Speaker 1: From Bloomberg News and iHeartRadio. It's the big Take. I'm
Speaker 1: West Kasova. Today, cities tried putting new limits on police.
Speaker 1: Police violence, especially against people of color, has been an
Speaker 1: urgent problem for years, yet despite so many deaths of
Speaker 1: citizens in all parts of the US, many cities have
Speaker 1: failed to stop it. Sales continue to emerge about what
Speaker 1: happened to Tyrene Nichols on January seventh. Community members and
Speaker 1: activists continue to voice their concerns and demand chake. Five
Speaker 1: police officers are charged in the death of Tyrene Nichols,
Speaker 1: twenty nine year old black man in Memphis, who was
Speaker 1: brutally beaten after being pulled over. Nichols death has renewed
Speaker 1: attention to traffic stops. City councils in several US cities
Speaker 1: have passed or are working on legislation to limit reasons
Speaker 1: police can pull a person over. In part, it's intended
Speaker 1: to reduce police contact with citizens. The first thing we're
Speaker 1: trying to do is address the idea of driving ball black.
Speaker 1: A lot of people have stories and narratives that put
Speaker 1: them in a position where they feel like they've been
Speaker 1: pulled over for the color of their skin. That's Philadelphia
Speaker 1: Councilman Isaiah Thomas. He led the city's effort to curtail
Speaker 1: police stops for minor violations like a hanging air freshener
Speaker 1: or a broken tail light. We'll hear more from him
Speaker 1: later in the program. First, my Bloomberg colleague Sarah Holder
Speaker 1: and Fola Kennaby. They've been reporting all about this and
Speaker 1: they join me now from New York. Sarah, you've been
Speaker 1: reporting on police stops for City Lab. What is the
Speaker 1: day to tell you about how frequent traffic stops by
Speaker 1: police are? How big a problem this is. Traffic stops
Speaker 1: are the most common police come into contact with the
Speaker 1: public every day. You know, police conduct around twenty million
Speaker 1: traffic stops every year, and a small fraction of those
Speaker 1: turn violent or deadly. But when you look at the
Speaker 1: data on police violence and police killings in America, you
Speaker 1: can see that seven percent of deadly police encounters started
Speaker 1: with a traffic stop. Last year. Between twenty eighteen and
Speaker 1: twenty twenty one, ten percent of all of the deadly
Speaker 1: police killings started with a traffic stop. So these are
Speaker 1: a really common way that police come into contact with
Speaker 1: the public, and sometimes they can go wrong and full
Speaker 1: of we're seeing this in cities across America. Is that right? Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's right. New York City, which is where we're based,
Speaker 1: actually had to release traffic stop data for the first
Speaker 1: time in twenty twenty two. In New York City. There
Speaker 1: were six hundred seventy three thousand traffic stops in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty two alone. Now, talking to the NYPD about these stops,
Speaker 1: they say that, you know, they're an important part of
Speaker 1: their enforcement practices. Only about two percent of those stops
Speaker 1: resulting and arrests. And there is actually a similar story
Speaker 1: for pedestrian stops, which there's a much richer history of
Speaker 1: data for. And what's the most common reason somebody gets stopped.
Speaker 1: There's a whole range of reasons why someone might get
Speaker 1: stopped by police in a car. You know, some of
Speaker 1: them are for offenses that do impact traffic safety, like
Speaker 1: speeding or running a red light. Others you might not
Speaker 1: even know are legal, like having something dangling from your
Speaker 1: rear view mirror that obscures vision, or driving without your
Speaker 1: license plate illuminated by a light, or having a noisy
Speaker 1: exhaust pipe. Police can use a whole variety of reasons
Speaker 1: to pull someone over and advocates argue that some of
Speaker 1: these more minor violations are used by police as a
Speaker 1: pretext to search a car for contraband like guns or drugs,
Speaker 1: And as fully just mentioned, in city after city, you
Speaker 1: see that a lot of the times those pretext stops
Speaker 1: aren't very effective. You know, in San Francisco, some of
Speaker 1: these minor violations turned up a gun or led to
Speaker 1: an arrest, you know, less than two percent of the
Speaker 1: time as well, and in fill It you're seeing the
Speaker 1: same thing. Traffic safety is a big issue on America's roads.
