More red state Idiocy
 

HIV at center of latest culture war after Tennessee rejects federal funds
The tensions in Tennessee began in the fall, when Republican Gov. Bill Lee voiced disapproval of two HIV grant recipients spotlighted in conservative media — a task force on transgender health issues and Planned Parenthood. The conflict escalated late last week when the state announced that after May 31, it would no longer accept any money from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for testing, prevention and surveillance of HIV.

State officials said they would continue to support HIV testing and prevention but would focus on first responders, victims of human trafficking and mothers and children. In contrast, the federal program prioritizes men who have sex with men and transgender people, particularly in communities of color, who are at greatest risk of HIV, according to federal surveillance data.

“It’s pretty hard not to think that part of the motivation is to restrict funding to groups we don’t like and don’t want to support,” said Wayne Smith, who runs a faith-based HIV prevention program in Knoxville that will lose about $10,000 for
testing each year.

In Texas, religious employers brought a suit arguing they shouldn’t have to pay for HIV-prevention drugs that are mandated by the Affordable Care Act, and in September, a federal judge sided with them, citing the right to religious freedom.


One of those who sued the federal government is a Christian-operated corporation called Braidwood Management, which is owned by Texas Republican megadonor Steven Hotze. Hotze claimed the Affordable Care Act requirement that health plans cover PrEP would make his company, quote, "facilitate and encourage homosexual behavior." And so this federal judge in Texas, Reed O'Connor, sided with Hotze. In his ruling, the judge said that Hotze was able to prove that the PrEP mandate substantially burdens his religious freedoms.

this judge is on the dole

The Texas Attorney General's Office has made a habit of filing lawsuits against the federal government that land in O'Connor's court.

Since 2015, almost half of challenges to the federal government that Texas filed in district courts here landed in O’Connor’s courtroom, attorney general’s office records show.

One of America’s most partisan judges just gave Navy SEALs permission to defy a direct order

yep red state Judges just acting on the Law not how its written ... But by his religious views on the matter ... we see it all over the nation now GODs justifies more discrimination over Justice

how do you know that judge is on the dole? just by saying it?

read the bill of rights wayne. you can’t peoppe to
force that which violates their generally accepted beliefs. you don’t have to like it, that’s the the bill of rights matters. no one has to fight for their rights when everyone agrees with them. the bill of rights only matters if you respect those rights even when you hate the context.

i dont especially like that context either. But the bill of rights matters, even if it’s not convenient for you,,wayne.

I hate what’s said on MSNBC, but they have the right to say it. I hate art that shows the Virgin Mary covered in feces, I hate meetings of the Black Panthers, but i like living in a country where they have the right to do what they believe.

The bill of rights is meaningless, if you’d only grant those rights when it’s convenient for you, when it costs you nothing.

Just read the bill. it’s not hard. they probably made a pop up book version somewhere. You can’t deny the right of someone else to freely exercise their religion as they, not you, see fit. the right doesn’t only exist when you feel
like granting it.

Quite the path they’ve chosen, I wouldn’t want to see them end up like sub-Saharan Africa.
46 men — including a high school football coach and a youth pastor — were arrested during a multi-agency operation targeting sex trafficking in North Texas and 30 church leaders in Tennessee and Georgia were convicted of sex abuse crimes.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

and no democrat or atheist has ever been arrested, ever.

Pete, i hate to break it to you, but our system of due process doesn’t allow you to trash freedom of religion to all of 330 million of us, because 46 people who go to church, got arrested.

Not how it works, and it’s a stupid argument, no clue what or who you were responding to. Did someone claim that everyone who goes to church is perfect?

how do you know that judge is on the dole? just by saying it?

Really Jim now sarcasm alludes you?

Of course you don’t see an issue with 50% of cases get sent to his desk from Religious zealots.

Who see how he rules not by the bill of rights that you quote as if to grant him an excuse. He rulings seem to always involve anti government religious overtones ..

Seem this guy would rule against any contraception agreeing it promotes un married Sex

But these religious nuts who feel anti hiv meds is promoting gay sex
Have no issues paying for others viagra ..

Not sure how a business offering health insurance can list what treatments are acceptable

Jim as expected sees discrimination as a religious right and freedom..

