A minority impact statement is a significant portion of a fiscal note prepared by the nonpartisan Fiscal Division of the Iowa Legislative Services Agency.\u00a0 In cooperation with the Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning of the Department of Human Rights, the Fiscal Division analyzes legislation to determine if the legislation will have an impact on minorities.<\/p>\n
Because Iowa has a staggering racial disparity in incarceration rates (as a matter-of-fact, a 2007 report from the Sentencing Project rates Iowa as THE state with the \u201chighest racial disparity in incarceration\u201d), it is important for legislators to take the time to look at these fiscal notes.\u00a0 Placing an emphasis on the minority impact statements, legislators should examine whether there might be a better method of achieving the same goals while reducing the imbalance of disproportionate incarceration.<\/p>\n
One of this year\u2019s best examples of a bill that may have a huge impact on increasing rather than decreasing the imbalance of minorities in the correctional system is Senate File 384<\/a>, a bill that creates the new offense of removal of an officer\u2019s communication or control device (radio).<\/p>\n A legitimate fear of a law enforcement officer is having someone strip the service revolver from the officer\u2019s holster.\u00a0 A person who commits this crime violates the Iowa law of \u201cDisarming a peace officer of a dangerous weapon\u201d and the punishment is a class \u201cD\u201d felony.\u00a0 A class \u201cD\u201d felony is punishable by confinement for no more than five years and a fine of at least $750 but not more than $7,500.\u00a0 The penalty for discharging that dangerous weapon, whether it hits the officer, a bystander, the ground, or anything else is a class \u201cC\u201d felony, which carries a penalty of up to ten years and a fine of between $1,000 and $10,000.\u00a0 This is all understandable and defensible.<\/p>\n Now, a related issue has come before the General Assembly.\u00a0 Senate File 384<\/a> began as a bill<\/a> that would make removing a communications device from a peace officer a class \u201cD\u201d felony, same as a weapon.\u00a0 This penalty seemed a little steep in comparison with intentionally removing a weapon, but we did understand that the loss of radio communication can be just as frightening as losing a weapon.\u00a0 We made an offer.\u00a0 What if the law had graduated steps?<\/p>\n Wouldn\u2019t it make sense to gradually increase the penalty along with the defendant\u2019s level of intent?\u00a0 Our idea was to suggest that if the defendant removed the radio, but inflicted no damage, didn\u2019t hurt the officer, and had no intention of preventing communication, the charge should be less than a defendant who caused bodily injury; serious injury; or tried to prevent the peace officer from communicating.\u00a0 Legislators in the Senate listened to what we had to say.<\/p>\n The bill was amended in the Senate Judiciary Committee to reflect our suggestion.\u00a0 The penalty for removing a radio or other communications device would range from a simple misdemeanor to a class \u201cD\u201d felony.\u00a0 However, in the course of amending the bill with our suggestion, the Senate Judiciary Committee added another issue to the bill.<\/p>\n A bill that has been coined by some as the \u201cclumsy cop bill\u201d, House File 528<\/a>, is a bill that proposes to amend Iowa law that enhances the crime of \u201cInterference with official acts\u201d under certain instances.\u00a0 As it is now, the law states that if \u201ca person commits an interference with official acts, . . . and in doing so inflicts<\/i> or attempts to inflict<\/i> [serious injury or bodily injury]\u201d the penalty is enhanced.\u00a0 Several special interests desire to replace the phrase \u201cinflicts<\/i> or attempts to inflict<\/i>\u201d with the phrase \u201cwhich results in\u201d.\u00a0 The derogatory title, \u201cclumsy cop bill\u201d, comes from the possible analogy of a police officer tripping on a curb and getting injured in the course of arresting a defendant.\u00a0 There is a huge difference between \u201cinflicting\u201d and \u201cresulting\u201d.\u00a0 Inflicts means to \u201ccause (something unpleasant or painful) to be suffered by someone or something.\u201d\u00a0 Result is defined \u201cas to happen or end in a certain way as a consequence of something else.\u201d\u00a0 As you can see, inflicts<\/i> has a direct causal relationship to the incident, while results<\/i> can be an indirect consequence of a separate act.\u00a0 Therefore, a peace officer may be injured in an act that is the \u201cresult\u201d of the arrest, but in which the defendant has no part.<\/p>\n We would settle for the word \u201ccauses\u201d to replace the word inflict, if a change needs to be made.\u00a0 Causes can mean \u201cmake something happen\u201d.\u00a0 This change was offered by Rep. Dave Dawson<\/a> (D-Sioux City) at a subcommittee on the bill in the House.\u00a0 We accepted the compromise; the County Attorneys Association flat out refused to meet us in the middle.\u00a0 The Peace Officers Association at least thought about it.<\/p>\n Recently, a fiscal note<\/a> on SF 384 was prepared at the Request of Senator Charles Schneider<\/a> (R-West Des Moines).\u00a0 The minority impact statement says:<\/p>\n It is expected this Bill will have a disproportionate impact on minorities because approximately 34.6% of offenders convicted under the Bill\u2019s provisions related to interference with official acts may be minorities. Under current law, these simple misdemeanor offenders are not supervised in the corrections system. This Bill shifts simple misdemeanor convictions to aggravated misdemeanor and Class \u201cD\u201d felony convictions. There will be an increase in the number of minority offenders supervised in the correctional system.\u00a0 To the extent that the new crime, removal of an officer\u2019s communication or control device, results in new convictions, the minority impact may be understated in this fiscal note.<\/p>\n The addition of a separate and somewhat unrelated issue to a bill that we have worked on with pride and fairness, and one that treats minorities with balance is a step backward.<\/p>\n \u00a9 Copyright 2013. All rights reserved.\u00a0 Fawkes-Lee & Ryan.<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A minority impact statement is a significant portion of a fiscal note prepared by the nonpartisan Fiscal Division of the Iowa Legislative Services Agency.\u00a0 In cooperation with the Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning of the Department of Human … Continue reading