> i quickly ask you, you have

written about the obstacles in training programs. the status quo, can you explain and add to your conversation? i don't want any police officer, you know, to not go home to their family. everyone say great relationships. i'm a big believer. and then the idea of deescalation in training and how that impacts on police interaction. >> time has expired. the witness is allowed to answer. >> it's a very exciting hearing. thank you. >> i have described the philosophical shift that i have been promoting for a couple of years as moving our culture closer to a guardian mentality rather than a warrior mentality. i believe the warrior mentality was a result of a political movement that started in the

'60s when we declared war on crime, war on drugs, war on all sorts of things. the police agencies across this nation responded as they do to their political leadership in their communities. what i'm trying to do is help our new police officers find the right balance because officers absolutely must have keen warrior skills and they must be able to use them without hesitation or policy. but i want them to consider their role within our democracy. and that role needs to be the role of a protector. with the goal of protecting people rather than conquering them. when you try to initiate this type of a mindset shift, there is naturally going to be resistance. the greatest i've encountered is just the misunderstanding. when i have the opportunity to explain it in more depth, most officers will say to me, that's how good cops have always done it.

i want our recruits on their first day on the street to have the wisdom of a good cop with 20 years experience. >> time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. >> i yield back. >> from michigan, mr. bishop for five minutes. >> thank you. i'd like to thank the panel for your testimony today. sheriff, i had an opportunity to speak with the law enforcement community in my community and i did a round table discussion about the events of the day and events that had been raised. they were concerned as well about some of the bad actors in their own rank and file. that we've been seeing around this country and very concerned about it, but also, adamant about the fact they expressed the vast majority of the officers they work with, the emergency response personnel,

are hard working, good professional people who are there for a common purpose and that is to serve the public. they're concerned that doesn't resonate, that we see more now the bad than we do about some of the negative that's didding for on. it's important we deal with that, but it's also important we do whatever we can to rally behind those in the law enforcement community. what's going on with the moral of the community and are you having problems with recruitment and retention of officers as a result of all that's going on around the country? >> mr. chair, congressman, we're on a tipping point and it is something i expressed not too long after what happened in

ferguson, missouri, about the psyche of the police officer, constant bashing and maligning of the profession is starting to take its toll. i just spent this week in the d.c. area for the national law enforcement officers memorial. police week, if you will, and i talked to law enforcement officers from all across this country and the one common theme i heard from them first of all, they're mindset is they're beleaguered right now, but the common theme that i heard is you know, sheriff, i don't know if i want to continue to take that extra step anymore because i don't want to be the next darren wilson. the next -- the officers in baltimore or new york or anywhere. because they, in a good faith effort, we're talking about the good faith action here, we operate in an environment of

chaos and uncertainty when we get sent to these calls. sometimes in this imperfect world, things can go horribly wrong, which they did in ferguson, missouri. i'm not going to get into, you know, whose fault it was, but something went horribly wrong. but some of the best law enforcement work that goes on all across the country is called self-initiated. it's not the call for service. when an officer gets sent to a call for service, something already happened. it's reactive. the crime already occurred. but the self-initiated policing is when that officer, that man or woman, uses their experience, their sixth sense, if you will, their street sense, that criminal activity may be afoot and they establish the reasonable suspicious so that they can make that stop. consistent with our constitution. they go and investigate. they pull that car over or go and what we call stick up a group of individuals hanging on

a corner or casing an area and we start to investigate. in self-initiated policing, you're going to find that guns are being used to transport to and from drive by shootings, you're going to find prohibited persons with firearm, you're going to find drugs, you're going to find people wanted on serious felony warrants. when that starts to fall off, and there will be a lag time. this isn't going to happen overnight. the cops in this country are not going to quit, but over time when they start to worry, they look and see that suspicious vehicle or individual and say, maybe not today. i don't want this thing to go haywire on me and the next thing you know, i'm one of those officers that -- who becomes a household name in america. that is going to a lag time. i don't like to create hysteria, but over time, i think it's going to have an effect on crime rates. in those communities that need

assertive policing and those are minority communities. >> i'll yield back. >> recognize the gentleman from new york, mr. nad lehr, for five minutes. >> before i ask a question, let me make an observation. sheriff clark talked about the sixth sense about taking that extra step. sometimes, taking that extra step is very necessary, but sometimes, maybe we want to officer not to take that extra step. maybe that's sometimes the problem and that leads into the question of changing police culture, which miss rahr talked about. what is the greatest challenge in changing police culture? >> i think the greatest challenge is recognizing that we have a real variety of cultures already existing across the country. when officers come to begin their career of service, most come to the table with the goal of doing something good, doing

