the county sheriffs, chiefs of police, and prosecutors who deal with crime on a day-to-day basis told us that community policing would make their jobs easier because police officers who are visibly involved in their communities are one of the best deterrents to crime. According to the National Association of Police Organizations, "We need all the help we can get in our daily work, and putting more cops on the streets will help us do our job." And that is what the crime bill delivered. The COPS-FAST program, which targets small jurisdictions, had a one-page application that was due by December 31. No redtape. no bureaucracy. Just an announcement a little over month later that communities in my district would receive a total of 17 new police officers. These are officers who will not just walk a beat, but work closely with the citizens and communities they serve. Community policing has proven to be effective. It is widely supported by law enforcement across the country. Why kill it in favor of block grants--funding which guarantees nothing and is likely to result in an overall reduction in dollars targeted for police and prevention? When we asked for help in developing the crime bill, local law enforcement answered. We listened to them, and then responded with cops-on-the-beat. Why are we putting them through the wringer again? Support the Schumer, Conyers, Chapman amendment and perpetuate this fine crime law offered by President Clinton.
Victor Fazio: “the county sheriffs, chiefs of police, and prosecutors who deal with crime on a day-to-day basis told us that community…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the benefits of community policing and the COPS-FAST program during a debate on crime legislation.
Share
More from Victor Fazio
today my colleagues and I have the opportunity to increase access to higher education for all Americans by supporting H.R. 6. However, a proposed amendment by Congressman Riggs promises to have the opposite effect by eliminating…
But it is rather ironic that this is presented as additional responsibilities for the Federal Election Commission when in fact, if my colleagues read the bill, there is no new authorization for what the report that accompanies the bill…
Now, Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield, as I remember the gentleman's comments from that earlier debate, he was also talking about people who were taxpayers, as many legal residents are, who are not citizens.
Mr. Chairman, I want to ask the author of the amendment if he would explain to me what is different from existing laws. As I understand it, we have always required that every President, going back as far as I can remember, reimburse part…