Speaker 1: In twenty twenty one, forty thousand people were killed in
Speaker 1: car accidents, So this is a major issue of concern,
Speaker 1: but not all of these traffic stops are really addressing
Speaker 1: the root causes of that traffic violence. Thinking about New
Speaker 1: York again, beyond the outcomes of the stop, we also
Speaker 1: see huge racial disparities in the stop. Roughly sixty percent
Speaker 1: of the stops involve black or Latino motorists, and that's
Speaker 1: of course disproportionate to the population of those folks in
Speaker 1: the city. Like Sarah mentioned earlier, can sometimes lead to
Speaker 1: deadly encounters, and beyond that can lead to distrust or
Speaker 1: a feeling that communities are being targeted by officers. Yeah,
Speaker 1: those disparities hold naturally as well. A study of nearly
Speaker 1: one hundred million traffic stops found that black drivers were
Speaker 1: twenty percent more likely than white drivers to be pulled over,
Speaker 1: and black drivers are more likely to be stopped and searched,
Speaker 1: but they're not more likely to hold these kinds of
Speaker 1: illegal materials than white drivers, like guns and drugs. You
Speaker 1: can see that the disproportionate stopping is not necessarily leading
Speaker 1: to better outcomes for traffic safety, but it is leading
Speaker 1: to a disproportionate amount of encounters between black motorists and
Speaker 1: police on the roads. So one very public recent example
Speaker 1: of that was Tyreny Nichols death in police hands, and
Speaker 1: that has led cities really to take a new look
Speaker 1: at traffic stops, Is that right, Yeah. After the killing
Speaker 1: of George Floyd in twenty twenty, peaceful protests across the
Speaker 1: country have far outnumbered incidents of violence stemming from the
Speaker 1: killing of George Floyd. Philadelphia was one of the first
Speaker 1: cities to look out traffic stops as a way to
Speaker 1: limit these police in public interactions. A council member there
Speaker 1: fought to pass a law that would limit police from
Speaker 1: making traffic stops for some of these minor violations that
Speaker 1: we mentioned, including like a dangling air freshmener or expired registration,
Speaker 1: as long as that registration hadn't been expired for more
Speaker 1: than sixty days. So he worked with the police department
Speaker 1: there and with advocates on the ground to pass this legislation,
Speaker 1: and we'll be seeing some data on how that's been
Speaker 1: working in the next few weeks. In Memphis, a city
Speaker 1: council member has proposed legislation doing the same thing as
Speaker 1: Philadelphia once did. She's targeting several low level violations that
Speaker 1: police typically pull drivers over for and making it so
Speaker 1: that police can no longer pull over people just for
Speaker 1: these low level violations. People can still be cited for
Speaker 1: having late registration or inexpired omissions check documentation, but they
Speaker 1: can't be the only reason that police pull someone over.
Speaker 1: And again, that's to try to limit the kinds of
Speaker 1: interactions that led to Nichols's death. In Memphis, police say
Speaker 1: that they pulled mister Nichols over for reckless driving, but
Speaker 1: the police chief there says there still hasn't been enough
Speaker 1: evidence to prove whether that was the case or not
Speaker 1: to connect to New York City. The city Council passed
Speaker 1: a law a few years ago to require the reporting
Speaker 1: of the vehicle stops, and twenty twenty two is the
Speaker 1: first year for which we have that data. But going
Speaker 1: back to nineteen ninety nine, another high profile of police
Speaker 1: gilling here the shooting of Amadu Dialloy for police officers.
Speaker 1: Today marks twenty four years since Amadu Diallo was shot
Speaker 1: and killed by police officers with the NYPD's Street Crimes
Speaker 1: Unit required the city to report pedestrian stops as a result,
Speaker 1: and so to that end, last year in twenty twenty two,
Speaker 1: there were fifteen thousand pedestrian stops and so that's on
Speaker 1: top of the six hundred and seventy three thousand vehicle stops.