something to benefit the community, then they're confronted with the realities of trying to do those good things. sometimes taking on a tougher persona and they may lose sight of their original reasons for coming in the door. i think we need to work harder. make sure that they are healthy, both mentally and physically and that they feel supported by the agency. if an officer doesn't feel support inside their agency, they're not going to be willing to take a risk and try something different. they're not going to be willing to take as much of a risk to go out on a limb to protect someone. i think the internal culture of policing is absolutely critical and when that is strong and healthy and confident, officers will be willing to try something different. >> and what, if anything, can we in congress do to help this change?

>> i would love to see congress provide funding for improved training. i'll just cut right to the chase. there are a number of excellent programs already in existence that could be -- could literally transform the profession of policing in this country. i've been involved for the last couple of years with a program called blue courage and that program seeks to support police officers, build their pride, build their sense of high morale and especially assist them in seeing their appropriate role within as a guardian in democracy. that program costs money and agencies that want to acquire that training have to pay for an officer -- >> appropriating money for training. anything else? >> besides training? >> besides money? >> i'm sorry. i think just the recognition that individual police agencies need to be supported.

there is not going to be a one size fits all federal solution to this. >> thank you very much. professor ramirez, we've had a number of all over the country, a number of problems obviously with violence against citizens who turned out not to have weapons or be guilt of anything. sometimes police are happy with that, sometimes, they're not. we've seen these controversies and of course, it's been suggested that the da are too close without being partisan whether they are or not. should we consider a special, should we have a law who investigates toward investigations of police officers on the grounds that the das are too close? >> i think it would be a good idea.

>> with that, in confidence and impartiality and what are the negatives on it? >> while we have a recusal system, that's in the hands of the district attorney. the district attorney in ferguson did not recuse himself. and i think having laws and a process would create more legitimacy and transparency to the public. >> thank you. what is -- also, what is the greatest impediment to prosecuting police officers who violate rights of individuals in official capacity? obviously, we don't do 180 -- deprivation of civil rights often, so what is by the federal government, the biggest impediment to prosecute police officers who ought to be prosecuted. >> i am someone who has prosecuted police officers and in a prosecutorial office when

you work with police, when you work with law enforcement, it is very hard to decide to prosecute. >> we talked about in our previous question. >> last because my time is running out, obviously, there have been a lot of controversial encounters and some of which police officers prosecuted, others which they weren't. sometimes the da was excoriated for prosecuting, sometimes not. would it be better for the sense of justice on the part of relatives of victims, would it be better for the police officers who could be exonerated by this, if police officers used body cameras all the time when ever they had such an encounter? >> i think cameras are critical at this juncture and we know four things happen when you put them in place because we've done

resempg search on this. first, the use of force diminishes and that's important. because police officers know that they're being recorded during an incident. second, complaints against police officers diminished significantly, reduces the cost and process of these incidents. surprisingly, the third thing is that there's been an increase in successful prosecution of domestic violence because the police can record on the scene at the time what happened. the fourth thing that would be helpful in moving the police culture from a warrior culture to a guardianship culture is that you could begin to have guardianship metrics. how many people did you arrest, search, seize? how many guns, how many drugs? if you had cameras, you could begin to do two things. you could begin to evaluate

officers on guardianship values. you could look at every 100th tape and say was this officer respectful? courteous? did they follow procedures? and it serves as an early warning system to police because if you're watching on a regular basis randomly on a regular basis, you will discern who are the bad apples. >> thank you. i yield back. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona. mr. franks, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. to paraphrase the poet, we sleep safe in our beds at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence of those who would do us harm and certainly, i believe that that in the people that wear the uniform, the many women that wear the uniform, fit in that paradigm very well because unless there

are those that are willing to stand between the innocent and the malevolent, then the malevolent will prevail. i think those that wear the uniform and place themselves in those dangerous positions are among the most noble figures in our society. and sheriff mack, sheriff clark, i heard you on one of the television interviews and was so struck by your clarity and your eagle eyed approach and i thought this gentleman personifies that nobility we talk about and i think my children and the children of this country have a safer, more hopeful future because of people like you, so i would suggest that might be why you're here on this hearing this morning. but my question is first for you. have the recent events and the press response had any kind of impact on your officers or made them more likely to employ strategies and tactics that might compromise their safety or

