[House Report 117-441]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


117th Congress   }                                       {      Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session      }                                       {     117-441

======================================================================



 
VIOLENT INCIDENT CLEARANCE AND TECHNOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIVE METHODS ACT 
                                OF 2022

                                _______
                                

 July 26, 2022.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Nadler, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 5768]

    The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the 
bill (H.R. 5768) to direct the Attorney General to establish a 
grant program to establish, create, and administer the violent 
incident clearance and technology investigative method, and for 
other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably 
thereon with amendments and recommends that the bill as amended 
do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     5
Background and Need for the Legislation..........................     5
Hearings.........................................................    10
Committee Consideration..........................................    10
Committee Votes..................................................    10
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................    17
Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects..........................    17
New Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost 
  Estimate.......................................................    17
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................    17
Performance Goals and Objectives.................................    17
Advisory on Earmarks.............................................    17
Section-by-Section Analysis......................................    17
Minority Views...................................................    18

    The amendments are as follows:
  Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Violent Incident Clearance and 
Technological Investigative Methods Act of 2022'' or ``VICTIM Act of 
2022''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

  Congress finds the following:
          (1) Research indicates that law enforcement agencies can 
        increase clearance rates by improving--
                  (A) investigative processes;
                  (B) detective capacities; and
                  (C) organizational oversight and supervision of 
                investigations.
          (2) When a law enforcement agency expends additional 
        investigative effort, the law enforcement agency improves its 
        success in gaining cooperation of key witnesses and increases 
        the amount of forensic evidence collected.
          (3) Effective investigation of shootings can prevent 
        subsequent related violence by--
                  (A) deterring retaliation; and
                  (B) providing interventions to individuals who may 
                continue to commit crimes or become victims of 
                retaliatory violence.
          (4) Law enforcement agencies that demonstrate higher rates of 
        clearance for homicides and non-fatal shootings--
                  (A) have more structured oversight and formal 
                interactions between investigative units and agency 
                leadership;
                  (B) are more likely to have investigative units that 
                have collaborative relationships and robust information 
                sharing with other units of the law enforcement agency;
                  (C) have investigative units that have specific goals 
                and performance metrics for both the unit and for 
                investigators within the unit;
                  (D) have investigators who more frequently respond to 
                the initial crime scene shortly after crimes have been 
                reported to collect evidence and interview witnesses;
                  (E) have investigators who either have specialized 
                experience before joining investigative units or are 
                trained in investigations once they join those units;
                  (F) often have standard operating procedures for 
                investigations that establish policies and evidence-
                based best practices for conducting and completing 
                homicide investigations; and
                  (G) have better relationships with the communities 
                they serve, even if no specific community-oriented 
                campaign or initiative exists between investigative 
                units and community groups.
          (5) Criminal justice agencies should collaborate with each 
        other and share best practices for solving homicides and non-
        fatal shootings.
          (6) A comprehensive community engagement strategy concerning 
        gun violence is essential to improving clearance rates for 
        homicides and non-fatal shootings.

SEC. 3. GRANT PROGRAM WITH RESPECT TO VIOLENT INCIDENT CLEARANCE AND 
                    TECHNOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIVE METHODS.