Speaker 1: Of the fifteen thousand pedestrian stops, ninety percent of them
Speaker 1: were black or Latino folks walking around the street. Yeah,
Speaker 1: after these kinds of high profile killings by police that
Speaker 1: start with a traffic stop, like the death of Filando Castile,
Speaker 1: what began as a routine traffic stop turned deadly. Wednesday,
Speaker 1: family members confirmed that thirty two year old Folando Castile
Speaker 1: has died Dante Right. The police chief says they stopped
Speaker 1: Dante Wright because he had an expired registration on his
Speaker 1: license plate, and now Tyree Nichols. There have been ever
Speaker 1: to look at the practice and reform it in New
Speaker 1: York City, in Memphis, in Philadelphia, in states like Virginia,
Speaker 1: and also in cities in California like Berkeley and Oakland.
Speaker 1: They've tried to take police out of traffic stops entirely
Speaker 1: and to civilianize the practice. They've run into issues with
Speaker 1: the state sort of coming after them saying they're not
Speaker 1: allowed to make those kinds of local level adjustments. Do
Speaker 1: the cities and police departments that are reducing the number
Speaker 1: of low level traffic stops say that they're doing it
Speaker 1: to reduce the number of times that police kill a motorists. Oftentimes,
Speaker 1: these reforms are framed within the context of broader public
Speaker 1: safety goals. So as we were saying, a lot of
Speaker 1: these pretextual stops don't result in an arrest, they don't
Speaker 1: even result in finding a weapon or drugs or anything
Speaker 1: that might make the public safer, And there are also
Speaker 1: a time suck for a lot of police departments, So
Speaker 1: framing it from a public safety standpoint. It's clear that
Speaker 1: there are issues with the way that police today enforce
Speaker 1: the rules of the road. But there's of course disagreement
Speaker 1: about how far these reforms should go, and whether you
Speaker 1: pretextual stops are needed, and whether police are needed on
Speaker 1: the roads to be enforcing these laws. You know, there's
Speaker 1: fear that if police pull back from doing traffic stops entirely,
Speaker 1: pedestrians will be less safe. And these changes aren't necessarily
Speaker 1: coming from police departments. They're coming from policymakers who are
Speaker 1: trying to reverse some of these racial disparities that we
Speaker 1: see again both in pedestrian and in vehicle stops. And
Speaker 1: I'll just note that when writing about the number of
Speaker 1: stops in New York City, I spoke with the NYPD
Speaker 1: and they defended their use of these stops, both pedestrian
Speaker 1: and vehicle stops, and they said that they called them
Speaker 1: an essential tool in their crime finding capabilities, and that
Speaker 1: you know, they're using an increased precision to make the stops.
Speaker 1: It's interesting after a year of this policy being in
Speaker 1: place in Philadelphia, where police start pulling over fewer drivers
Speaker 1: for these minor offenses. Preliminary data shows that traffic stops
Speaker 1: overall are down slightly, but that the amount of contraband
Speaker 1: that's actually been picked up has doubled. So doing these
Speaker 1: more targeted stops appears to be having a positive impact
Speaker 1: in some of the policing strategies that departments across the
Speaker 1: country tend to favor. If the solution to police violence
Speaker 1: against citizens is to limit the number of times police
Speaker 1: can get near citizens, it seems like sort of a
Speaker 1: big failure in thinking about policing that instead of saying, hey,
Speaker 1: we have to make sure that cops aren't violent and
Speaker 1: killing people, we say we're just going to keep cops
Speaker 1: away from people. A lot of the reforms of the
Speaker 1: last few years have been to try to stop police
Speaker 1: from taking such an outsize role in many parts of
Speaker 1: public life, like Roofstine. Cities try to address mental health
Speaker 1: calls or calls on how people not by police but
Speaker 1: by social workers. We're seeing this in traffic enforcement as well.