the safety of the community? >> mr. chair, congressman, without a doubt, as part of that tipping point that i talked about. you know, we need balance in this obviously and even if we find it, maintaining it is going to be more difficult. an officer delaying that thing that's telling him or her to do a certain thing that doesn't happen and may cost them their lives, but let me say this about the use of body cameras. i am for this, the use of this technology. as a force multiplier. it can only help. but what i've been advising is i think we're rushing into this because we're going to end up with a lot of unintended consequences. there are some privacy issues involved. it could lead to fewer people wanting to come forward and wanting to cooperate with police. especially in our minority communities, where cooperating with police can lead you to a very bad conclusion. you don't want to be seen doing

that. you don't want to be videotaped cooperating with the police, so we need to think about what impact it will have on witnesses wanting to come forward or even calling to report crime and i want to close by saying that you know, the use of body cameras in the early evidence that it's leading to fewer complaints and fewer instances of force, is not -- and evidence to suggest it's not to show it, that there isn't just the result of the officer knowing that someone's watching. it's also letting the person who the officer's dealing with know if i make a false complaint against this officer, it's going to be on video and that could lead to a decrease in complaints as well. so i don't want everybody to presume that it's because the officers are being watched that they're changing their behavior. the same with suspects. maybe they're less likely to fight the police, so that's why

i say i support that. i say let's not rush into this because it's not a panacea. thank you. >> thank you, sir. >> in your testimony, you discussed the absence of a national coherence in policing. i wonder how you would propose to implement national policing standards while still ensuring that local police departments maintain the autonomy necessary to be relevant in their own jurisdictions. >> sir, i have a suggested national standards. what the task force worked on was recommendations to provide guidance and more support for police departments. i don't think we will ever come to a place where we have national standards for police policies and procedures. there's just too many different variables in each community. >> mr. chairman, i would just suggest, sir, that while i think

everyone sees our police force in general as guardians, i'm thankful that there are enough warrior mentality among them to hold back those that would desecrate the innocent and i yield back. >> recognizes the gentleman from tennessee, mr. cohen. >> thank you, mr. chair, and i want to thank you for holding this hearing and i want to say i started my legal career, i was a lawyer, as attorney for memphis police. spent three and a half years working for the police and i understand it and appreciate and know it's essential for an order of liberty in a society that's has on the front line men and women willing to risk their lives. on the other hand, i have great respect for mr. gowdy. he looks to the day that with you rue the death of the lady

and i forget her that i am, who was ampparently killed by her husband in a domestic violence situation. the same as the problems when a white policeman kills a black citizen and i would have to say, there's a big difference. one is a private tragedy. the other is a public tragedy because it's under color of law. and while we like to see no crime whatsoever and that would be wonderful, we can only mostly be concerned about the color of law killings. and that's something we should be concerned about. it's a big difference. a question for professor ramirez. you mentioned decisions rest in hands of das and mr. gowdy mentioned recusals. they're up to the da and in the recommendations of the president's task force, there were recommendations that we have an independent prosecutor. congressman clay and i introduced a bill that requires states to adopt independent laws or face a cut in burn jag funding. this would present a solution.

is part of the reason the problem exists, is it perception? is it part of the reason why you think it's important to have an independent prosecutor because the perception the public has that there is not independent an that will sis of the cases and independent determination? >> i believe that the prosecutors across the country try to do the best they can and exercise the best judgment. because of this inherent conflict, there may be the perception in the eye of the public that this was not a fair and full hearing. >> the da's main witnesses are police and in my community, the da hire, which makes sense, former sheriff's people to be their investigators. >> yes, sir. >> so there's an inherent conflict. that's the reason we have our

bill because we think not only would it get, eliminate the perception, but also, there are certain cases where it's politics involved and a base for the da who's elected is law enforcement and that's a problem. you were a member of the president's task force and thank you for your work and your colleague's work. the task force recommended the use of independent prosecutors. was that recommendation for das to not -- if the recommendation was based on instances where das did not pursue cases as aggressively as they should or was this based on a mere perception on a conflict of interest? >> in our debates and conversations, the primary focus was on the perception and we have to maintain public trust. there are many prosecutors that are perfectly capable i believe of doing an objective investigation and prosecution of

police shootings. unfortunately, we have to maintain public trust. and when you balance those two issues, it was the consensus that they had to have more weight than just the pragmatism of those prosecuted. >> you mentioned training. part of the bill i had required some kind of sensitivity training to understand ethnic differences and maybe secular orientation districts. do you think it's helpful for the diverse societies we have today. >> i believe it would be helpful, i wouldn't entitle it sensitivity because i think the police would shut down. >> sheriff clark, you've mentioned in your testimony that much of the population in the state and federal prisons was for violent crime.