This is the new religion in the Right in America.. don’t like something and then scream religious rights

And some judges and the SJC will agree with them because their allegiance is to god before the nation or its laws
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Not sure how a business offering health insurance can list what treatments are acceptable"

No kidding. Because you only care about the Bill Of Rights, when it's the rights of liberals being discussed. Americans can not be forced to abandon their religious beliefs at work. That's how. The Bill doesn't specify that you have to agree with the context in which someone is asserting those rights.

I'm not saying I agree with the stance those Christians are taking. I just agree the Bill Of Rights gives them that right. If I owned a business that provided health insurance, I'd absolutely want to cover HIV treatment, but not recreational birth control and not gender transition treatments. You want it, you buy it. Leave me out of it.

Poor victim
Nothing to do with it, I don’t care and neither does HIV/AIDS care what religion anyone is.
Being religious doesn’t make you immune to disease or snakebites.
Most of the infected in sub-Sahara Africa aren’t gay or drug users.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yeah Jim, this same judge ruled that the Navy SEALs didn’t have to get the vaccine and banned the Navy from discharging them. That is pure BS because apparently shall not kill. Does it apply?. to Navy SEALs who suddenly feel getting the vaccine was it was against their religion like I said Christians, picking and choosing which religious freedoms they want to use and win total BS. And shockingly the supreme court ruled against the judge like I said, holds 50% of the cases that come out of Texas regarding government and religion

The bill of rights has never been so abused until conservatives used it as it as a weapon I just don’t know why you can’t see that?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's not just one judge. Other judges (Supreme Court I think?) ruled that Hobby Lobby and Little Sisters Of The Poor cannot be forced to violate their religion in terms of what they offer employees in health insurance.

"The bill of rights has never been so abused until conservatives used it as it as a weapon"

Liberals use the Bill Of Rights every single day, while doing things that infuriate conservatives, but they have that right. When MSNBC and CNN claim that I hate everybody, when liberals burn the flag, when artists use public money to hang paintings of Jesus covered in feces in public museums. Those are all things that I find revolting and deeply insulting, but I'd never, ever say that the left doesn't have the right to exercise those rights.

Wayne, it's very easy to grant rights to people who you know will only exercise those rights in ways you agree with. The test of the Bill Of Rights, is whether or not you'd guarantee those rights to those who exercise them in ways that make you sick. I'm fine guaranteeing those rights to those I disagree with. Clearly you are not, because you spend a lot of time whining about it.

If you're OK with limiting those rights to situations you agree with, that means conservatives will do the same thing when they're in charge. You want Donald Trump being able to decide when Freedom of The Press exists and when it doesn't? Or Freedom Of Speech? I'm not OK with that..

Here's the exact wording from the constitution...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

The state doesn't decide what's a legitimate religious belief, we decide that for ourselves. And the state cannot interfere, within reason (no human sacrifices).

And I'm sorry to break it to you, but nowhere in that phrase does it say that freedom of religion only applies as long as you happen to be OK with it.

Liberal snowflakes seem to think they have a constitutional right to never be offended. I'm a conservative catholic living in CT. I'm used to being offended.

Nobody said democracy is supposed to be easy. People who disagree with you on everything, have the same exact rights that you have.

You're saying Christians are hypocrites if they serve in combat?

Theologians have LONG interpreted that commandment as "thou shall not commit murder". Killing someone in self-defense, and also in a just war, has long been considered in keeping with that commandment.

You just make it up as you go along.

Dearest Jim, when was the last time you saw a US flag burnt?

Iam no biblical scholar but I know the Ten Commandments don’t say Thou shall not murder.

And as if you ever went to war . There’s no such thing as a just war it’s all about kill or be killed

Theologians have LONG interpreted that commandment as "thou shall not commit murder". in a just war, has long been considered in keeping with that commandment.

Where did you get that lie from the the theologians from the crusades
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i’m not lying. the catholic church recognizes the principle of just war. Your ignorance, doesn’t make me a liar.

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/n...holic-teaching

Just war, that statement is so open to interpretation, so many hundreds of thousands have died in the worlds holy wars in the name of Christianity. Who determines one particular war or conflict is just?

St. Augustine in the 4th century Yep Jim what a convincing argument
You just proved my point some edict from the crusades

Just another example of religious people wanting to pick and choose when and how they wish to excise their beliefs to justify when convenient

you mis-read it. in july, pope francis said war can be just and there is the right to self defense.


this is too stupid to believe you’re serious

https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2022/07/...t-war-doctrine

We just killed a isis leader in Africa were those forces acting in self defense? We attacked them

Just accept it jim when politicians politicized the vaccine mandate the conservatives and their supporters in their efforts to continue to push their agenda and switch gears to the religious freedom argument which is totally bogus..