Speaker 1: It does speak to a broader issue that the culture
Speaker 1: of policing is violent, and advocates would argue that there
Speaker 1: are broader reforms and structural reforms needed. A lot of times,
Speaker 1: what cities have under their control is the amount of
Speaker 1: responsibilities and the amount of time the police spend interacting
Speaker 1: with the public. And there are broader, more structural reforms
Speaker 1: that advocates have been pushing for that would address the
Speaker 1: deeper culture of policing that's led to so many of
Speaker 1: these violent encounters. Police departments in some places are asked
Speaker 1: to be you know, social workers, are asked to be
Speaker 1: emergency responders, are asked to be you know, public safety
Speaker 1: agents as well. And so we've seen cities like Austin,
Speaker 1: for example, remove forensic departments from the police department's per view.
Speaker 1: We've seen cities think about having a non police in parks.
Speaker 1: This push has been to sort of roll back the
Speaker 1: reach of an agencies that has been asked to do
Speaker 1: more than I think folks really originally intend, Sarah. The
Speaker 1: US Congress has also started to take an interest in
Speaker 1: this question of police stops. Yeah, a Democratic House representative
Speaker 1: from New York or to Torres, has introduced legislation that
Speaker 1: would incentivize cities and states to take police out of
Speaker 1: traffic enforcement, either by civilianizing their traffic enforcement duties or
Speaker 1: turning to technology like speed cameras and things like that.
Speaker 1: So he sort of talks about this perverse incentive for
Speaker 1: making traffic stops, where a lot of cities really depend
Speaker 1: on the fines and fees that are extracted from motorists
Speaker 1: because of all the issues that we are discussing, Torres
Speaker 1: says that there should be more of an incentive not
Speaker 1: to conduct extra stops or disproportionate stops just for that
Speaker 1: financial reason. So he's proposing a one hundred million dollar
Speaker 1: grant under the Department of Justice that would reward cities
Speaker 1: that really take a look at their traffic enforcement and
Speaker 1: try to think of a way to do it better.
Speaker 1: I think it'll be important to look at whether these
Speaker 1: laws stick at all, whether they do spread. Already, you're
Speaker 1: seeing in Philadelphia, the police union has sued the city
Speaker 1: over this law. You're seeing in Pittsburgh, which followed Philadelphia's
Speaker 1: lead in passing similar legislation limiting these low level police stops,
Speaker 1: the police chief has told officers not to follow it anymore,
Speaker 1: pending more training. You're seeing in Virginia, Republican House trying
Speaker 1: to vote to overturn some of these more sweeping laws
Speaker 1: limiting low level stops as well. So you're already seeing
Speaker 1: a backlash brewing even where these reforms have been made,
Speaker 1: and we've seen that with the movement to defund or
Speaker 1: cut funding from police or reallocate resources away from police
Speaker 1: in the wake of George Floyd's killing. So I think
Speaker 1: the first thing to pay attention to is whether these
Speaker 1: promises are followed up on. Part of it is also
Speaker 1: the accountability and the data transparency and the follow up
Speaker 1: to see whether police departments are actually taking this training
Speaker 1: with them into the fields, whether they're actually following the
Speaker 1: letters of these laws that have been passed, because we've
Speaker 1: seen you in places like Minneapolis, which was seen a
Speaker 1: sort of a bastion of police reform before the killing
Speaker 1: of George Floyd. Like a lot of laws on paper
Speaker 1: don't really do much when you have sort of this
Speaker 1: culture of violence and policing where you have bad actors
Speaker 1: in the field, or you have these perverse incentives and
Speaker 1: these disparities showing up time and time again. Sarah holder
Speaker 1: fula kind of you. Thanks so much for joining me today.
Speaker 1: Thanks so much, Thanks for having me. When we come back.
Speaker 1: How Philadelphia's experiment in limiting traffic stops is working out.
Speaker 1: We heard how Philadelphia was the first city to put
Speaker 1: limits on routine traffic stops. Isaiah Thomas is the councilman
Speaker 1: who pushed for it, and he joins me, now, councilman,
Speaker 1: you are behind the Driving Equality Act. Can you tell
Speaker 1: me what that is and and how it works sure
Speaker 1: Driving Equality in Philadelphia specifically, it's legislation that we introduced
Speaker 1: to acknowledge first and foremost that there's a problem between
Speaker 1: communities of color and law enforcement and to say that
Speaker 1: we're willing to take some steps in the direction to
Speaker 1: try to rectify that particular issue. And so what the
Speaker 1: legislation does is it looks at how we enforce motor
Speaker 1: vehicle CO violations right now is predominantly with a traffic stop,
Speaker 1: and it changes the enforcement of minor motor vehicle CO
Speaker 1: violations that do not have a negative impact on public safety.
