2016: Schweikert Voted Against Barring Funds To Bureau Of Land Management And The U.S. Forest Service Law Enforcement Offices. In July 2016, Schweikert voted against an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "bar[red] funds in the bill from being used to abolish law enforcement offices at the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service." The underlying legislation was an FY 2017 interior and environment appropriations bill. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 194 to 233. The House later passed the underlying legislation, but the Senate took no substantive action on the legislation. [House Vote 470, 7/14/16; Congressional Quarterly, 7/14/16; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 1366; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5538]
BLM And Forest Service Employees Have Been Targets Of Violence, Including Occupations Of Their Offices. According to Think Progress, "BLM and Forest Service employees have also been the targets of violence outside of these occupations, ranging from attempted murder to threats of physical assault. The CAP report makes clear that these agencies need more resources, not less, to adequately protect the national forests, national parks, and other public lands to which they are entrusted." [Think Progress, 3/24/16]
2016: An Armed Occupation On A Federal Wildlife Refuge In Oregon Was Sparked In Part Due To The Arrest Of Cliven Bundy, Who Became Famous For A Standoff Over Federal Land In Nevada. According to Reuters, "The four holdouts in the armed occupation of a federal wildlife refuge in Oregon surrendered on Thursday, with the last protester repeatedly threatening suicide in a dramatic final phone call with mediators before he gave up, ending the 41-day standoff. [...] The takeover, which began on Jan. 2, was sparked by the return to prison of two Oregon ranchers convicted of setting fires that spread to federal property in the vicinity of the refuge. The standoff, which was originally led by brothers Ammon and Ryan Bundy, came to a head after the arrest on Wednesday in Portland of their father, Cliven Bundy. On Thursday, he was charged with conspiracy, assault on a federal officer and obstruction of justice in connection with a separate 2014 standoff on federal land near his Nevada ranch." [Reuters, 2/17/16]
2024: Schweikert Voted To Condemn Calls To Defund The Police And To State That Such Calls Result In Increased Violence Towards Law Enforcement. In May 2024, Schweikert voted for , according to Congressional Quarterly, "the resolution that would condemn calls to defund the police, which it says has 'increased violence towards law enforcement officers.' It would recognize that law enforcement officers must have the equipment, training and resources needed to protect the health and safety of the public as well as their fellow law enforcement officers on the job. It would recognize the need for better data collection on law enforcement officers who are assaulted, injured, or disabled in the line of duty. It also would acknowledge the mental stress and strain law enforcement officers suffer not only because of the job's pressures and realities, but also the 'negative environment in which they often must work.'" The House adopted the resolution by a vote of 337 to 61. [House Vote 218, 5/17/24; Congressional Quarterly, 5/17/24; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 1213]
2023: Schweikert Voted To Praise Local Law Enforcement And Condemn Calls To Defund Or Abolish The Police. In May 2023, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted for a concurrent resolution that would "express that Congress recognizes and appreciates the 'dedication and devotion' of local law enforcement officers and condemns 'calls to defund, disband, dismantle, or abolish the police.' Among other provisions, the resolution's preamble would state that 'looting, rioting, and violence in major cities' in the summer of 2020 caused the destruction of many businesses; that the national murder rate in 2020 was the highest total since 1995; that 'leftist activists and progressive politicians' have called for defunding or dismantling police and 'actively encouraged resentment toward local law enforcement'; that 'the defund police movement vilifies and demonizes local law enforcement officers and puts them at greater risk of danger;' and that 'violent leftist extremists have repeatedly attacked and assaulted local law enforcement officers.' As amended, it would express that local law enforcement officers who have been accused of misconduct should have certain rights in the course of investigations and encourage states to adopt a 'Bill of Rights' related to such officers' rights." The vote was on passage. The House passed the resolution by a vote of 301 to 119. [House Vote 227, 5/18/23; Congressional Quarterly, 5/18/23; Congressional Actions, H.Con.Res. 40]
2023: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Condemn Calls To Defund Law Enforcement Agencies. In May 2023, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted for the "adoption of the rule that would provide for floor consideration of [...] the concurrent resolution (H Con Res 40) expressing support for law enforcement and condemning efforts to defund law enforcement agencies. The rule would provide for one hour of general debate on each bill. It would make in order floor consideration of two amendments to HR 2494, four amendments to HR 3091 and one amendment to H Con Res 40." The vote was on the adoption of the rule. The House adopted the rule by a vote of 222 to 203. [House Vote 216, 5/16/23; Congressional Quarterly, 5/16/23; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 398; Congressional Actions, H.Con.Res. 40]
