Anyone who follows the wacky world of politics can easily recall an election campaign (probably several) in which candidates flood the TV ads with claims of being tough on crime. The appeal to voters’ desires of being able to live in a safe home, free of the fear of heinous crimes is a tried-and-true tactic. It works, as evidenced by the fear stoked by Republican strategist Lee Atwater for George H. W. Bush in the 1988 presidential campaign.
But in reality, what has the tough on crime campaign done since the VIOLENT CRIME CONTROL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT ACT of 1994, sponsored, by the way, by then-Sen. Joe Biden?
Well, for one, the U.S. now incarcerates MORE PEOPLE PER CAPITA – 698 per 100,000 population – than any other nation. That includes Iran, Russia, China and Third World countries. (Louisiana, by the way, is tops in the nation at 1,052 per 100,000, exceeding the national rate by 50.7 percent).
Why is that?
For openers, there is the case of FAIR WAYNE BRYANT of Shreveport who was sentenced to life imprisonment for…(wait for it)…stealing a pair of hedge clippers. He actually spent nearly 24 years behind bars before eventually being paroled at age 63 when his case was brought to the public’s attention.
Then there is Derek Harris of Abbeville, a veteran of Desert Storm, who received a life sentence to Angola State Prison for selling $30 worth of weed to an undercover sheriff’s deputy. The Louisiana Supreme Court eventually awarded the 52-year-old Harris a new sentencing hearing that allowed him to go free after serving 9 years.
Both Bryant and Harris are Black.
Compare those two life sentences for relatively minor crimes with that of HOLDEN MATTHEWS, who received 25 years for burning down three predominantly African American churches in St. Landry Parish. Matthews, who told the court that he had found God since the arsons, was also ordered to pay the churches $2.6 million. Good luck collecting that, even if he does get out early, which he probably will.
Despite that trend of stiffer penalties for less serious crimes and the accompanying problem of prison overcrowding, Wisconsin Republicans pushed a package of “TOUGHER ON CRIME” bills as recently as last year.
Typically, the proponents of the Wisconsin package would:
- Expand the number of crimes for which juveniles can be incarcerated;
- Increase the penalties for carjacking (currently considered burglary);
- Call for longer sentences for parolees or those on probation who are accused of another crime;
- Institute mandatory minimum sentences for repeat shoplifters.
In a nation where politicians attempt to out-law-and-order their opponents, nothing could be more puzzling than our inability to hold the one person who doubtless incited the invasion of Congress accountable. The fact that this individual, this man named Donald Trump, is solely responsible in causing the constitutional crisis of Jan. 6. But Republican senators have already telegraphed their unwillingness to follow through on their get-tough-on-crime rhetoric.
That he stood before the frothing throng that fateful day there is no question, but rather than admit defeat in an election he lost convincingly, he chose instead to urge his conspiracy-minded followers bent on seeking out and inflicting harm on members of Congress. Now Republicans in the Senate will overlook this perpetuation of sedition and treason in the impeachment trial.
Nearly every Republican is on record in favor of stiff punishment for crime but oppose anything that resembles reform. Take, for example, Sen. John N. Kennedy who is on record as OPPOSING the First Step Act.
So, if stealing hedge clippers and selling 0.69 grams of pot warrant life sentences for a couple of Black offenders, how does 25 years for a white man who torched three Black churches square up?
Better yet, how is it that a criminal, a mob boss, who encourages a treasonous insurrection in the halls of Congress is not facing indictment and criminal prosecution?
Rand Paul claims that impeachment of a former president is unconstitutional. He’s probably wrong but all doubt can be removed if federal prosecutors simply indict Trump.
Why is the fruitless effort to convict him in his impeachment trial even being pursued before spineless Republicans who, while advocating toughness on crime on the one hand when it involves one segment of society, choose to look the other way for one who has influence but utterly no regard for the U.S. Constitution?
There are, of course, penalties spelled out for INCITING To RIOT, so why is the statute not invoked in this case?
Here is the question I would pose for Louisiana Reps. Mike Johnson, Clay Higgins, Steve Scalise and Garret Graves, and Sens. John Kennedy and Bill Cassidy, each of whom voted against impeachment:
If stealing hedge clippers and selling less than an ounce of pot warrant life sentences, how then in the name of all that is just, is it that inciting mob violence against elected members of Congress during which five people died does not rise to the level of high crimes?
I implore each of those men to provide an answer to that question.
If you fail to respond, I can only hope the question comes up again in your next election campaign.
You owe the citizens of Louisiana that much.