The Colorado legislature passed into law SB22-145 today, legislation that provides some $30.5 million in funding for Colorado law enforcement.
As Hannah Metzger reports for the publication formerly known as the Colorado Statesman:
Under the bill, the funds would be distributed over two years with $15 million for the crime prevention program and $7.5 million going to each of the workforce programs. Another $400,000 would pay for oversight from the Department of Public Safety and $100,000 would fund a statewide forum to solicit suggestions on crime prevention measures.
Of the $15 million for crime prevention, at least $5 million would be reserved for community-based organizations and another $5 million for law enforcement and local governments. At least 20% of the grant funds would be required to go to rural communities if they apply.
Senate Bill 145 was bipartisan in nature — with two GOP sponsors — yet 13 (13!) Republicans in the State House of Representatives voted NO: Mark Baisley; Terri Carver; Tim Geitner; Ron Hanks; Stephanie Luck; Pat Neville; Andres Pico; Kim Ransom; Janice Rich; Shane Sandridge; Matt Soper; Kevin Van Winkle; and Dave Williams.
The next time you hear ANY of these Republican legislators talking about how Democrats are trying to “defund the police” or about how Republicans “back the blue,” please kindly tell them to stick their heads in an appropriately dark place.
Perhaps Negev or Moderatus can explain why these Republicans apparently don't believe that "blue lives matter."
ewe did you bundle me with Moderatus? My guess is Republicans don't believe Dems know WTF they are doing….. but that sword cuts both ways. Dano may be correct $5 mil to the police would get a donut and a coffee to split with their partner so calling it "funding the police" is a bit of a grift. Denver budget for police alone is like $400m so if they got it all it would like 1% change. Split that up between the state and the actual "funding" of police would be statistically insignificant. But it sounds good and you can reverse the effects the defund position cost you so more power to ya…
"Defund position" didn't cost me anything. I remain a registered Republican.
Well then perhaps you are better equipped to answer your own question.
Actually I can guess their reasoning. A whole lot money for prevention and rehabilitation and hardly anything that can be spent on guns, ammo, and faster cars.
The only person among that list meritorious of comment is Ron Hanks. However; it is not inconstant with the white christian nationalist movement to want to weaken law enforcement, police specifically. Their belief stems from the concept that police are anti democratic vs sheriff's who are elected. Though all law enforcement is viewed suspiciously and with veiled contempt. The overall goal is to weaken and remove law enforcement to replace them with theocratic bullies in the community and frequent lynching.
For the MAGA freaks, support/opposition to the police is situational.
When talking about the cops at the Capitol on 1/6, they are tyrannical oppressors of freedom lovers who were simply exercising their First Amendment rights.
When it comes to Derick Chauvin, Darren Wilson, or Daniel Pantaleo, the MAGA crowd celebrate "law enforcement."
Ultimately, you're right in wanting to replace the police with "theocratic bullies." Afghanistan had a governmental agency called the Ministry for the Propagation of Virtue and the Suppression of Vice.
I could see a future Republican administration setting up such a department and naming Sam Alito or Amy Coney Barrett as its first secretary.