  (a) Definitions.--In this section:
          (1) Clearance by arrest.--The term ``clearance by arrest'', 
        with respect to an offense reported to a law enforcement 
        agency, means the law enforcement agency--
                  (A) has--
                          (i) arrested not less than 1 person for the 
                        offense;
                          (ii) charged the person described in 
                        subparagraph (A) with the commission of the 
                        offense; and
                          (iii) referred the person described in 
                        subparagraph (A) for prosecution for the 
                        offense; or
                  (B) has cited an individual under the age of 18 to 
                appear in juvenile court or before another juvenile 
                authority with respect to the offense, regardless of 
                whether a physical arrest occurred.
          (2) Clearance by exception.--The term ``clearance by 
        exception'', with respect to an offense reported to a law 
        enforcement agency, means the law enforcement agency--
                  (A) has identified not less than 1 person suspected 
                of the offense; and
                  (B) with respect to the suspect described in 
                subparagraph (A), has--
                          (i) gathered enough evidence to--
                                  (I) support an arrest of the suspect;
                                  (II) make a charge against the 
                                suspect; and
                                  (III) refer the suspect for 
                                prosecution;
                          (ii) identified the exact location of the 
                        suspect so that the suspect could be taken into 
                        custody immediately; and
                          (iii) encountered a circumstance outside the 
                        control of the law enforcement agency that 
                        prohibits the agency from arresting the 
                        suspect, charging the suspect, or referring the 
                        suspect for prosecution, including--
                                  (I) the death of the suspect;
                                  (II) the refusal of the victim to 
                                cooperate with the prosecution after 
                                the suspect has been identified; or
                                  (III) the denial of extradition 
                                because the suspect committed an 
                                offense in another jurisdiction and is 
                                being prosecuted for that offense.
          (3) Clearance rate.--The term ``clearance rate'', with 
        respect to a law enforcement agency, means--
                  (A) the number of offenses cleared by the law 
                enforcement agency, including through clearance by 
                arrest and clearance by exception, divided by
                  (B) the total number of offenses reported to the law 
                enforcement agency.
          (4) Eligible entity.--The term ``eligible entity'' means a 
        State, Tribal, or local law enforcement agency or prosecuting 
        office, or a group of Tribal law enforcement agencies or Tribal 
        prosecuting offices.
          (5) Grant recipient.--The term ``grant recipient'' means a 
        recipient of a grant under the Program.
          (6) Law enforcement agency.--The term ``law enforcement 
        agency'' means a public agency charged with policing functions, 
        including any component bureau of the agency (such as a 
        governmental victim services program or village public safety 
        officer program), including an agency composed of officers or 
        persons referred to in subparagraph (B) or (C) of section 2(10) 
        of the Indian Law Enforcement Reform Act (25 U.S.C. 2801(10)).
          (7) Program.--The term ``Program'' means the grant program 
        established under subsection (b)(1).
  (b) Grant Program.--
          (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
        enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall establish a 
        grant program within the Office of Justice Programs under which 
        the Attorney General awards grants to eligible entities to 
        establish, implement, and administer violent incident clearance 
        and technological investigative methods.
          (2) Applications.--An eligible entity seeking a grant under 
        the Program shall submit to the Attorney General an application 
        at such time, in such manner, and containing or accompanied 
        by--
                  (A) such information as the Attorney General may 
                reasonably require; and
                  (B) a description of each eligible project under 
                paragraph (4) that the grant will fund.
          (3) Selection of grant recipients.--The Attorney General, in 
        selecting a recipient of a grant under the Program, shall 
        consider the specific plan and activities proposed by the 
        applicant to improve clearance rates for homicides, rapes, 
        other aggravated felonies, and non-fatal shootings.
          (4) Eligible projects.--A grant recipient shall use the grant 
        for activities with the specific objective of improving 
        clearance rates for homicides, rapes, other aggravated 
        felonies, and non-fatal shootings, including--
                  (A) ensuring the retention of detectives who are 
                assigned to investigate homicides, rapes, other 
                aggravated felonies, and non-fatal shootings as of the 
                date of receipt of the grant;
                  (B) hiring and training additional detectives who 
                will be dedicated to investigating homicides, rapes, 
                other aggravated felonies, and non-fatal shootings;
                  (C) developing policies, procedures, and training to 
                improve the ability of detectives to effectively 
                investigate and solve homicides, rapes, other 
                aggravated felonies, and non-fatal shootings, including 
                implementing best practices relating to--
                          (i) improving internal agency cooperation, 
                        organizational oversight and accountability, 
                        and supervision of investigations;
                          (ii) developing specific goals and 
                        performance metrics for both investigators and 
                        investigative units;
                          (iii) establishing or improving relationships 
                        with the communities the agency serves; and
                          (iv) collaboration with and among other law 
                        enforcement agencies and criminal justice 
                        organizations;
                  (D) training personnel to address the needs of 
                victims and family members of victims of homicides, 
                rapes, other aggravated felonies, and non-fatal 
                shootings or collaborating with trained victim 
                advocates and specialists to better meet victims' 
                needs;
                  (E) acquiring, upgrading, or replacing investigative, 
                evidence processing, or forensic testing technology or 
                equipment;
                  (F) development and implementation of policies that 
                safeguard civil rights and civil liberties during the 
                collection, processing, and forensic testing of 
                evidence;
                  (G) hiring or training personnel for collection, 
                processing, and forensic testing of evidence;
                  (H) hiring and training of personnel to analyze 
                violent crime and the temporal and geographic trends 
                among homicides, rapes, other aggravated felonies, and 
                shootings;
                  (I) retaining experts to conduct a detailed analysis 
                of homicides, rapes, other aggravated felonies, and 
                shootings using Gun Violence Problem Analysis (commonly 
                known as ``GVPA'') or a similar research methodology;
                  (J) ensuring victims have appropriate access to 
                emergency food, housing, clothing, travel, and 
                transportation;
                  (K) developing competitive and evidence-based 
                programs to improve homicide and non-fatal shooting 
                clearance rates;
                  (L) developing best practices for improving access to 
                and acceptance of victim services, including victim 
                services that promote medical and psychological 
                wellness, ongoing counseling, legal advice, and 
                financial compensation;
                  (M) training investigators and detectives in trauma-
                informed interview techniques;
                  (N) establishing programs to support officers who 
                experience stress or trauma as a result of responding 
                to or investigating shootings or other violent crime 
                incidents; or
                  (O) ensuring language and disability access supports 
                are provided to victims, survivors, and their families 
                so that victims can exercise their rights and 
                participate in the criminal justice process.
  (c) Federal Share.--
          (1) In general.--The Federal share of the cost of a project 
        assisted with a grant under the Program shall not exceed--
                  (A) 100 percent if the grant is awarded on or before 
                December 31, 2032; or
                  (B) subject to paragraph (2), 50 percent if the grant 
                is awarded after December 31, 2032.
          (2) Waiver.--With respect to a grant awarded under the 
        Program after December 31, 2032, the Attorney General may 
        determine that the Federal share of the cost of a project 
        assisted with the grant shall not exceed 100 percent.
  (d) Report by Grant Recipient.--Not later than 1 year after receiving 
a grant under the Program, and each year thereafter, a grant recipient 
shall submit to the Attorney General a report on the activities carried 
out using the grant, including, if applicable--
          (1) the number of homicide and non-fatal shooting detectives 
        hired by the grant recipient;
          (2) the number of evidence processing personnel hired by the 
        grant recipient;
          (3) a description of any training that is--
                  (A) provided to existing (as of the date on which the 
                grant was awarded) or newly hired homicide and non-
                fatal shooting detectives; and
                  (B) designed to assist in the solving of crimes and 
                improve clearance rates;
          (4) any new evidence processing technology or equipment 
        purchased or any upgrades made to existing (as of the date on 
        which the grant was awarded) evidence technology or equipment, 
        and the associated cost;
          (5) any assessments of evidence processing technology or 
        equipment purchased with grant funds to determine whether such 
        technology or equipment satisfies the objectives of the use of 
        the technology or equipment in increasing clearance rates, and 
        any policies in place to govern the use of the technology or 
        equipment;
          (6) the internal policies and oversight used to ensure that 
        any technology purchased through the grant for the purposes of 
        improving clearance rates does not violate the civil rights and 
        civil liberties of individuals;
          (7) data regarding clearance rates for homicides, rapes, 
        other aggravated felonies, and non-fatal shootings, including 
        the rate of clearances by arrest and clearances by exception, 
        and crime trends from within each jurisdiction in which the 
        grant recipient carried out activities supported by the grant;
          (8) whether the grant recipient has provided grant funds to 
        any victim services organizations, and if so, which 
        organizations;
          (9) the demographic information for victims of homicides, 
        rapes, other aggravated felonies, and non-fatal shootings, and 
        the length and outcomes of each investigation, including 
        whether the investigation was cleared by arrest or exception;
          (10) the demographic information for each victim or family 
        member of a victim who received victim-related services 
        provided by the grant recipient; and
          (11) identification of the services most used by victims and 
        their families and identification of additional services 
        needed.
  (e) National Institute of Justice Evaluation and Report to 
Congress.--
          (1) Evaluation.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
        enactment of this Act, and every 2 years thereafter, the 
        Director of the National Institute of Justice shall conduct an 
        evaluation of--
                  (A) the practices deployed by grant recipients to 
                identify policies and procedures that have successfully 
                improved clearance rates for homicides, rapes, other 
                aggravated felonies, and non-fatal shootings; and
                  (B) the efficacy of any services provided to victims 
                and family members of victims of homicides, rapes, 
                other aggravated felonies, and non-fatal shootings.
          (2) Report to congress.--Not later than 30 days after 
        completion of an evaluation by the National Institute of 
        Justice under paragraph (1), the Attorney General shall submit 
        to Congress a report including--
                  (A) the results of the evaluation; and
                  (B) information reported by each grant recipient 
                under subsection (d).
  (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--
          (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
        carry out this section $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 
        2023 through 2032.
          (2) Percent for certain eligible entities.--The Attorney 
        General shall use 10 percent of the amount made available under 
        paragraph (1) for a fiscal year to award grants under the 
        Program to Tribal law enforcement agencies or prosecuting 
        offices, or groups of such agencies or offices.