Speaker 1: So what we did was we work with the police
Speaker 1: department and other stakeholders to determine a little more than
Speaker 1: a handful of motor vehicle coal violations that are now
Speaker 1: in its classification as it relates to enforcement as a
Speaker 1: secondary level of enforcement. So for us in the city
Speaker 1: of Philadelphia, seat belts was already in this category if
Speaker 1: you were speeding or running a red light or committing
Speaker 1: a motor vehicle co violation as a public safety hazard,
Speaker 1: and you also didn't have your seat belt on, you
Speaker 1: would get it for that as well as not wearing
Speaker 1: a seatbelt. We now put eight other around eight other
Speaker 1: motor vehicle co violations in that same category, and the
Speaker 1: legislation has put us in a position to be more
Speaker 1: efficient and hopefully what we'll see pretty soon in some
Speaker 1: improvements in a relationship between communities of color and law enforcement.
Speaker 1: Why did you think this legislation was needed? What is
Speaker 1: it trying to address? I mean, I think the first
Speaker 1: thing we're trying to do is address the idea of
Speaker 1: driving about black. A lot of people have stories and
Speaker 1: narratives that puts them in a position where they feel
Speaker 1: like they've been pulled over for the color of their skin.
Speaker 1: When you talk to a lot of those same individuals
Speaker 1: white counterparts, their narratives and their experiences aren't the same.
Speaker 1: We also looked at other issues as it relates to
Speaker 1: where we are as a municipality and trying to address
Speaker 1: how to be more efficient as a department, specifically looking
Speaker 1: at some of the hiring issues that we're having in
Speaker 1: a public sector as well as the private sector. We're
Speaker 1: living in an era of the Great Resignation. But then
Speaker 1: also we were looking at just this idea of addressing
Speaker 1: racism and institutional issues that we know have disproportionately impacted
Speaker 1: people of color, And so the legislation has a number
Speaker 1: of different layers. You know, we're in twenty twenty three.
Speaker 1: Clearly we have a lot of issues as it relates
Speaker 1: to our municipality, and I'm sure big cities coming out
Speaker 1: of the pandemic across the country are facing similar issues.
Speaker 1: And we just want to be innovative in our approach.
Speaker 1: Where you're talking about issues like crime and things of
Speaker 1: that capacity, we don't want to be random. We want
Speaker 1: to be specific. We want to target areas where we
Speaker 1: know people are committing issues that put them in a
Speaker 1: position in position to be incarcerated, and where we can
Speaker 1: use technologies such as minor motor vehicle co violations or
Speaker 1: secondary means of enforcement. We want to be able to
Speaker 1: do that so we can make sure we're maximizing everyone's time.
Speaker 1: And so when we look at the eight motor vehicle
Speaker 1: co violations, we're talking about registration and a grace period
Speaker 1: on registration. We already had a thirty day grace period
Speaker 1: on registration in Philadelphia, So we just extended that a
Speaker 1: little bit to be able to also allow people to
Speaker 1: adjust to the fact that most of that stuff was
Speaker 1: done online or pandemic. We look at admission and inspection stickers,
Speaker 1: which again is probably was already in that category. It's
Speaker 1: very difficult to see the admission and inspection stickers on
Speaker 1: a moving vehicle. We're looking at something dangling from the mirror,
Speaker 1: might damage to a bumper, the relocation of your license
Speaker 1: plate as long as it's visible in one tail, like
Speaker 1: being out. So these are the motor vehicle violations that
Speaker 1: we talk about in the midst of the Philadelphia version
Speaker 1: of Driving Equality to put us in a position to
Speaker 1: address some of the issues I discussed earlier. A problem
Speaker 1: that happens is that when cops stop drivers, especially black drivers,
Speaker 1: there's a higher percented chance of something happening, and this
Speaker 1: just keeps cops away from people. Is that really a
Speaker 1: solution to the problem, or do you need to address
Speaker 1: the core problem that causes police to commit violence against citizens.
