Whether officials in our state like it or not, federal officers have a responsibility to enforce federal laws. That doesn’t change just because the enforcement efforts have unforeseen consequences, such as the tragic deaths of two people in Minnesota over a recent 17-day period.
Many in the public have seen the disturbing videos of the Minneapolis encounters that became fatal. Those raise questions about whether federal officers acted fairly and proportionately, as well as the degree to which the two people who died had put themselves in harm’s way.
The questions are legitimate. What happened in Minnesota deserves to be investigated fully, carefully and impartially, and if wrongdoing is found, the people responsible must be held accountable.
None of it changes the fact that federal officers have a duty to remove criminals who are in our country illegally. They don’t get to pick and choose which laws they enforce, any more than state officials get to tell federal officials how to enforce the law.
Democrats here seem confused about how to respond. Gov. Bob Ferguson angrily spoke of preparing for a “similar incursion” in Washington by the same federal agency — to the point of calling out the National Guard to “keep Washingtonians safe.”
What safe means isn’t clear in this case, but the followup statement from the governor’s office was at least honest enough to admit an important fact: State officials don’t have authority to control the movements of federal law enforcement officers.
In contrast, Democrats in the legislative branch of state government seem to think they can tell the feds what to do. On Jan. 28, legislation to prohibit law officers from wearing certain face coverings was passed in the Senate on a party-line vote.
Taken together, here’s what Democrats are saying to the feds: We can’t stop you from going places in our state, but you must follow a certain dress code.
It’s an unserious response to an important question.
Similarly, if Democratic legislators here are unhappy with the immigration policies that rightfully are made at the federal level, going after those who enforce the policies and have no power to change them seems performative, not productive.
During the hour-long debate that preceded the vote on Senate Bill 5855, Democratic senators recounted stories of people not going grocery shopping, showing up to court or agreeing to evacuate during the recent flooding, all out of fear of being detained.
They didn’t mention the Washingtonians hurt in a Dec. 4 crash in Thurston County or the Bonney Lake father of two young boys killed in a Dec. 11 crash on state Route 167. Both involved semi-trucks driven by people believed to be in the country illegally — who were then reportedly freed because Washington is a “sanctuary” state.
Two senators present for the infamous World Trade Organization protests in Seattle a quarter-century ago noted officers responding to the resulting riots didn’t wear masks. That’s an irrelevant argument, considering cellphone cameras and social media didn’t exist then to support the reprehensible practice known as “doxing.”
Officers today have been put in the unfortunate position of using masks as a simple, effective defense against online threats and harassment of themselves and family members.
Some of the remarks made by Democrats in support of the no-mask bill — about the officers who “terrorize our communities,” and the masked, unidentified stranger who is “coming to take them and their families” — help explain why the Department of Homeland Security recently reported huge increases in hostility against officers engaged in immigration and customs enforcement. Assaults are up more than 1,300% nationwide, vehicular attacks have climbed 3,200% and death threats have shot up 8,000%.
Republicans understand the concerns about the highly publicized encounters involving law enforcement officers. We hear them from constituents as well.
Unfortunately, SB 5855 seems more about giving Democrats a platform for making incendiary remarks than it does about serious governance. Only state and local officers would be affected if it becomes law, yet there have been zero complaints about them wearing masks, as supporters of the bill admitted during the debate.
If the governor and Democrat lawmakers are serious about the safety of Washingtonians, they should stop the inflammatory statements and instead open a conversation with the feds about what should be a shared goal: effectively locating and detaining violent offenders who aren’t supposed to be here.
They could learn how pursuing that goal is more complicated in a so-called sanctuary state, and look for ways to help, not hinder.
Also, violent encounters in our state might be avoided if the governor and attorney general would explicitly define a “peaceful” protest and make it clear that federal officers are protected by Washington’s laws against harassment and obstructing law enforcement.
Finally, about the avoidable December semi-truck crashes: the governor and Democrat legislators want accountability for federal officers, but what about those two truck drivers — and justice for the victims?
Legislators in Olympia face big challenges this session. Our affordability crisis won’t be solved by rules about face coverings that federal officers can ignore. And while claiming the mask ban is about transparency and accountability, Democrats are promoting other legislation that would make state government less transparent and accountable.
While the no-mask bill will likely become law, it’s already an unenforceable virtue-signaling distraction — which may be its true purpose. Legislators must do better.
Sen. John Braun (R-Centralia)
John Braun
Senator John Braun was first elected to the Washington State Senate in 2012 to represent Southwest Washington’s 20th Legislative District, which includes most of Cowlitz and Lewis counties along with parts of Clark and Thurston.
John is leader of the Senate Republican Caucus and a member of the Senate Ways & Means Committee, the Labor & Commerce Committee, and the Housing Committee.
Prior to his business career, John served on active duty in the U.S. Navy. He holds a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering from the University of Washington and master’s degrees in business administration and manufacturing engineering from the University of Michigan.
He and his family reside on a small farm in rural Lewis County, outside Centralia.