2023: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Condemn Calls To Defund Law Enforcement Agencies. In May 2023, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted for the "motion to order the previous question (thus ending debate and possibility of amendment) on the rule that would provide for floor consideration of [...] the concurrent resolution (H Con Res 40) expressing support for law enforcement and condemning efforts to defund law enforcement agencies. The rule would provide for one hour of general debate on each bill. It would make in order floor consideration of two amendments to HR 2494, four amendments to HR 3091 and one amendment to H Con Res 40." The vote was on a motion to order the previous question. The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 220 to 209. [House Vote 215, 5/16/23; Congressional Quarterly, 5/16/23; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 398; Congressional Actions, H.Con.Res. 40]
2019: Schweikert Voted Against An Omnibus Spending Proposal Preventing Another Government Shutdown And Providing $304 Million For The Community Oriented Policing Services Program. In February 2019, Schweikert voted against the FY 2019 consolidated appropriations bill. According to Congressional Quarterly, "This Conference Summary describes the agreement on H J Res 31, Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY 2019, which provides detailed, full-year funding for all seven remaining FY 2019 spending bills ---thereby completing the FY 2019 appropriations process. The centerpiece, Homeland Security, provides $1.375 billion for new and replacement barriers along the U.S. border with Mexico, including 55 miles of new fencing, along with an increase of $1.5 billion in other border security funding --- such as for new technology at ports of entry and additional Customs officers. Outside of the Homeland bill, it includes another $1.6 billion for border security, as well as a 1.9% pay increase for federal civilian employees." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 300 to 128. The bill was later signed into law by the president. [House Vote 87, 2/14/19; Congressional Quarterly, 2/14/19; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 31]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against An Amendment That Would Allocate 2% Funding And Authorize $8 Million Annually Through FY 2026 To Improve Criminal Justice Response Policies And Enhance LGBTQ-Related Victim Services. In March 2021, Schweikert voted against en bloc amendments no.1 which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "reserve 2 percent of funding authorized by the bill for grants to improve criminal justice response policies and grants to support families in the justice system for grants to enhance LGBTQ-specific victim services, and authorize an additional $8 million annually through fiscal 2026 for such purposes." The vote was on the adoption of amendments. The House adopted the amendments by a vote of 228-197. [House Vote 83, 3/17/21; Congressional Quarterly, 3/17/21; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt. 31; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1620]
2014: Schweikert Voted To Cut DEA Funding By $35 Million From An FY 2015 Commerce, Justice And Science Appropriations Bill. In May 2014, Schweikert voted for an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "reduce[d] by $35 million the amount provided for the Drug Enforcement Agency, and transfer the savings to the bill's spending reduction account." The underlying legislation was an FY 2015 Commerce, Justice and science appropriations bill. The vote was on the amendment. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 66 to 339. [House Vote 250, 5/29/14; Congressional Quarterly, 5/29/14; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 719; Congressional Actions, H.R. 4660]
2021: Schweikert Voted For An Amendment That Would Expand A Justice Department Grant Program To Develop And Strengthen Policies And Training For Police Officers, Prosecutors, And The Judiciary To Prosecute Instances Of Domestic Violence And Sexual Assault And Harassment. In March 2021, Schweikert voted for an amendment which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "expand an existing Justice Department grant program aimed at improving criminal justice policies in response to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking against individuals who have had contact with the justice system to allow the department to make grants to develop or strengthen policies and training for law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and the judiciary in recognizing and prosecuting instances of such violence." The vote was on the adoption of an amendment. The House adopted the amendment by a vote of 242-174. [House Vote 84, 3/17/21; Congressional Quarterly, 3/17/21; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt. 33; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1620]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Responding To The January 6th Insurrection By Providing $520.9 Million To The National Guard And Various Law Enforcement Agencies And $66.8 Million To D.C. For Terrorist Threat And Federal Presence Expenses. In May 2021, Schweikert voted against the Emergency Security Supplemental Appropriations Act which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "For expenses related to the Jan. 6 attack and to prevent similar incidents, it would provide $520.9 million for the National Guard and funding for several law enforcement agencies, including the FBI and National Park Service. It would provide $66.8 million to the District of Columbia for public safety expenses related to terrorist threats and federal presence in the district." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 213-212, and was sent to the Senate and the President and ultimately became law. [House Vote 156, 5/20/21; Congressional Quarterly, 5/20/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3237]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against The George Floyd Justice In Policing Act Of 2021, Which Would Create Policing Data Requirements And Restrict Law Enforcement Agencies From Using Certain Policing Practices. In March 2021, Schweikert voted against the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2021 which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "establish reporting and oversight requirements related to policing data and restrict the use of certain policing practices by federal law enforcement agencies and state and local agencies receiving certain federal policing grants." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-212. The Senate did not take substantive action on the bill. [House Vote 60, 3/3/21; Congressional Quarterly, 3/3/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1280]
House Democrats Drafted Identical Legislation During The 116th Congress After The Killing Of George Floyd, Followed By The Deaths Of Other Black Americans And Continued Police Violence In Spring 2021 Where At Least 23 Black Americans Were Killed. According to Vox, "In June 2020, House Democrats crafted identical legislation in response to the worldwide demonstrations against police brutality that were sparked by the killing of George Floyd by then-Minnesota police officer Derek Chauvin --- and that were sustained by the deaths of dozens of other Black Americans, including Breonna Taylor, Daniel Prude, and Rayshard Brooks. Since then, police violence against Black Americans has not waned. In the first few months of 2021, police have killed at least 23 Black Americans; prominent incidents of violence include an officer in Rochester, New York, pepper-spraying a handcuffed 9-year-old girl, and police killing 52-year-old Patrick Lynn Warren following a mental health 911 call placed on his behalf." [Vox, 3/3/21]
The Policies Placed By The Measure Would Be Tied To The Federal Funding Of State And Local Governments. According to Politico, "The federal policies would be tied to law enforcement funding for governments at the state and local levels." [Politico, 3/3/21]
The Police Reform Bill Was Named After George Floyd, Who Was Killed After A White Minneapolis Police Officer Knelt On His Neck For Minutes, And The Police Officer Was Scheduled To Go On Trial Days After The Passage Of The Bill. According to CBS News, "The bill is named after Floyd, the Black man who died May 25 after a white Minneapolis police officer knelt on his neck for minutes. The officer, Derek Chauvin, was fired, and he faces charges of second-degree murder and manslaughter. His trial and jury selection are scheduled to begin Monday." [CBS News, 3/3/21]
House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy Claimed The Bill Would "Defund The Police" By Placing New Regulations That Would Effectively "Drain" The Resources Of Police Departments. According to The New York Times, "Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the Republican leader, repeated one of those attacks on Thursday, asserting that the bill would 'defund the police' by imposing 'mountains of new regulations' that would drain departments' resources." [The New York Times, 3/4/21]
The Bill Would Have Allowed For Subpoenas For Evidence In Potential Constitutional Rights Violations By Law Enforcement And Authorized State Grants To Aid Investigations. According to Congressional Quarterly, "authorize subpoenas by the Justice Department or state attorneys general for evidence related to potential violations of constitutional rights by law enforcement and authorize grants to states to support such investigations." [Congressional Quarterly, 3/3/21]
The Bill Would Have Authorized Funds For Community-Based Policing Practices And Non-Police Public Safety Initiatives. According to Congressional Quarterly, "authorize grant funding for activities related to community-based policing practices and non-police public safety initiatives." [Congressional Quarterly, 3/3/21]
The Bill Would Have Limited The Transfer Of Military Equipment To State And Local Law Enforcement Agencies. According to Congressional Quarterly, "limit the transfer of military equipment from the Defense Department to state and local law enforcement agencies." [Congressional Quarterly, 3/3/21]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Prohibiting No-Knock Warrants, Chokeholds And The Use Of Deadly Or Less Lethal Force Before Using De-Escalation Methods. In March 2021, Schweikert voted against the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2021 which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "restrict a number of policing practices by federal law enforcement agencies and state and local agencies that receive federal funding, including to prohibit the use of 'no-knock warrants' to execute searches in drug cases; the use of deadly force, including chokeholds, except as a 'last resort' to prevent imminent injury to an officer or another person; and the use of deadly or 'less lethal' force before exhausting reasonable alternatives, including deescalation tactics." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-212. The Senate did not take substantive action on the bill. [House Vote 60, 3/3/21; Congressional Quarterly, 3/3/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1280]