    Amend the title so as to read:
    A bill to direct the Attorney General to establish a grant 
program to establish, implement, and administer the violent 
incident clearance and technology investigative method, and for 
other purposes.

                          Purpose and Summary

    H.R. 5768, the ``Violent Incident Clearance and 
Technological Investigative Methods Act of 2022'' or the 
``VICTIM Act of 2022'' is bipartisan legislation that 
authorizes a grant program within the Office of Justice 
Programs to establish, implement, and administer violent 
incident clearance and technological investigative methods 
within law enforcement agencies to improve clearance rates for 
homicides, rapes, sexual assaults, kidnappings, and non-fatal 
shootings. VICTIM Act grants would be available to state, 
tribal, or local law enforcement agencies and prosecuting 
offices.

                Background and Need for the Legislation


                         I. VIOLENT CRIME RATES

    Nationally, the United States has experienced a substantial 
decline in homicides and violent crime since the peak rates in 
the early 1990's. While the homicide rate in 1991 was 10 per 
100,000 people, the rate fell to 5 per 100,000 by 2014.\1\ 
According to research from the Council on Criminal Justice, the 
number of homicides in 2021, in the 27 major cities studied, 
increased by 5% from 2020 and by 44% from 2019.\2\ This 
increase in homicides is significant, but is a statistical 
aberration from the overall trajectory of a decline in all 
crime, and homicide rates remain well below the peaks seen in 
the early 1990s.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \ 1\Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Underlying 
Cause of Death Data for Homicides calculated per 100,000 people. 
https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/
D76;jsessionid=7633FEC96290CE584FB63A862C17 (accessed 4/27/22).
    \2\Rosenfeld and Lopez, Pandemic, Social Unrest, and Crime in U.S. 
Cities: Year-End 2021 Update, Council on Criminal Justice, January 24, 
2022, https://counciloncj.org/crime-trends-
yearend-2021-update/.
    \3\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Non-fatal shootings, or gun assaults, have also increased 
over the past several years. An analysis by the Council on 
Criminal Justice of 15 cities found gun assaults rose by 8% in 
2020 over 2019.\4\ A subsequent analysis of 12 cities showed an 
additional 8% increase in gun assaults in 2021 over 2020.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\Rosenfeld and Lopez, Pandemic, Social Unrest, and Crime in U.S. 
Cities: Year-End 2021 Update, Council on Criminal Justice, January 24, 
2022, https://counciloncj.org/crime-trends-
yearend-2021-update/.
    \5\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 II. VIOLENT INCIDENCE CLEARANCE RATES