I had a friend who’s sons in the Air Force but he’s a trump fan bought into all the vaccine lies . Who insisted he was going to get a religious exemption.. after the military mandated the shot. He’s baptized that the extent of his faith
But he had a choice follow order or get out… he got the shot..

Not sure why conservatives suddenly feel disobeying orders is fashionable in today’s military talk about a woke idea.. what’s next for people in the military no iam not going to attack that enemy position it’s dangerous and I might die says my religion
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

From a sitting Air Force General recently

“Lethality matters most,” he added, according to Task & Purpose, a military publication. “When you can kill your enemy, every part of your life is better. Your food tastes better. Your marriage is stronger.”

And I bet he goes to church on Sundays :btu:

Haven’t you noticed the people callously saying someone “should’ve just complied” are the same ones SCREAMING “DO NOT COMPLY” when it comes to vaccines?!

DO NOT COMPLY when it comes to election results they don’t like?!

Poor victims
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

After watching all the video available, I can’t blame that guy from running. These cops are going to do time.

The police have been given status in the nation in the last 20 years police have always been respected but it seems our conservatives want them to worshiped to be beyond scrutiny.. the same thing has happened to our military from baby killers to people whom were convicted as war criminals pardoned and adopted as a hero by the Right .

The police dress and are equipped as if they were in Iraq . Not with out some justification seeing the Right allows all manner of weapons to be available to be used against them..

But I’ve said this before in Iraq I could not shoot and kill any Iraqi because I thought or I feared for my safety . Or simply because they ran
But if the pointed or fired a weapon it was game on.

But in my own country the police have the power and the mindset that allows them to kill unarmed persons . Because they feared for their life. I get it it’s a dangerous job but I would expect they understood that

But my same principle applies to police if someone points a gun or fires at you or come at you with a blade then it’s game on .

But in today’s polarized landscape
Any police criticism or accountability is considered left wing radicalism

Police training needs 24hrs of mandatory training focused on You Are not above the law.. and here’s why
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

l

lies

police aren’t to be worshipped, everyone in the right calls for training and rooting out the bad apples

what you’re oblivious to as always, is that it’s your side peddling in politically convenient horsesh*t, they they’re all racist and all bad and engaged in a plot to commit genocide against blacks, despite the data being crystal clear that’s not the case. That they need to be defunded.

There are hundreds of thousands of cops. there are some really bad ones who need to be rooted out. most are trying to do a difficult, dangerous, and vital job.

why anyone would ever do it, given what they can expect from the left, is beyond me. Look no further than the history of current liberal kingpin al sharpton.

accurate police criticism is fine. suggesting that they are systemically racist, is typical liberal crap. in most urban areas, the police is the one single urban institution that works the way it’s supposed to.

it’s all a diversion, a distraction, a smokescreen.anything to avoid an honest conversation about what’s going on in the cities

wayne, you’re a prison guard, and you said the most hateful peoppe you e ever
met are the ones who go to church. worse than the prisoners yiu guard.

you’re not to be taken seriously here. .

here’s the deal. We need most cops to be where most violent crime happens. That’s poor urban areas. because that’s where most cops are, and where most violence takes place, it’s where most tragedies will inevitably occur. it’s not about race, it’s about socioeconomics.

to the left, all they want to talk about is race, because even they know they look stupid talking about anything else.

Why is the truth always seen as lies by conservatives ?




30 year in corrections aka Law enforcement .. even inside prisons we deal with the same issues do you think violent criminals stop being violent after they go to Jail ? .. we have cameras everywhere but maybe were trained differently... but we still have a culture to overcome . And staff who stepped outside the line sure they get removed . but the image still sticks to the good people who are left to carry on

so everyone who voted against a bill you liked, is in favor of police brutality.

As always, zero facts, zero honesty, zero common sense. just more “conservatives are all evil, and all the world’s evil exists on the right” simpleton nonsense.

you think something is true because it comes from the left.. that’s not evidence of anything.

so everyone who voted against a bill you liked, is in favor of police brutality.

well if you try to pass bills that Republicans introduced that would encourage — not force — police departments to end the use of violent tactics like chokeholds and no-knock raids. that sounds about right .