June 2020: Senate Republicans Wanted A Plan That Would Not Ban Chokeholds Outright, But Democrats Said It Would Not Address Racial Inequity. According to NPR, "The bill passed the House by a 220-212 vote, mostly along party lines. But it has faced an uphill climb in the Senate, where Republicans have sought to revive a competing plan by Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., designed to diminish the use of chokeholds --- but not ban them outright --- and increase federal reporting requirements for use of force and no-knock warrants. Democrats blocked the plan last June, saying it did not go far enough to address racial inequality." [NPR, 4/21/21]
The Measure Would Ban Chokeholds At The Federal Level And No-Knock Warrants In Drug Cases At The Federal Level. According to Politico, "The bill would prohibit racial and religious profiling by law enforcement at every level while banning chokeholds at the federal level and no-knock warrants in federal drug cases." [Politico, 3/3/21]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Prohibiting Racial Profiling, Against Authorizing Legal Action Against Racial Profiling And Against Requiring Racial Profiling Training And Oversight Procedures. In March 2021, Schweikert voted against the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2021 which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "prohibit racial profiling by law enforcement, authorize lawsuits regarding violations of the prohibition, and require agencies to implement racial profiling training and oversight procedures." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-212. The Senate did not take substantive action on the bill. [House Vote 60, 3/3/21; Congressional Quarterly, 3/3/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1280]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Eliminating Qualified Immunity By Prohibiting Using "Acting In Good Faith" And The Lack Of Established Law As Legal Defenses For Charged Police Officers. In March 2021, Schweikert voted against the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2021 which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "eliminate 'qualified immunity' protections for law enforcement officers by prohibiting legal defenses based on an officer acting 'in good faith' or the purported absence of 'clearly established' law." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-212. The Senate did not take substantive action on the bill. [House Vote 60, 3/3/21; Congressional Quarterly, 3/3/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1280]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Requiring Federal Law Enforcement To Use Body And Dashboard Cameras And State And Local Agencies To Grant Funds To Buy And Implement Body Cameras. In March 2021, Schweikert voted against the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2021 which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "require federal law enforcement officers to use body cameras and dashboard cameras and require state and local agencies to use certain grant funding to purchase body cameras and develop protocols for their use." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-212. The Senate did not take substantive action on the bill. [House Vote 60, 3/3/21; Congressional Quarterly, 3/3/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1280]
2021: Schweikert Voted Against Providing $750 Million Annually Through FY 2024 To Support Independent Investigations Of Law Enforcement Usage Of Deadly Force, Including The Creation Of Civilian Review Boards. In March 2021, Schweikert voted against the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2021 which would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "authorize $750 million annually through fiscal 2024 for grants to support independent investigations into police use of deadly force, including to create civilian review boards." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 220-212. The Senate did not take substantive action on the bill. [House Vote 60, 3/3/21; Congressional Quarterly, 3/3/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1280]
2021: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against The George Floyd In Policing Act, Which Would Be A Policing Overhaul. In March 2021, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted for the "motion to recommit the bill to the House Judiciary Committee." The vote was on a motion to recommit. The House rejected the motion by a vote of 208-219. [House Vote 59, 3/3/21; Congressional Quarterly, 3/3/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1280]
2021: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against The George Floyd In Policing Act, Which Would Be A Policing Overhaul. In March 2021, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted against the "adoption of the rule that would provide for House floor consideration of [...] the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act (HR 1280)." The vote was on the adoption of the rule. The House adopted the rule by a vote of 218-207. [House Vote 51, 3/1/21; Congressional Quarterly, 3/1/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1280; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 179]