probably that's true, but in the federal system, it's mostly for drug crime. that's where the drug situation really fills up the federal prisons and you said that illegal drug use is the scourge of the black community and it is a problem and leads to a great deal of violence crime. would you agree that marijuana possession is not the scourge of the black community and does not lead to violent crime the same way meth, crack, cocaine and heroin do? >> no, i wouldn't agree. >> that's interesting and wished i had more time to talk to you, but thank you for allowing me this opportunity and the defense attorney is not supposed to ask the question, but it was such an obvious answer, i just never thought i'd get that answer. >> chair recognizes the gentleman from iowa, mr. king for five minutes. >> resisting the temptation to yield to mr. cohen, i'd put out i have in my hand an article

titled and dated by the way, the 6th of may, but it's titled obama praised baltimore police he's now investigating. and it points out the study this the gentleman from tennessee referenced, the president's task force on 21st century policing, which i have in my hand and quotes from the police chief of baltimore who said he changed outdated procedures that put officers at odds with the community. this goes back to march of 2015 was dated the report date of this article is the first week or so in may. it's interesting to me i listened to the testimony of mr. rahr and i give you credit for that, that you'd like to see a shift from the warrior mentality to that of a guardian and i think of the night i came here and i watched live on television. i saw the baltimore police retreat from rock throwing mobs, so is there a time they need to

convert back to the warrior mentality and was that the time? >> i want to clarify when i talk about a guardian mentality. that absolutely does not imply retreat. it does not imply weakness. it implies being able to do thing two things at once. >> but you can do that by just answering my question. was baltimore a time they should have been more of a warrior mentality when they were facing rock throwing mobs and retreating in the face of rock throwing mobs, was that a time there needed to be an engagement of the police rather than a retreat. >> they needed to use warrior tactics while having the mindset of a guardian. >> i would turn to miss ramirez. i began thinking about our constitution and where it says in the first amendment and i'll

paraphrase, congress shall make no law respecting the right of the people peaceable to assemble. do you agree with that statement? >> yes, sir. >> and there's no prohibition and prohibits congress from making a law that would prohibit the people from violently assembling. >> congress does have the right to restrain violence in any form. >> so, we agree that freedom of speech isn't the right to yell fire in a crowded theatre. >> correct. >> we could also agree on -- now i'll ask you. is it then, is it lawful or unlawful for one to pay protesters and encourage them to become violent? >> i think that's a crime. >> and i would agree with that, also.

>> that part, and encourage violence, i have in my hand a stack of tweets and stories and messages about protesters in ferguson, missouri. who now are protesting that they didn't get paid. for the work they did. and i put that word work in quotes. have you reviewed that or are you knowledgeable about this? >> no, but i would say this. that at this juncture, the mostful thing we could do is to try to bring the community and the police together in dialogues at the local level. >> i do understand that. that was in your testimony. and i think the panel understands it, but if you were presented with information that showed -- that indicated that there were, there was a funder or funders who have hired

protesters that may have bussed into places like ferguson, missouri or sent to places like baltimore and we ended up watching buildings and businesses be burned and property damage being created and in some cases assault, would that be worthy of an investigation would you think by the local police force? >> yes. >> and what about by the u.s. attorney general? >> i think that they should -- if there is evidence that someone were being paid to engage in violent protests and engage in violence, then that's a serious problem. >> but you wouldn't think that if they didn't say violence, if they just said protest and it turned into violence, then it wouldn't be a crime. >> that's a different situation. >> i'd like to ask sheriff clark if he could respond. >> sure, i was a little disappointed that there weren't more aggressive prosecutions and attempts to investigate some of the behavior of some of the rioters who were captured on