    A law enforcement agency's clearance rate is determined by 
calculating the rate of crimes resulting in an arrest and 
charge divided by the total number of crimes recorded. Per the 
Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Uniform Crime Reporting 
Program, law enforcement agencies can clear, or ``close,'' 
offenses by either arrest or exceptional means.\6\ For a law 
enforcement agency to clear by arrest, at least one person must 
be arrested, charged with the commission of the offense, and 
turned over to the court for prosecution. When a law 
enforcement agency is unable to arrest and formally charge an 
offender, such as when the offender is dead, they may clear the 
offense by exceptional means. For an agency to clear by 
exceptional means, they must identify the offender, gather 
enough evidence to support an arrest, make a charge, turn the 
offender over to the court for prosecution, identify the 
offender's exact location so that the offender could be taken 
into custody immediately, and encounter a circumstance outside 
their control that prohibits them from arresting, charging, and 
prosecuting the offender.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-
2017/topic-pages/clearances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 2020, law enforcement agencies solved 1,200 more 
homicides than in 2019, an increase of 14%, but due to the 
dramatic rise in homicides, the clearance rate in 2020 fell to 
roughly 50%.\7\ This drop follows a consistent decline in 
clearance rates historically from 83% in 1965 to 61% in 2007, a 
number the rate hovered near until the drop in 2020.\8\ For 
example, in 2020, the Kern County Sheriff's Office in 
Bakersfield, California had a homicide clearance rate of 19% 
and the Idaho State Police had a clearance rate of only 11%.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\According to the National Incident-Based Reporting System 
(NIBRS), the clearance rate for homicides in the United States during 
2020 was 49.8%. This includes 5024 incidents cleared by arrest and 406 
incidents cleared by exceptional means. However, because NIBRS is a 
voluntary reporting program through the FBI, these numbers do not 
represent the total number of homicides or clearances in the United 
States during 2020. https://crime-data-explorer.fr.cloud.gov/pages/
downloads.
    \8\Braga AA, Dusseault D. Can Homicide Detectives Improve Homicide 
Clearance Rates? Crime & Delinquency. 2018;64(3):283-315.
    \9\https://www.themarshallproject.org/2022/01/12/as-murders-spiked-
police-solved-about-half-in-2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Clearance rates for non-fatal shootings are even lower than 
that of homicides. In 2016, the Chicago Police Department 
cleared less than 12% of nonfatal shootings, the San Francisco 
Police Department cleared only 15% of its gun assaults, and the 
Los Angeles Police Department cleared 17% of its gun 
assaults.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\In Chicago between 2010 and 2016, annual clearance rates for 
gun homicides ranged from 26% to 46% and from 5% to 11% for nonfatal 
shootings. Improving Police Clearance Rates of Shootings: A Review of 
the Evidence, Anthony A. Braga.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Clearance rates are influenced by factors both beyond and 
within law enforcement control. The ability for police to solve 
homicides, rapes, sexual assaults, kidnappings, and non-fatal 
shootings can depend on a number of factors including specific 
event characteristics such as circumstances, victim-offender 
relationships, weapon type or method of killing or assault, and 
crime scene setting.\11\ For example, crimes involving people 
who know each other are more likely to be solved than crimes 
involving strangers, especially drug or gang-related 
crimes.\12\ Crimes involving guns are less likely to be solved 
than crimes with non-firearms, such as blunt or sharp 
instruments. This suggests that crimes requiring the suspect to 
be in close contact with the victim increases the chance of 
clearance, often because the victim can identify the suspect 
and there is a greater likelihood of physical evidence being 
recovered.\13\ Other factors that can influence the likelihood 
of clearance include the location of the crime scene, 
neighborhood dynamics and socio-economic status, and 
investigative resources.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\Braga, A.A., Turchan, B. & Barao, L. The Influence of 
Investigative Resources on Homicide Clearances. J Quant Criminol 35, 
337-364, 340 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-018-9386-9.
    \12\Id.
    \13\Id.
    \14\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A lack of resources and large caseloads for detectives can 
also result in lower clearance rates and, in some 
circumstances, a failure to even investigate a crime.\15\ A 
2017 staffing report for the Baltimore Police Department showed 
57 homicide detectives assigned 483 cases.\16\ In Flint, 
Michigan, a 2013 audit found 14 detectives were working 927 
cases, including homicides and other violent crimes.\17\ In 
2017, more than 40 percent of cases were not assigned to an 
investigator in the Oakland Felony Assault Unit,\18\ and 28 
percent weren't assigned an investigator in Portland, 
Oregon.\19\ A review of the Cleveland Division of Police's 
Homicide Investigation Process by the Police Executive Research 
Forum found that detectives in the Homicide Unit were carrying 
very large caseloads due to unit understaffing and the shift 
structure and found that any revisions to policy, training, or 
other areas would not have the desired impact, unless the 
Cleveland Division of Police committed to providing the 
Homicide Unit with necessary staffing resources.\20\ In rural 
communities with significant increases in homicide rates, 
agencies are ill-equipped to respond to the increase. County 
sheriffs are trying to hire more deputies and prosecutors are 
working to equip their staff with the skills to handle complex 
homicide cases.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2018/09/13/
feature/even-with-murder-rates-falling-big-city-detectives-face-
daunting-caseloads/?utm_term=.3ad18dd6ec4b; https://www.thetrace.org/
2019/01/murder-solve-rate-gun-violence-baltimore-shootings/.
    \16\U.S. v. Baltimore Police Department, Consent Decree https://
www.justice.gov/crt/case-document/file/925036/download.
    \17 \Flint Police Operational Report 2014 https://
www.documentcloud.org/documents/5691959-Flint-Police-Operational-
Report-2014-11.html.
    \18 \Oakland Police Department Annual Report 2017 https://
www.documentcloud.org/documents/5691907-Oakland-Police-Department-
Annual-Report-2017.html.
    \19 \Portland Police Bureau Case Assignments 2017 https://
www.documentcloud.org/documents/5691912-Portland-Police-Bureau-Case-
Assignments-2017.
    \20\Review of the Cleveland Division of Police's Homicide 
Investigation Process 2016 https://ewscripps.brightspotcdn.com/32/01/
23872f754ec687bd3d9d163a3bb3/perf-december-20016.pdf.
    \21\https://www.wsj.com/articles/violent-crime-rural-america-
homicides-pandemic-increase-11654864251?mod=hp_lead_pos7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The same issues that result in low clearance rates for 
homicides affect the ability of law enforcement to clear non-
fatal shootings, including a lack of resources and overburdened 
investigators. However, those issues are magnified for non-
fatal shootings. Homicides are typically investigated by 
detectives specifically assigned to homicides, whereas non-
fatal shootings are usually handled by non-specialist 
detectives who are also responsible for large numbers of 
robberies, assaults, burglaries, thefts, and other crimes.\22\ 
Beyond an initial response at the crime scene and continued 
investigative work over the following two days, most nonfatal 
shooting investigations do not receive extended follow-up 
action by detectives.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \22\Improving Police Clearance Rates of Shootings: A Review of the 
Evidence, Anthony A. Braga.
    \23\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The failure to consistently close homicide and non-fatal 
shooting cases can have serious effects on the victims, as well 
as on the law enforcement agency and the community it serves. 
Failure to clear can harm the reputation of the agency and 
impact public trust and confidence in law enforcement. 
Additionally, failure to clear a case leaves the victim and 
their family members without justice or closure. This failure 
can lead some shooting victims to turn to violence to achieve 
what they believe in their minds to be justice, when it cannot 
be delivered by the criminal justice system.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \24\Scott W Phillips, Greg M Drake, Irshad Altheimer, The 
effectiveness of standardized investigative tactics in clearing non-
fatal shooting investigations, International Journal of Police Science 
& Management, 10.1177/14613557221074986, (146135572210749), (2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The ability to clear cases can have positive impacts on law 
enforcement agencies and their continued efforts to protect 
public safety. Just as a failure to clear cases results in a 
negative perception of the police's efficacy, consistently 
closing cases results in a positive perception and leads to 
greater cooperation with law enforcement by witnesses and 
victims. Clearing cases consistently can improve future 
cooperation in similar cases, making future investigative work 
more effective.\25\ Finally, clearing homicides, rapes, sexual 
assaults, kidnappings, and non-fatal shootings can deter future 
criminal activity because the certainty of being caught is the 
most effective deterrent.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \25\Id.
    \26\According to the National Institute of Justice in the 
Department of Justice, ``research shows clearly that the chance of 
being caught is a vastly more effective deterrent than even draconian 
punishment'' and ``the police deter crime when they do things that 
strengthen a criminal's perception of the certainty of being caught.'' 
https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/five-things-about-deterrence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Devoting more resources to investigate homicides, rapes, 
sexual assaults, kidnappings, and non-fatal shootings helps 
increase the likelihood of an arrest. Certain factors within 
police control can exert significant influence on clearances, 
including the actions of the first officer on the scene, a 
detective responding to the scene in less than 30 minutes, the 
notification of the crime lab and medical examiner's office, 
the number of detectives assigned to the case, and the 
documentation of the crime scene.\27\ Additional research has 
demonstrated the importance of training homicide detectives and 
other personnel in improving the capacity of the police to 
clear homicide cases.\28\ Case management systems, the 
development of working relationships with outside criminal 
justice agencies, a strong community policing presence, 
collaboration with external agencies, and a culture dedicated 
to innovation have also been cited by research as improving 
clearance rates.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \27\Braga, A.A., Turchan, B. & Barao, L. The Influence of 
Investigative Resources on Homicide Clearances. J Quant Criminol 35, 
337-364, 343 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-018-9386-9.
    \28\Id.
    \29\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 2011, the Boston Police Department received a U.S. 
Bureau of Justice Assistance Smart Policing Initiative grant to 
engage in a problem-oriented policing enterprise to improve 
homicide clearance rates. This initiative provided a series of 
recommendations that were implemented in January 2012 to 
increase the size of the homicide unit, enhance training of 
detectives, and adopt new investigative practices and 
policies.\30\ Specifically, they increased the size of the 
homicide unit by 10 personnel, hired a civilian crime analyst 
to enhance the unit's ability to search computerized databases 
in real time and pursue analyses to generate investigative 
leads, added a second Victim-Witness Resource Officer, and 
strengthened their connections to victim assistance 
organizations in an effort to improve relationships between 
detectives and victims' families and witnesses.\31\ The 
department also altered the structure of their investigative 
squads, improved training for its Crime Scene Response Unit and 
Forensic Group in cutting-edge investigative techniques, and 
developed and implemented a comprehensive set of standardized 
protocols to guide work activities across the different stages 
of homicide investigation.\32\ Their Bureau of Investigative 
Services command staff reviewed protocols to ensure 
standardization was achieved and the homicide unit convened 
monthly peer review sessions for all open homicide 
investigations to increase accountability by ensuring all 
possible avenues for identifying responsible offenders were 
being pursued.\33\ A similar process was put in place to manage 
the processing and testing of physical evidence by the 
Forensics group and new forensic technology was also acquired 
and used.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \30\Braga AA, Dusseault D. Can Homicide Detectives Improve Homicide 
Clearance Rates? Crime & Delinquency. 2018;64(3):283-315.
    \31\Id.
    \32\Id.
    \33\Id.
    \34\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          III. THE VICTIM ACT