2021: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against The George Floyd In Policing Act, Which Would Be A Policing Overhaul. In March 2021, according to Congressional Quarterly, Schweikert voted against the "motion to order the previous question (thus ending debate and possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 179) that would provide for House floor consideration of [...] the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act (HR 1280)." The vote was on a motion to order the previous question. The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 220-201. [House Vote 50, 3/1/21; Congressional Quarterly, 3/1/21; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1280; Congressional Actions, H.Res. 179]
2020: Schweikert Voted Against The George Floyd Justice In Policing Act. In June 2020, Schweikert voted against the House police reform bill that would, according to Congressional Quarterly, "establish reporting and oversight requirements related to policing data and restrict the use of certain policing practices by federal law enforcement agencies and state and local agencies receiving certain federal policing grants. It would restrict a number of policing practices [...] including to prohibit the use of 'no-knock warrants' to execute searches in drug cases; the use of deadly force, including chokeholds, except as a 'last resort' to prevent imminent injury to an officer or another person; and the use of deadly or 'less lethal' force before exhausting reasonable alternatives, including deescalation tactics. It would prohibit racial profiling by law enforcement, authorize lawsuits regarding violations of the prohibition, and require agencies to implement racial profiling training and oversight procedures. It would require the Justice Department to establish a national police misconduct registry, and it would establish a number of reporting requirements for law enforcement agencies, including on use of force, racial profiling, officer misconduct records and routine policing practices [...] It would eliminate 'qualified immunity' protections for law enforcement officers by prohibiting legal defenses based on an officer acting 'in good faith' or the purported absence of 'clearly established' law. It would require federal law enforcement officers to use body cameras and dashboard cameras." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 236-181. [House Vote 119, 6/25/20; Congressional Quarterly, 6/25/20; Congressional Actions, H.R.7120]
The Legislation Eliminated Legal Protections For Police Officers And Banned Uses Of Deadly Force Such As Chokeholds. According to the New York Times, "The House on Thursday passed an expansive policing overhaul bill aimed at combating racial discrimination and excessive use of force in law enforcement [...] It would eliminate legal protection that shield police officers from lawsuits, make it easier to prosecute them for wrongdoing, impose a new set of restrictions on the use of deadly force, and effectively ban the use of chokeholds." [New York Times, 6/25/20]
The Bill Created A National Registry To Track Police Misconduct. According to the New York Times, "The bill would also create a national registry to track police misconduct and require law enforcement agencies to report data on the use of force, aim to force departments to eliminate the use of chokeholds, and conditions some federal grants on the adoption of anti-discrimination training and practices." [New York Times, 6/25/20]
The Bill Received Support From Over 100 Civil Rights Groups, As Well As Some Parents Of Black Americans Killed By The Police Including Tamir Rice And Eric Garner's Mothers. According to the New York Times, "Over 100 civil rights groups endorsed the legislation, as did some families of black Americans killed by the police, including Gwen Carr, the mother of Eric Garner, who died in 2014 after an officer put him in a chokehold, and Samaria Rice, the mother of Tamir rice, a 12-year-old boy who was shot for carrying a toy gun [...] Law enforcement organizations and police unions forcefully opposed it." [New York Times, 6/25/20]
Republicans Stated The Bill Is A Federal Overreach, And The White House Issued A Veto Statement, Claiming It Would "Weaken The Ability Of Law Enforcement Agencies To Reduce Crime." According to the New York Times, "Republicans have said the bill is a federal overreach into policing that will never pass the Senate [...] The white House issued an official threat to veto the measure, calling it 'overboard' and arguing that it would 'deter good people from pursuing careers in law enforcement' and 'weaken the ability of law enforcement agencies to reduce crime.'" [New York Times, 6/25/20]
Despite Bipartisan Determination To Pass A Police Reform Bill, The Refusal To Compromise On Both Sides Will Likely Thwart Any Legislation From Being Passed This Year. According to the New York Times, "Passage of the legislation [...] only underscored the depth of the stalemate in Congress over how to bring about law enforcement changes that both parties say are needed [...] Over two weeks ago, as protestors thronged streets in big cities and small towns across the nation, many lawmakers on Capitol Hill hoped that they would be able to bridge a previously insurmountable gulf on police reform efforts and pass legislation addressing systemic racism in law enforcement. Those hopes have rapidly fizzled, replaced by bitter recriminations after Senate Democrats refused on Wednesday even to allow the Republican bill to come up for debate, calling it 'woefully inadequate.' [...] Both Republicans and Democrats have insisted that the opportunity to revive policing reform efforts has not been foreclosed. But given the partisan gridlock, and with lawmakers in both chambers expected to be out of Washington for extended periods of time leading up to the November election, many of them privately concede that a compromise will be difficult to strike." [New York Times, 6/25/20]