Even in my prison we couldn't use choke holds for decades :btu:

WOW Jim do ever do any research.

The House passed the George Floyd Justice In Policing Act on Wednesday night with just one Republican vote. And that one Republican now says it was an accident.

no knock raids have an obvious place. there are times where it’s better for police to not have to announce that they’re on scene. Some people might react negatively to that. I’m sorry if that’s going too fast for you.

biden said this week that police shouldn’t shoot to kill. he said they should “shoot to stop”. this is the president,. liberals can’t understand that reality trumps utopia. we should ask cops to shoot guns out of peoples hands. super. how come
no one ever thought of that, it’s so simple!!

when you elect an alzheimer’s patient, this is what you get.

when you post that they voted against it, without a syllable as to why, it’s because you don’t know why. you’re just regurgitating talking points. Tell me why they said they oppose the bill.

Here’s a list of effective change since the Rodney King beating:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ask any police department human resources officer, they’ll
disagree. there’s a lot more sensitivity training , etc. maybe that stuff is a waste.

I saw a CNN report tonight that said some of the memphis cops on that video, were hired after the city lowered the hiring requirements in an attempt to increase diversity. i’m sure that diversity comes as a great comfort to the victims family.

diversity really is overrated in some professions. Quality and competence is a lot more important, isnt it?

not a lot of improvements in gun laws after sandy hook. because both sides dig in amd refuse to compromise. both sides elect too many jerks.

One of the facts seared into my head is that when Derek Chauvin was convicted for murdering George Floyd, he was only the 7th cop to be convicted of murder since 2005, out of the 15,000 police killings in those 16 years.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

because most deaths are justified, and the ones that aren’t self defense are mostly good faith mistakes, which is t murder. . i’m sure there were murders that went unpunished, but very few

do you ever consider the other point of view? the cop, who didn’t ask to be put into a life or death situation where they have to make a decision in a fraction of a second. There will be tragedies. no way to avoid it. we need to mimimize it, but there’s a reality to accept.

and for sure, it’s not always about race.

You’re wrong

“One of the facts seared into my head is that when Derek Chauvin was convicted for murdering George Floyd, he was only the 7th cop to be convicted of murder since 2005, out of the 15,000 police killings in those 16 years.”

It’s a statistical impossibility the other 14,993 of those were without police fault. Normal human error for difficult tasks is on the order of 50%. A typist with near perfect scores still has a 1% error rate. 1% of 15,000 is 150. We’re easily a few short.

As far as dangerous jobs, Police officers are not even in the top twenty for fatal otj incidents.

Wonder why cops are taught to yell “stop resisting” and “drop your weapon” after firing a gun, because bystanders will remember they said it and their memory will automatically reverse the order of the events to make it make sense. Their testimony will support cops, because of this.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i didn’t say “without police fault”. in fact, i said no doubt some
murders were overlooked. n

what’s wrong with you? if i say “some
murders went unpunished”, how can you accuse me of saying the police are never wrong?

you’re either unbelievably stupid, or unbelievably dishonest. my money is on dishonest. there’s nothing you won’t say, nothing you won’t accuse me of saying.

You’re a pathological liar, you can’t stop. you’re like trump.

Poor victim, accusing me of saying that you said the police are never wrong, you're always kinda sorta saying things like "Because most" it's baloney and means nothing.

As I said "It’s a statistical impossibility the other 14,993 of those were without police fault. Normal human error for difficult tasks is on the order of 50%. A typist with near perfect scores still has a 1% error rate. 1% of 15,000 is 150. We’re easily a few short."

There's been no change in police behavior, if anything it's gotten worse.
Police have gotten more militant and look more like an army than ever.

you’re a lunatic.


on this issue, the data is crystal crystal clear. probably 700,000 cops, god knows how many millions and millions of interactions between them and citizens in a year. and a dozen or so times out of those millions, there’s a tragedy. that’s not systemic anything. it’s barely a rounding error.

but hey, democrats can either distort that, or talk about slaughtering the unborn, or any it’s a great idea for men and little girls to share bathrooms. so i get why they want to talk about their warped, distorted take on this issue.

i’m reacting to what the data actually is. you’re reacting to what you wish the data was.

Jim
Show the data then, it only exists in your imagination.

No government agency even started collecting that information till 2019 and what has been collected “does not assess or report whether officers followed their department’s policy or acted lawfully.”