    Under the VICTIM Act, state, tribal, or local law 
enforcement agencies and prosecuting offices would be able to 
use federal funds to hire, retain, or train detectives to 
investigate homicides, rapes, sexual assaults, kidnappings, and 
non-fatal shootings; train police personnel to address the 
needs of victims and family members; hire and train evidence 
processing personnel; acquire, upgrade, or replace 
investigative or evidence processing technology or equipment; 
hire and train personnel to analyze violent crime; ensure 
victim services are funded, staffed, and trained; provide 
resources to victims and their family members, including mental 
health treatment and grief counseling, funeral and burial 
expenses, relocation expenses, emergency shelter and 
transportation, and lost wage assistance; develop competitive 
and evidence-based programs to improve clearance rates; or 
develop best practices for improving access and acceptance of 
victim services.
    Within a year of being awarded a VICTIM grant, each 
recipient must report to the Attorney General information on 
the use and effectiveness of their grant, including the number 
of detectives hired, the number of evidence processing 
personnel hired, any training provided to detectives to assist 
in solving crimes and improving clearance rates, any new or 
upgraded evidence processing technology or equipment and 
corresponding training, and data regarding clearance rates for 
homicides, rapes, sexual assaults, kidnappings, non-fatal 
shootings and related crime trends.
    The VICTIM Act also requires the National Institute of 
Justice (NIJ) to conduct bi-annual evaluations of the VICTIM 
grants and the practices deployed by the grant recipients to 
identify policies and procedures that have successfully 
improved clearance rates for homicides, rapes, sexual assaults, 
kidnappings, and non-fatal shootings. The Attorney General is 
required to report to Congress the results of NIJ's evaluation 
and the information each recipient is required to report to the 
Attorney General. Finally, to carry out the Program, the VICTIM 
Act authorizes $100,000,000 a year for ten years.

