[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 12]
[House]
[Pages 17402-17403]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      H.R. 5407 DESERVES A HEARING

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Al Green) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would like to say without 
reservation, hesitation, or equivocation, I have preeminent respect for 
the constabulary. I have a relative who was a part of the constabulary. 
I believe that police officers have a very difficult job, and they do 
it under stressful circumstances, and I believe that most police 
officers are doing a good job every day.
  I also want to say that there are many people without the 
constabulary, however, who would have us get over Michael Brown, get 
over Eric Garner, get on with it. And then there are those who say in 
the alternative--not in these exact words but with words connoting 
this--they say, if you can't get over Garner, get over Brown, because 
Garner is a better case for you to take to the court of public opinion.
  To these people I say, we can't get over Garner and we can't get over 
Brown, because if the truth be told, Garner and Brown are two sides of 
the same coin, two sides of one coin. If the truth be told, without the 
eye of the camera, without what appears to be clear and convincing 
evidence, without what appears to be evidence that is beyond reproach, 
without the eye of the camera, Garner would be Brown. The Garner case 
is only what it is because the camera was there to capture the essence 
of what happened.
  If the truth be told, without the camera, there would be questions 
about how Garner was arrested, there would be questions about how he 
was taken to the ground, there would be questions about whether he made 
comments about his inability to breathe. How many times did he say, ``I 
can't breathe?'' There would be questions about whether or not he made 
some effort to harm some officer. There would be questions about 
whether the guns were somehow at risk of being taken from an officer.
  If the truth be told, without the eye of the camera, Garner would be 
Brown.
  This is why, Mr. Speaker, I have made an appeal to this House to 
bring H.R. 5407 to the floor. Let it go to a hearing. H.R. 5407 is the 
TIP Act, the Transparency in Policing Act. H.R. 5407 would accord the 
Justice Department the opportunity to do a survey and ascertain the 
cost of equipping municipalities, counties, police departments--the 
constabulary, if you will--with cameras. Then it would go on to require 
those that can afford it to have

[[Page 17403]]

the cameras, and those that cannot, it provides an exemption to them.
  H.R. 5407 is good legislation. It is not a panacea; it won't cure 
all. For those who are concerned about the camera not being enough to 
cause a proper decision to be reached before a grand jury, it may not 
be, but it sure does provide the opportunity to galvanize the country 
around the notion that something needs to be done. It is not a panacea, 
not a cure-all, but it does present an opportunity for officers to be 
exonerated.
  H.R. 5407 would do more to help officers than anything out there 
right now that I can see, because it gives the evidence of what 
actually occurred at an event, it can cause officers not to be 
questioned about what they did, and it will cause those who would 
perpetrate dastardly deeds and fraudulent circumstances upon officers 
to be properly prosecuted.
  H.R. 5407 is a bill that is before the House and has a good many 
supporters right now, more than 40.
  I believe that H.R. 5407 deserves a hearing. I make an appeal, I 
beseech, and I implore my colleagues, who have the preeminent authority 
to make a decision as to whether it moves forward, to please give H.R. 
5407 an opportunity to be heard. This is not an appeal from one 
Congressperson; this is an appeal from those who are concerned about 
proper policing.

                          ____________________