videotape. one of the ones that stands out was a group of young individuals standing and dancing on top of a police cruiser that had been destroyed so to speak, as if they had captured some sort of ground that's government property. in wisconsin, we have a statute inciting a riot. i think those should be used both sides. seems to be too much focus on what the police may have done you know prior to the riots breaking out. as you indicated, there's a more socially acceptable way under our first amendment to display your frustrations, your anger and it's not rioting. it's not destroying property of other people. they abandon -- we saw that night what baltimore would look like without the police. with police stepping back as they did. some say retreating, so it was

an ugly situation for a great american city. >> thank you, sheriff. thank the chairman and witnesses and yield back to balance my time. >> thank the gentlemen and recognize the gentleman from georgia. mr. johnson, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank you and the ranking member for agreeing to hold this hearing. and i -- sheriff clark, i heard about, read about your astigmatic testimony -- astigmatic is the word i'm trying to use. please note my strong respect and support for police and law enforcement and my strong insistence that the rule of law apply to all regard regardless of whether a person is a civilian or law enforcement. the failure to prosecute police officers to put peaceful

protests and video footage of people dying by the hands of law enforcement have led us to where we are today. while discussing police accountability is an essential way to improve the relationship between the community and law enforcement, i hope that this committee will hold additional hearings that will allow us to specifically focus on grand jury reform, use of body cameras and the doj's transparency practices. before we witness the militarization of police in missouri, i had been working on stock militarizing law enforcement act. which prevents local police forces from receiving emraps, tanks and other weapons left over from the war and i'm very grateful and humbled that president obama on yesterday issued an executive order that virtually ends the 1033 program. and i've also introduced the grand jury reform act which

calls for the use of special prosecutors and independent law enforcement agencies when there has been a police killing. and also, i've introduced the police accountability act, which would expand the doj's authority to bring charges against law enforcement officers. enforcement officers. sir, do you, have you heard the name arriston waiters before? he was just a 19-year-old, unarmed black male just a typical unarmed black male down in union city. georgia, who was shot while laying on his stomach, shot twice in the back by a law enforcement officer, police officer. from union city. shot twice in the back at close range. the officer who killed mr. waiters allegedly exhibited signs of post-traumatic stress

disorder. he was an afghanistan war veteran. according to the anxiety disorders association of america, there are 40 million adults in the united states over the age of 18 who suffer from anxiety disorders. 18 who suffer from anxiety disorders. 7.7 million of those americans suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. i'm concerned about the role mental health issues play in officers using excessive force against civilians. we've talked about police officers receiving training on how to apprehend people suffering from mental illnesses. but what is your department doing to make sure that offerers themselves aren't suffering from mental illnesses? >> mr. chair, congressmen, that is one of the most difficult situations that law enforcement

officers are dealing with today. the mentally ill. >> i'm saying in terms of -- would you agree there must be some out there among the 7.7 million americans suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder who are law enforcement officers. you would not deny that would you? >> i don't have any data to refute it. >> well, but would you think that there may be some cases where there are officers who are suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder and who are serving currently in law enforcement. >> if i had to guess, yes. i had such a situation with one of my patrol sergeants who served in the first gulf war, i believe. and he slapped around a handcuffed prisoner. not only had him charged with a

felony, he went to prison for 18 months. >> you are to be commended for that. >> it was a hard thing to do. >> does your department have a system of monitoring police officers, or your officers periodically, just to determine whether or not they have any mental health issues that could impede their ability to protect and serve the people? >> not a systematic one. we have our standard early warning system. >> do you think it would be wise for the federal government -- i noticed that in your statement you say that police use of force -- i'm quoting you -- police use of force should be scrutinized -- locally that is. does that mean you don't think the federal government should concern itself with these issues at all? >> it's not that i don't think the federal government should concern itself.

i think the federal government should observe what's going on across the nation with all of these issues. but to -- i think it's a slippery slope. >> when you say they should be scrutinized locally, is that to the exclusion of the federal government? >> well, if i can finish the sentence -- >> the time of the gentleman has expired, but the witness is allowed to answer the question. >> thank you. sure it's to be scrutinized without a doubt. >> thank you. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania mr. marino, for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it's a pleasure to have you here today. sheriff, if you could zero in on an issue for me concerning resources, if you had the money, would you hire more sheriffs deputy sheriffs, and where would you put them? what would you do with them? >> yes, i would hire them. i'm in a court battle now with the county. i've had to sue the county to hire some more law enforcement officers.