                                Hearings

    For the purposes of clause 3(c)(6)(A) of House rule XIII, 
the following hearing was used to develop H.R. 5768: On March 
8, 2022, the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland 
Security held a hearing on ``Reimagining Public Safety in the 
COVID-19 Era.'' The witnesses were: Thomas Abt, Chair, Violent 
Crime Working Group; Madeline Brame, Chairwoman, NYS Victims 
Rights Reform Council; the Honorable Nicholas W. Brown, U.S. 
Attorney for the Western District of Washington; the Honorable 
Satana Deberry, District Attorney, Durham County, North 
Carolina; Edgardo ``Eddie'' Garcia, Chief of Police, Dallas 
Police Department; Charles Fain Lehman, Fellow, Manhattan 
Institute for Policy Research; Jerika L Richardson, Senior Vice 
President, Equitable Justice & Strategic Initiatives, National 
Urban League; and the Honorable Sylvester Turner, Mayor, City 
of Houston. At the hearing, the witnesses explored a variety of 
approaches to reducing violence and increasing public safety.

                        Committee Consideration

    On June 15, 2022, the Committee met in open session and 
ordered the bill, H.R. 5768, favorably reported with an 
amendment, by a rollcall vote of 25 to 14, a quorum being 
present.

                            Committee Votes

    In compliance with clause 3(b) of House rule XIII, the 
following rollcall votes occurred during the Committee's 
consideration of H.R. 5768:
    1. An amendment by Mr. Roy to add findings related to 
jurisdictions that have reduced funding for their police 
departments was defeated by a rollcall vote of 15 to 22. The 
vote was as follows:
 
 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    2. An amendment by Mr. Tiffany to prohibit funding under 
the bill to any jurisdiction that has reduced its law 
enforcement budget for any of the previous 5 fiscal years 
without a corresponding reduction in revenue was defeated by a 
rollcall vote of 15 to 25. The vote was as follows:

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    3. A motion to report H.R. 5768, as amended, was agreed to 
by a rollcall vote of 25 to 14. The vote was as follows:

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of House rule XIII, the 
Committee advises that the findings and recommendations of the 
Committee, based on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) 
of House rule X, are incorporated in the descriptive portions 
of this report.

                Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)1) of House rule XIII, the Committee 
adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by the Director of 
the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

   New Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of House rule XIII and section 
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, and pursuant to 
clause 3(c)(3) of House rule XIII and section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has requested 
but not received from the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office, a budgetary analysis and a cost estimate of the bill.

                    Duplication of Federal Programs

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of House rule XIII, no provision 
of H.R. 5768 establishes or reauthorizes a program of the 
federal government known to be duplicative of another federal 
program.

                    Performance Goals and Objectives

    The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of 
House rule XIII, H.R. 5768 would increase public safety and 
improve law enforcement practices by providing funding for law 
enforcement agencies to improve clearance rates for homicides 
and other serious crimes.

                          Advisory on Earmarks

    In accordance with clause 9 of House rule XXI, H.R. 5768 
does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax 
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 
9(e), or 9(f) of rule XXI.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

    The following discussion describes the bill as reported by 
the Committee.
    Sec. 1. Short Title. Section 1 sets forth the short title, 
the ``Violent Incident Clearance and Technological 
Investigative Methods Act of 2022'' or the ``VICTIM Act of 
2022.''
    Sec. 2. Findings. Section 2 provides findings related to 
clearance rates.
    Sec. 3. Grant Program with Respect to Violent Incident 
Clearance and Technological Investigative Methods. Section 3 
authorizes, for ten years, a grant program within the Office of 
Justice Programs to establish, implement, and administer 
violent incident clearance and technological investigative 
methods to improve clearance rates for homicides, rapes, sexual 
assaults, kidnappings, and non-fatal shootings. It also defines 
relevant terms, establishes the specific projects that the 
grant funds are eligible for, and requires state, tribal, or 
local law enforcement agencies and prosecuting offices that 
receive funding under the program to report to the Attorney 
General information regarding the use of the grants. It also 
requires the NIJ to conduct bi-annual evaluation of the 
practices deployed by the grant recipients to identify best 
practices for improving clearance rates for homicides, rapes, 
sexual assaults, kidnappings, and non-fatal shootings and 
submit any findings to Congress. This section Authorizes 
$100,000,000 each year from fiscal year 2023 through fiscal 
year 2032, setting aside 10 percent of each appropriation for 
Tribal offices or agencies.

                             Minority Views

    H.R. 5768, the ``Violent Incident Clearance and 
Technological Investigative Methods Act of 2022'' or the 
``VICTIM Act of 2022,'' creates a new grant program within the 
Department of Justice authorized at $100 million dollars per 
year for the next decade, for a total of $1 billion. The new 
government program would use federal taxpayer money to pay for 
activities that should be left to states and localities.

H.R. 5768 IS AN ELECTION-YEAR PLOY TO PAPER OVER THE DEMOCRATS' RADICAL 
                     ``DEFUND THE POLICE'' CAMPAIGN

