Democrats Vote Against Tim Scott’s Police Reform Bill

Part 3 in a three-part series.

Shortly after president Trump signed a new executive order aimed at initiating police reform at the federal level, both parties in the House and Senate drafted their reform bills, proposing new laws and amendments.

Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina led the Senate Republican Bill, which was quickly and harshly shut down by Senate  Democrats. The vote against the legislation is tragedy, as it eliminates any possibility of passing police reform this year.

The policing bill needed 60 votes to pass, but failed by a vote of 55-45. The vote to kill the bill came after a passionate, thoughtful speech by Scott, the lone black republican in the Senate. He attested that this bill was the opportunity to say “Not only do we hear you, not only do we see you, we are responding to your pain.”

Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer commented that the harsh reality of the bill was that it “is so deeply, fundamentally and irrevocably flawed, it cannot serve as a useful starting point for meaningful reform.” Yet, Senator Angus King of Maine (one of only three members of the Democratic caucus who voted for the Scott bill) explained, “voting against it will end the discussion of this subject in the Senate for the foreseeable future, and leave us with nothing to show for all the energy and passion that has brought this issue to the forefront of public consciousness.”

His statement holds resounding truth; a truth which is even more startling in the context of the generous compromise Scott offered with his bill. His initial draft already included a number of Democratic proposals, including: making lynching a federal hate crime; creating a national policing commission to conduct a review of the U.S. Criminal justice system; collecting data on use of force by police; barring the use of chokeholds by federal officers and withholding federal funds to state and local law enforcement agencies that do not agree to bar them; and withholding federal money to police departments that fail to report to the Justice Department when no-knock warrants are used.

Not only did the original draft already include many Democratic propositions, but Scott offered to allow votes on as many amendments as Democrats wanted  (something Pelosi had refused to allow House Republicans to do on the House police reform bill). He even promised Democrats he would filibuster his own bill if they did not get the votes they sought. Scott explained in his floor speech that he would even vote in support of some of the Democrats’ amendments, including expanding on the definition of “chokehold” and collecting data on not only serious bodily injury and death, but also all used of force by police. He promised “We’ll stay on this floor for as long as it takes, and as many amendments are it takes.” With his own Republican backing, Scott likely could have pulled in enough support from the rest of the party to pass the amendments as well, giving Democrats a fair shot at significantly modifying the bill.

Despite these efforts, the Democrats’ refused to compromise. Without submitting a Senate-version of the bill, the House-Senate conference has taken it off the table, and all progress at making the bill as law stops for the time being. The Democratic Party even  voted against allowing debate on the bill, knowing this would mean police reform would not part of this year’s policy reform.

In his final speech that day on the Senate Floor, a solemn Scott concluded  “We lost- I lost – a vote on a piece of legislation that would have led to a systemic change in the relationship between the communities of color and the law enforcement community.”