COMMENTARY DISCLAIMER: The views and comments expressed are those of the writer and not necessarily those of the Lynnwood Times nor any of its affiliate
Democrats’ no-mask bill is unenforceable, distracts from real issues
Whether officials in our state like it or not, federal officers have a responsibility to enforce federal laws. That doesn’t change just because the enforcement efforts have unforeseen consequences, such as the tragic deaths of two people in Minnesota over a recent 17-day period.
Many in the public have seen the disturbing videos of the Minneapolis encounters that became fatal. Those raise questions about whether federal officers acted fairly and proportionately, as well as the degree to which the two people who died had put themselves in harm’s way.
The questions are legitimate. What happened in Minnesota deserves to be investigated fully, carefully and impartially, and if wrongdoing is found, the people responsible must be held accountable.
None of it changes the fact that federal officers have a duty to remove criminals who are in our country illegally. They don’t get to pick and choose which laws they enforce, any more than state officials get to tell federal officials how to enforce the law.
Democrats here seem confused about how to respond. Gov. Bob Ferguson angrily spoke of preparing for a “similar incursion” in Washington by the same federal agency — to the point of calling out the National Guard to “keep Washingtonians safe.”
What safe means isn’t clear in this case, but the followup statement from the governor’s office was at least honest enough to admit an important fact: State officials don’t have authority to control the movements of federal law enforcement officers.
In contrast, Democrats in the legislative branch of state government seem to think they can tell the feds what to do. On Jan. 28, legislation to prohibit law officers from wearing certain face coverings was passed in the Senate on a party-line vote.
Taken together, here’s what Democrats are saying to the feds: We can’t stop you from going places in our state, but you must follow a certain dress code.
It’s an unserious response to an important question.
Similarly, if Democratic legislators here are unhappy with the immigration policies that rightfully are made at the federal level, going after those who enforce the policies and have no power to change them seems performative, not productive.
During the hour-long debate that preceded the vote on Senate Bill 5855, Democratic senators recounted stories of people not going grocery shopping, showing up to court or agreeing to evacuate during the recent flooding, all out of fear of being detained.
They didn’t mention the Washingtonians hurt in a Dec. 4 crash in Thurston County or the Bonney Lake father of two young boys killed in a Dec. 11 crash on state Route 167. Both involved semi-trucks driven by people believed to be in the country illegally — who were then reportedly freed because Washington is a “sanctuary” state.
Two senators present for the infamous World Trade Organization protests in Seattle a quarter-century ago noted officers responding to the resulting riots didn’t wear masks. That’s an irrelevant argument, considering cellphone cameras and social media didn’t exist then to support the reprehensible practice known as “doxing.”
Officers today have been put in the unfortunate position of using masks as a simple, effective defense against online threats and harassment of themselves and family members.
Some of the remarks made by Democrats in support of the no-mask bill — about the officers who “terrorize our communities,” and the masked, unidentified stranger who is “coming to take them and their families” — help explain why the Department of Homeland Security recently reported huge increases in hostility against officers engaged in immigration and customs enforcement. Assaults are up more than 1,300% nationwide, vehicular attacks have climbed 3,200% and death threats have shot up 8,000%.
Republicans understand the concerns about the highly publicized encounters involving law enforcement officers. We hear them from constituents as well.
Unfortunately, SB 5855 seems more about giving Democrats a platform for making incendiary remarks than it does about serious governance. Only state and local officers would be affected if it becomes law, yet there have been zero complaints about them wearing masks, as supporters of the bill admitted during the debate.
If the governor and Democrat lawmakers are serious about the safety of Washingtonians, they should stop the inflammatory statements and instead open a conversation with the feds about what should be a shared goal: effectively locating and detaining violent offenders who aren’t supposed to be here.
They could learn how pursuing that goal is more complicated in a so-called sanctuary state, and look for ways to help, not hinder.
Also, violent encounters in our state might be avoided if the governor and attorney general would explicitly define a “peaceful” protest and make it clear that federal officers are protected by Washington’s laws against harassment and obstructing law enforcement.
Finally, about the avoidable December semi-truck crashes: the governor and Democrat legislators want accountability for federal officers, but what about those two truck drivers — and justice for the victims?
Legislators in Olympia face big challenges this session. Our affordability crisis won’t be solved by rules about face coverings that federal officers can ignore. And while claiming the mask ban is about transparency and accountability, Democrats are promoting other legislation that would make state government less transparent and accountable.
While the no-mask bill will likely become law, it’s already an unenforceable virtue-signaling distraction — which may be its true purpose. Legislators must do better.
Sen. John Braun (R-Centralia)
Senator John Braun was first elected to the Washington State Senate in 2012 to represent Southwest Washington’s 20th Legislative District, which includes most of Cowlitz and Lewis counties along with parts of Clark and Thurston.
John is leader of the Senate Republican Caucus and a member of the Senate Ways & Means Committee, the Labor & Commerce Committee, and the Housing Committee.
Prior to his business career, John served on active duty in the U.S. Navy. He holds a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering from the University of Washington and master’s degrees in business administration and manufacturing engineering from the University of Michigan.
He and his family reside on a small farm in rural Lewis County, outside Centralia.
COMMENTARY DISCLAIMER: The views and comments expressed are those of the writer and not necessarily those of the Lynnwood Times nor any of its affiliate
Author: Lynnwood Times Contributor
Tell Us What You Think