    During the last two years, the United States has seen a 
spike in violent crime.\1\ In 2020, the United States tallied 
more than 20,000 murders--the highest total since 1995 and 
4,000 more than in 2019.\2\ While Democrat-run cities have seen 
an increase in homicides, many of those cities chose to defund 
their police. For example:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Amir Vera, Despite Covid-19 and Stay-at-Home Orders, 2020 Saw an 
Increase in Homicides across the US, CNN (Jan. 1, 2021), https://
www.cnn.com/2021/01/01/us/homicides-2020-increase-coronavirus/
index.html.
    \2\Jason Johnson, Why Violent Crime Surged Across America After 
Police Retreated, USA Today (Apr. 9, 2021), https://www.usatoday.com/
story/opinion/policing/2021/04/09/violent-crime-surged-across-america-
after-police-retreated-column/7137565002/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           In New York City, the NYPD's data shows the 
        overall crime rate rose 11.2 percent in October 2021 
        compared to October 2020.\3\ This jump in crime 
        continues after New York City defunded its police 
        department by $1 billion.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\Fox 5 New York Staff, Violent Crime Continues to Surge in NYC, 
FOX 5 New York (Nov. 3, 2021), https://www.fox5ny.com/news/violent-
crime-continues-to-surge-in-nyc.
    \4\The Official Website of the City of New York, In the Face of an 
Economic Crisis, Mayor de Blasio Announces Budget that Prioritizes 
Safety, Police Reform, Youth Services, and Communities of Color (Jun. 
30, 2020), https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/487-20/in-
face-an-economic-crisis-mayor-de-blasio-budgetprioritizes-safety-
police.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           In Los Angeles County, homicides increased 
        23 percent between 2020 and 2021, from 555 in 2020 to 
        683 in 2021.\5\ The increased homicide rate occurred 
        after Los Angeles defunded its police department by 
        $150 million.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\Id.
    \6\Anabel Munoz, Los Angeles City Council votes to cut LAPD budget 
by $150 million, ABC 7 (Jul. 2, 2020), https://abc7.com/defund-the-
police-lapd-los-angeles-mayor-eric-garcetti/6289037/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Houston, Texas, saw an 18 percent increase 
        in homicides from 2020 to 2021, going from 405 to 
        479.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\Major Cities Chiefs Association, Violent Crime Survey--Agency 
Totals (2020-2021), https://majorcitieschiefs.com/wp-content/uploads/
2022/02/MCCA-Violent-Crime-Report-2021-and-2020-Year-End.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Minneapolis, Minnesota, saw an increase in 
        homicides in 2021 with 96 reported as opposed to only 
        84 in 2020.\8\ Minneapolis was one of the first cities 
        to defund its police department in 2020 after the death 
        of George Floyd. The Minneapolis City Council voted to 
        refund its police department by $6.4 million after the 
        increase in crime.\9\ Moreover, in November 2021, 
        Minneapolis voters rejected a City Council ballot 
        proposal to replace the city's embattled police 
        department.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\Id.
    \9\Bradford Betz, Minneapolis Push to Defund Police Backfires After 
Residents Complain of Slow Response Times, Increase in Crime, Fox News 
(February 14, 2021) https://www.foxnews.com/us/minneapolis-defund-
police-backfires-residents-complain-slow-response-times-increase-crime.
    \10\Joe Walsh, Minneapolis Votes Down Proposal to Replace its 
Police Department, Forbes (Nov. 2, 2021), https://www.forbes.com/sites/
joewalsh/2021/11/02/minneapolis-votes-down-proposal-to-replace-its-
police-department/?sh=1a119c4b2fce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, saw a nearly 13 
        percent increase in homicides from 2020 to 2021. In 
        2020, Philadelphia suffered 499 homicides, while 563 
        were reported in 2021. Philadelphia decided to cut its 
        police budget by $33 million in 2020.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\Michael D'Onofrio, Preliminary Philly budget cuts $33M in 
police spending, implements reform, Pennsylvania Capital Star (Jun. 18, 
2020), https://www.penncapital-star.com/government-politics/
preliminary-philly-budgetcuts-33m-in-police-spending-implements-
reform/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Residents of Portland, Oregon, suffered an 
        increase in homicides from 2020 to 2021. In 2020, 
        Portland suffered 53 homicides while enduring 87 in 
        2021.\12\ Portland also reported 3,409 aggravated 
        assaults in 2021, an increase from 2,726 in 2020.\13\ 
        Portland also decided to defund its police department 
        to the tune of $16 million in 2020.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\Major Cities Chiefs Association, Violent Crime Survey--Agency 
Totals (2020-2021), https://majorcitieschiefs.com/wp-content/uploads/
2022/02/MCCA-Violent-Crime-Report-2021-and-2020-Year-End.pdf.
    \13\Id.
    \14\Portland, Ore., Cuts Police Budget by $16 million, Dissolves 
Programs, OANN (Nov. 6, 2020), https://www.oann.com/portland-votes-
against-18m-police-funding-cut/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    It is not just Democrat-run cities that have embraced the 
radical ``defund the police'' movement. Democrat Members of 
Congress, including some on the Judiciary Committee, have also 
parroted this dangerous rhetoric. For example:
           Chairman Jerrold Nadler. Chairman Nadler 
        publicly agreed with reducing the NYPD budget, stating 
        ``[t]here should be substantial cuts to the police 
        budget and a reallocation of those funds to where we 
        need them.''\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\Michael McDowell, Jerry Nadler Thinks the NYPD Budget Should be 
Cut and He's Getting Ready if Trump Disputes the Election, WEST SIDE 
RAG (June 7, 2020), https://www.westsiderag.com/2020/06/07/jerry-
nadler-thinks-the-nypd-budget-should-be-cut-and-hes-getting-ready-if-
trump-disputes-the-election.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Representative Cori Bush. Responding to a 
        tweet from former President Barack Obama, Rep. Bush, 
        the Vice Chair of the Crime Subcommittee, tweeted: 
        ``It's not a slogan. It's a mandate for keeping our 
        people alive. Defund the police.''\16\ In February 
        2022, when challenged about the popularity of the 
        ``defund the police'' platform, Rep. Bush stated, 
        ```[d]efund the police' is not the problem.''\17\ 
        Minutes after President Biden gave the State of the 
        Union address in March 2022, Rep. Bush tweeted, 
        ``Defund the police. Invest in our communities.''\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\Cori Bush (@CoriBush), Twitter (Dec. 1, 2020, 9:03 PM), https:/
/twitter.com/CoriBush/status/1333955011475365888.''
    \17\Cameron Jenkins, Cori Bush Says She Won't Stop Saying `Defund 
the Police' Despite Pressure From Other Democrats, The Hill (Feb. 9, 
2022), https://thehill.com/homenews/house/593517-cori-bush-says-she-
wont-stop-saying-defund-the-police-despite-pressure-from.
    \18\Cori Bush (@CoriBush), Twitter (Mar. 1, 2022, 10:45 PM), 
https://twitter.com/CoriBush/status/1498866983835783171.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. 
        Responding to a media report that Customs and Border 
        Patrol had used drones over the protests in Minneapolis 
        following the death of George Floyd, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez 
        tweeted: ``This is what happens when leaders sign blank 
        check after blank check to militarize police, CBP, etc 
        while letting violence go unchecked. We need answers. 
        And we need to defund.''\19\ After New York decided to 
        cut $1 billion from its police department, Rep. Ocasio-
        Cortez indicated that she thought the cuts did not go 
        far enough, stating, ``defund the police means 
        defunding the police.''\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \19\Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC), Twitter (May 29, 2020), 
https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1266422625032642563?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw.
    \20\Bob Fredericks, $1.5B in NYPD Cuts Not Enough For AOC: `Defund 
Police Means Defunding the Police'' New York Post (June 30, 2020), 
https://nypost.com/2020/06/30/aoc-says-1-5b-nypd-budget-slash-didnt-go-
far-enough/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Representative Mondaire Jones. Responding to 
        a question in 2020 about where he stands on criminal 
        justice reform, Rep. Jones said he supports ``a suite 
        of criminal justice reforms to redress racial 
        inequalities and harms in our justice system, including 
        . . . defunding police and reinvesting this money in 
        health, education, and alternatives to incarceration . 
        . . .''\21\ Rep. Jones also commented about a man 
        killed by police in Sacramento, California, and 
        tweeted, ``[t]he leadership of the department, and all 
        of these officers, must be fired. Then, the department 
        must be dismantled and policing reimagined.''\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \21\Lanning Taliaferro, Candidate Profile: Mondaire Jones for 
Congress, PATCH (Jun. 16, 2020), https://patch.com/new-york/nyack/
candidate-profile-mondaire-jones-congress.''
    \22\Mondaire Jones (@MondaireJones), Twitter ((Aug. 30, 2020) 
https://twitter.com/mondairejones/status/1300042191671304192.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Representative Pramila Jayapal. Rep. Jayapal 
        used different language to support defunding of police, 
        saying, ``[i]t is completely reasonable for us to shift 
        significant resources from law enforcement and 
        investing in people.''\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \23\Dyer Oxley and Adwoa Gyimah-Brempong, What does Congressmember 
Jayapal Think About Defunding the Police?, KUOW (Jul. 16, 2020), 
https://www.kuow.org/stories/jayapal-supports-diverting-police-money-
to-other-public-uses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Representative Ilhan Omar. Responding to the 
        death of George Floyd, Rep. Omar went further than 
        defunding the police in Minneapolis. Rep. Omar stated 
        that, ``[w]e need to completely dismantle the 
        Minneapolis Police Department. Because here's the 
        thing, there is a cancer . . . . The Minneapolis Police 
        Department is rotten to the root, and so when we 
        dismantle, it we get rid of that cancer . . . .''\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \24\Mark Moore, Rep. Ilhan Omar Calls to Dismantle `Rotten' 
Minneapolis Police Department, New York Post (June 8, 2020), https://
nypost.com/2020/06/08/rep-omar-dismantle-rotten-minneapolis-police-
department/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Representative Ayanna Pressley. Explaining 
        her position on the defund the police movement, Rep. 
        Pressley tweeted, ``[t]he defund movement isn't new. 
        Folks are just finally listening. We got money for wars 
        but can't feed the poor.''\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \25\Ayanna Pressley (@AyannaPressley), Twitter (Jun. 16, 2020), 
https://twitter.com/hashtag/
HappyBirthdayTupac?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For two years, many prominent Democrats embraced the 
``defund the police'' movement. Now, after seeing the dangerous 
results in their communities and how unpopular it is with 
Americans, some Democrats are now attempting to distance 
themselves from the defund the police movement by committing $1 
billion in federal taxpayer dollars to various jurisdictions 
via H.R. 5768, including those reckless jurisdictions that 
chose to defund the police.