Speaker 1: Of course, we need to address the core problem. But
Speaker 1: you know, when we first talked about the legislation, I
Speaker 1: think I said that the purpose of the bill is
Speaker 1: to first and foremost acknowledge that there is a problem.
Speaker 1: And I think in far too many spaces and in
Speaker 1: far too many commons stations, you will have people who
Speaker 1: will say that there isn't a problem. You will have
Speaker 1: people that say that we're overcritical as it relates to
Speaker 1: the relationships and the experiences of people of color and
Speaker 1: law enforcement. So, by no means do I see this
Speaker 1: as a solution in the systemic and institutional racism and
Speaker 1: racist practices. But I do see it as a way
Speaker 1: of number one acknowledging that we do have a problem,
Speaker 1: and of course number two saying that we want to
Speaker 1: try to put us in a position to rectify that
Speaker 1: actual problem. Is it the end all, be all solution.
Speaker 1: Absolutely not, I'll be the first one to tell you that.
Speaker 1: But I do think it's a step in the right direction.
Speaker 1: What did it take to pass this legislation? Did you
Speaker 1: encounter any resistance? I mean it started with a collaborative effort.
Speaker 1: I think that was the first step of passing a
Speaker 1: bill like this. It took us over a year to
Speaker 1: craft the legislation, to put together a coalition of people
Speaker 1: of stakeholders, which included the Police Department, the Mayor's team,
Speaker 1: the Public Defender's office, and other stakeholders to be able
Speaker 1: to come up with what we all could agree upon
Speaker 1: as a relates to legislation. So it was very time
Speaker 1: consuming and consists of a lot of work. We had
Speaker 1: to talk to a lot of our legal partners to
Speaker 1: ensure that we were doing it in a way that
Speaker 1: could will stand in challenging court and to make sure
Speaker 1: that the bill couldn't be repealed based on it being
Speaker 1: some type of illegal legislation. So at the end of
Speaker 1: the day, the process was a very tedious one. We
Speaker 1: tried to be as detail oriented as possible. We followed
Speaker 1: the data and talked to a lot of experts and
Speaker 1: put us in a position to be able to pass
Speaker 1: the bill. Pretty soon. We're going to be coming upon
Speaker 1: the one year anniversary since the implementation of the bill
Speaker 1: because we had a collaborative effort. One of the things
Speaker 1: that the police department asked for was time for training,
Speaker 1: and so we gave him ample time for that and
Speaker 1: so overall the past the bill, it was a lot
Speaker 1: of steps, but you know, we also like to try
Speaker 1: to work with other elect officials across the city across
Speaker 1: the country. I'm sorry who looking to replicate the legislation,
Speaker 1: because we understand not just the tedious process that we
Speaker 1: had to go through, but the coalition building that put
Speaker 1: us in a position to be successful, as well as
Speaker 1: some of the other legal matters that within the legislation
Speaker 1: towards ensure that it could will stand a court challenge
Speaker 1: or any type of legal resistance. Our conversation continues after
Speaker 1: the break. How did the Fraternal Order of Police in
Speaker 1: Philadelphia respond to the legislation. I mean, we haven't been
Speaker 1: in dialogue with them about the legislation. They followed a
Speaker 1: lawsuit against the actual bill in court, and so we
Speaker 1: have ongoing legal matters that's actually happening right now as
Speaker 1: it relates to the FOP and their concerns around the legislation.
Speaker 1: But we're optimistic, based on the work that we've done
Speaker 1: and the experts that we work with and the legal
Speaker 1: team that we have, that it'll will stand that challenge.
