On Wednesday, Democratic officials on the House Judiciary Committee put forth legislation to reform policing practices. The George Floyd Justice in Policing Act is an attempt by elected officials to address the demands of citizens across the country to figure out a way to stop the racial injustices people of color—and specifically Black people—are facing on the streets of America. It is a life and death matter for millions of people. Senate Republicans have introduced their own toothless version of law enforcement reform legislation, which restates most of the existing practices without changing much of anything.
The differences between the two bills include how meaningful the definition of “chokehold” is, and whether or not law enforcement officers continue to have unchecked immunity against citizens seeking damages for police brutality. The Democratic plan asks to ban all chokeholds for any reason, while the Republican plan restates the same general guidelines being used by most law enforcement agencies that have not banned chokeholds. The Democratic plan would end no-knock warrants, while the Republican plan would call for more transparency in reporting no-knock warrants.
Democratic Rep. Cedric Richmond of Louisiana was using some of his speaking time to call out the GOP’s attempts to slow down and sidetrack the reform legislation, introduce amendments to investigate antifa, and other such nonsense. Rep. Richmond told the committee he wanted everyone to stand up or shut up. He wanted to see where people stood. They could always amend the law later, but he was more interested in passing legislation that might help to save lives as soon as possible, and had very little time for the general Republican hemming and hawing around race and law enforcement.
REP. CEDRIC RICHMOND: To my colleagues, especially the ones that keep introducing amendments that are a tangent and a distraction from what we are talking about: You all are white males. You never lived in my shoes and you do not know what it is like to be an African American male. All I am saying is if you are opposed to this legislation, let's have a vote. But please do not come in this room and make a mockery of the pain that exists in my community. It reminds me of the argument about the 1964 Civil Rights Act, or the 1965 Voting Rights Act, where 126 people voted against the Civil Rights Act. 85 people against the Voting Rights Act. They had all these side issues. Either man up and say you don't believe in it, or let's talk about the real issue.
And yes, we are not interested in a watered down version of this bill. I am not interested in equality “with all deliberate speed.”* This is a crisis. People are losing their lives. So if we have other things we want to fix, fix them in another bill, but people are dying as we talk, so I am not interested in moving at a snail’s pace. I am not interested in a watered down bill that mandates nothing. I am not interested in studying antifa. I'm not even interested in studying sovereign citizens right now. That is not the imminent threat Black men face on a daily basis. Right now, too often, it is law enforcement. Those who were sworn to protect and serve. So all we are asking today is to deal with that. I don't mind dealing with other pieces of legislation. I don't mind dealing with other issues you all may have. What I don't want to leave this conversation with—why I am speaking now instead of later—is because I don't want you to leave here saying: “We did not know. We did not know that's how you felt.” I want to be crystal clear and I will give you the benefit of the doubt it is unconscious bias I'm hearing, because at worst, it is conscious bias and that, I would hate to assume from any of the people on the other side.
It was here that Grandstander General Matt Gaetz of Florida asked if Richmond would yield for a question. (Of course Matt Gaetz is never ever really asking any questions because he isn’t curious about anything that isn’t the sound of Matt Gaetz’s voice.) “Are you suggesting that you’re certain that none of us have non-white children?” Rep. Richmond very quickly attempted to stop Gaetz from sticking his foot into his mouth: “Matt, stop!” But Florida Man Gaetz loves the taste of his own shoe polish, and he continued: “Because you reflect on your Black son, and you said none of us could understand.”
REP. RICHMOND: I am not about to get sidetracked about the color of our children. I reclaim my time.
REP. Gaetz: You said—
REP. RICHMOND:—I reclaim my time.
It was here that Richmond decided to make things crystal clear for Mr. Gaetz. This is serious stuff for serious people to talk about and Matt Gaetz is not a serious person.
REP. RICHMOND: I know there are people on the other side that have Black grandchildren. It is not about the color of your kids. It is about Black males. Black people in the streets that are getting killed. If one of them happens to be your kid, I'm concerned about him too. Clearly, I am more concerned about him than you are. So let us be clear about that.
This dose of reality really messed with Gaetz’s head, and as is his way, Florida Man turned up the volume on his histrionics in the hope that a louder racist display would be perceived as being serious.
REP. GAETZ: You are claiming more concern for my family? Who in the hell do you think you are? You don't know— you should take those words back—
Order was restored quickly and Rep. Richmond asked, “Was that a nerve?”
Let us be clear here: Matt Gaetz has been given every opportunity to show the world that he is not a racist asshole rich kid with zero talents other than being unabashedly narcissistic. But time and time again, Rep. Gaetz has used his position of power to wonder aloud about whether or not Americans protesting for police reform and chanting Black Lives Matter should be lynched. Then, amid all of the calls for reform and with a never-ending stream of video evidence showing law enforcement attacking peaceful protesters, Rep. Gaetz offered up the idea of creating a law that would make it illegal for athletes to kneel during the playing of the national anthem at sporting events.
*Rep. Richmond is referencing the vagueness of language in the historic Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education. It was the vagueness of “with all deliberate speed” that segregationists used to slow down the process of integration.
UPDATE: Rep. Gaetz has decided to blow everyone’s mind once again, reacting clearly to the viral nature of his confrontation with Rep. Richmond.
This has brought out the obvious questions as to why this is the first anyone has ever heard of this.