  DEMOCRATS HAVE NOT FULLY REJECTED THE RADICAL ``DEFUND THE POLICE'' 
                                CAMPAIGN

    During Committee consideration of H.R. 5768, Democrats 
rejected an amendment offered by Representative Tiffany that 
would have prohibited jurisdictions that chose to defund their 
police from receiving the grant funds authorized in this 
legislation.\26\ Jurisdictions that created more crime by 
defunding the police should not be rewarded with federal 
taxpayer dollars to solve the problems they caused, yet 
Committee Democrats are willing to send Americans' hard-earned 
money to jurisdictions that allowed crime to flourish by 
defunding their police departments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \26\Business Meeting of the H. Comm. on Judiciary, 117th Cong. 
(Jun. 15, 2022) (Roll Call Vote #3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Showing that they really have not fully divorced themselves 
from the radical ``defund the police'' movement, Democrats 
could not even find it themselves to accept an amendment to the 
findings section of the bill that declared ``defunding the 
police can have deadly consequences.'' The amendment, offered 
by Representative Roy, was rejected along a party-line 
vote.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \27\Id. (Roll Call Vote #4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               CONCLUSION

    This bill authorizes $1 billion over the next ten years to 
have unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats in Washington, 
D.C. pick winners and losers when handing out these grant 
funds. Because Democrats rejected Republican amendments, 
jurisdictions that irresponsibly defunded their police 
departments would be eligible for such funds. At a time of 
record inflation and economic stagnation, the American people 
simply cannot afford paying for the Democrats' missteps.
                                                Jim Jordan,
                                                    Ranking Member.

                                  [all]