Speaker 1: The driving equality law has become something of a model,
Speaker 1: a blueprint for other cities. In Memphis, for example, where
Speaker 1: Tyree Nichols died in police custody, the city is now
Speaker 1: looking to replicate it. What would you like to see
Speaker 1: next to address this issue, which is something that we
Speaker 1: see all over the country. We like the idea of
Speaker 1: incentivizing cities all across the country to use technology as
Speaker 1: often as they can to address issues related to minor
Speaker 1: motor vehicle co violations. I think that's the direction that
Speaker 1: we are encouraging governments to go in. There's no reason
Speaker 1: that some of the lessons that we learned during the
Speaker 1: pandemic can be applied to some of the institutional issues
Speaker 1: that people of color experience all across the country. So
Speaker 1: driving equality is just a step first step in the
Speaker 1: direction of hopefully trying to put us in a position
Speaker 1: to assure that when we are having interactions between community
Speaker 1: and colors and law enforcement is not always a negative one.
Speaker 1: We also recognize that within a lot of traffic stops,
Speaker 1: to push the police officer in a dangerous position, especially
Speaker 1: when they're patroling by themselves, And we also recognize that
Speaker 1: it makes us more efficient as a city and as
Speaker 1: government to be able to have our police focus on
Speaker 1: things that are a serious public safety hazard. Minor motor
Speaker 1: vehicle co violations are not a public serious public safety
Speaker 1: hazard when you look at issues around traffic and what
Speaker 1: police do around addressing traffic. We want to pull them
Speaker 1: out of those areas as well too, because overall, we
Speaker 1: want to redefine what it means to police to have
Speaker 1: communities to police, and the relationship between communities of color
Speaker 1: and law enforcement. That's a big part of the direction
Speaker 1: that we want to go and moving forward, and we
Speaker 1: want to see some traction as it relates to improving
Speaker 1: the level of trust. Where do you make of this
Speaker 1: bill in Congress that would remove police from traffic stops?
Speaker 1: First of all, I love the concept. I love the
Speaker 1: idea of the federal government incentivizing local governments to use
Speaker 1: things like technology and to invest in infrastructure to be
Speaker 1: able to be able to address modern motor vehicle co violations.
Speaker 1: You look at things like noise ordinances, You look at
Speaker 1: especially when you talk about like modified vehicles. You look
Speaker 1: at things like something dangling from your mirror. You look
Speaker 1: at some of the minor issues that's in driving equality,
Speaker 1: and I love the idea of incentivizing cities to move
Speaker 1: away from that particular model because you know, I believe
Speaker 1: it's archaic when you look at crime and the issues
Speaker 1: that crime have created all across the country over the
Speaker 1: last you know, you could probably say the last fifty years,
Speaker 1: you know, post nineteen seventy, you know, crime has really
Speaker 1: been driven by issues like poverty, issues like addiction and
Speaker 1: things in that capacity, and over police and neighborhoods will
Speaker 1: not put us in a position to address some of
Speaker 1: these systemic issues that unfortunately often hurt communities of color
Speaker 1: worse than other neighborhoods. And so at the end of
Speaker 1: the day, when I think about the idea and the
Speaker 1: concept of legislation on the federal level incentivizing cities to
Speaker 1: use things like technology and other innovative measures to address
Speaker 1: minor violations, it puts us in a position, I think,
Speaker 1: to move effectively into the next decade, into into the
Speaker 1: future to see what it means to not just address
Speaker 1: this issue of driving while black, but to improve the
Speaker 1: ability for police to for police to do their job
Speaker 1: and communities of color council in a Zaiah Thomas, thanks
Speaker 1: for speaking with me, Thank you for having me. I
Speaker 1: appreciate it. Thanks for listening to us here at The
Speaker 1: Big Take. It's a daily podcast from Bloomberg and iHeartRadio.
Speaker 1: For more shows from my Heart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio, app,
Speaker 1: Apple podcasts or wherever you listen, and we'd love to
Speaker 1: hear from you. Email us questions or comments to Big
Speaker 1: Take at Bloomberg dot net. The supervising producer of The
Speaker 1: Big Take is Vicky Bergolina. Our senior producer and the
Speaker 1: producer of this episode is Katherine Fink. Hildegarcia is our engineer.
Speaker 1: Our original music was composed by Leo Sidrin. I'm West Kasova.
Speaker 1: We'll be back tomorrow with another Big Take.