i'd put them in the field. based on what the data is showing, where the crime is occurring. not just the crime but to provide a consistent visible presence as a deterrent to crime. not just making arrests and writing citations, but to deter and prevent. >> if you need help in that department with your superiors, let me know. i'd be glad to help. >> i'll do that. >> ms. ramirez, i come from a long line of law enforcement people. we take it very seriously. i was an assistant district attorney. i was a district attorney. i was a united states attorney. my colleague here was one of the best assistant u.s. attorneys in the country. i prosecuted cases myself. i did not base my decision to prosecute cases involving african-americans or police on color or on the police. i based it on the rule of law.

it had nothing to do with who committed the crime and who didn't and what police were involved. you stated that you had a difficult time choosing over law enforcement and police. i never did. if you have a difficult time like that you shouldn't be a prosecutor. why would you prosecute if you made that statement, that i have a difficult time prosecuting police if they broke the law? >> in my particular situation, as an assistant u.s. attorney we had not prosecuted police officers in the past. and the u.s. attorney at the time said to me do you plan to practice law as a defense attorney here in boston afterwards? i said -- >> let me reclaim my time. you're going to get into the u.s. attorney or that individual. you have a step to go to if you have a complaint about prosecuting a case in the u.s. attorney's office. >> yes. >> you can go from one person to another, and you can go to the

justice department. now, you also raised the issue -- >> which we did, sir. may i say -- >> i'm asking the questions here. >> okay. >> you also raise the issue of re recusal. that it's up to the district attorney, up to the u.s. attorney. in my state, in the state courts ss and even in the federal courts, if there was a recusal, we looked at it seriously. i recused myself before. you can take that to the judge and petition as to why. you didn't mention that. >> here's another thing that i ran into as a prosecutor as my colleague said. it was difficult to get young african-american males to testify against others, particularly -- even in cases where a family member was killed. can you address that for a little bit please? >> that is one of the most

important problems that needs to be addressed. i want to talk about how we addressed it in boston. >> would you please make it quickly. i have a minute and a half. >> okay. we went to the community organizations. we went to the faith-based community. we talked to the community and we asked them why people were unwilling to come forward as witnesses. there were a myriad of causes. we set up a process and hearings. as a result we had i don't know how many cold cases that were solved through a process in which the faith-based community went out, did outreach to the community. the community organizations did that. we have improved that. >> i agree with you. that's a good way to handle it. but you do agree, it's a problem. >> it's definitely a problem sir. >> it's a big problem. have you -- you've had an extensive, exemplary career. but have you ridden in the car with a police officers when they were faced with a quick decision

in have you been on the street when the police officers had to make a split second decision that has taken the united states court two years to determine what's right on a 5-4 decision? >> yes i have been in cars where police had to make split second decisions. i found it frightening. >> sure. >> they do a job i could not do. >> the difference in a split second decision and the fact that someone has to determine over a period of time what is right and wrong. you did cherry pick a lot of cases. you didn't bring up the issue that the number keeps coming after that 93% of the young black males those ones that are murdered, 93% are killed by young black males. why is this happening, and what can we do to change that? >> that is a serious problem sir. but i do agree with others who have said what happens under color of law is different from

what happens privately between two private individuals. they are both problems. but they are different problems. and when someone kills under color of law, that merits a different process. >> i think any prosecutor worth his or her soul understands that very, very much. i yield back the time. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentlewoman from california hz chu ms. chu, is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. ms. rahr, you have a new approach of leasing listen and explain with equity and dignity which puts a premium on listening during a police encounter. can you walk us through a hypothetical situation where l.e.a.d. works? >> the purpose of developing the model was to simplify the procedures behind criminal

justice and give officers tangible behavioral direction. in situations where there is conflict, taking the time if there is not a threat present. i want to be very clear about that. if somebody is pointing a gun at you, you don't listen and explain. you do what you have to do. but in most police interactions in the community, there is time. if officers are reminded of the benefit of listening, that will help set that interaction going down the correct track. most police officers like myself, we like to step in and control things. we have to be reminded to stop and listen. when people say police should treat people with respect, the most effective way to convey respect is to listen. so we really want to emphasize that for our officers. the other area where many officers forget is that we know the system inside and out. we know how the process is going to work. we know what's going to happen next. people we're interacted with don't know tha