National Use-of-Force Data Collection
The FBI created the National Use of Force Data Collection in 2015, in partnership with law enforcement agencies, to provide nationwide statistics on law enforcement use-of-force incidents.

The FBI began collecting this data from law enforcement agencies on January 1, 2019. The most recent data is available on the FBI’s Crime Data Explorer website.

The data collection Includes:

National-level statistics on law enforcement use-of-force incidents
Basic information on the circumstances, subjects, and officers involved
The National Use-of-Force Data Collection offers big-picture insights, rather than information on specific incidents. The collection does not assess or report whether officers followed their department’s policy or acted lawfully.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

pete, here the washington post says 14 unarmed
blacks were killed by police in all of 2019.

spin that into an epidemic. good luck. you got any data to suggest there’s an actual epidemic of racist assassinations at the hands of white cops? or are you lying as usual?

https://www.manhattan-institute.org/...race-injustice

You’re the only one making this a racist cop issue
That’s not the Washington Post, it’s the Manhattan Institute, a right-leaning think tank that’s been criticized numerous times for its sloppy self serving reports.

Show the data “or else we know you’re lying”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

you. ritocozed me for saying police deserve no criticism, which i never came close to saying. You’re saying i’m the only one making this a racist cop issue? the left doesn’t have a field day making this a racist cop issue time after time? really?

It must be exhausting/frustrating when the data so often spits in the face of the narrative you’re enslaved by.

Jordan, R-Ohio, pointed to the "disparagement" of law enforcement overstressing police forces across America.

"We're not getting enough good people applying because of the disparagement on police officers," Jordan told NBC's "Meet the Press." Gym a lying seditious scumbag who should be on trial like the foot soldiers already charged and convicted


police are the victims FYI most people don’t want to be cop because the hours and shift work blows and the pays poor unless you’re in a big city or a state trooper in the NE
See article below


https://www.statista.com/statistics/...olice-by-race/

Statistics don’t lie

Sadly, the trend of fatal police shootings in the United States seems to only be increasing, with a total 1,060 civilians having been shot, 220 of whom were Black, as of December 20, 2022. In 2021, there were 1,055 fatal police shootings, and in 2020 there were 1,020 fatal shootings. Additionally, the rate of fatal police shootings among Black Americans was much higher than that for any other ethnicity, standing at 5.9 fatal shootings per million of the population per year between 2015 and December 2022.

now here comes what’s called 13/50 argument

The “13/50” argument is an overused and under-analyzed conservative talking point, one that unfortunately aids in perpetuating lies about the black community and in casting an unfounded presumption of guilt onto black people. The argument proposes that while black people make up only 13 percent of the population of the United States, we commit 50 percent of all known crime. Occasionally, the 50 percent statistic will vary, sometimes only referring to murder or more broadly to violent crime. Nonetheless, because this argument lacks truly concrete evidence

I posted the entire article because Gym Jordan lies as easily as he breathes

Question for Jim are you against police unions. Seeing your an anti union guy?

A letter to the American public: 3 common misconceptions about pay and rural policing Wanting equitable wages for rural cops is not about greed or ingratitude, it’s just economics

Every news cycle brings competing headlines: should we defund cops, or pay them more to halt the exodus of experienced officers? While big papers cover big cities, I’m here to remind the reader that rural police officers and police agencies aren’t exempt from the influence of inflation and market pressures. The same financial pressures that translate into problems with retention make an already-difficult field an even harder sell for recruiting.

In that case, what do West Virginia, Oklahoma, Florida, South Carolina, Arkansas and Georgia have in common? They all have bills pending to increase pay for (mostly state) law enforcement officers. While some of the raises are substantial, the effects on officer salary would be modest, partly because starting pay is so low now, and partly because it’s been a long time since the last pay boost. In Oklahoma, it would be the first raise troopers have seen in seven years.

Proposed pay increases for state troopers – many of whom live and patrol in relatively remote locations – are a concern for local agencies, which lose seasoned officers when nearby departments pay higher salaries. In response, a group of Arizona legislators drafted a bill that stipulates starting pay for deputy sheriffs cannot be more than 5% below the average salaries of the two top-paying law enforcement agencies in the county. Whether it passes or not, that lawmakers saw a need for such a bill raises a question: what assumptions are standing in the way of paying officers fairly (enough to keep them loyal and working hard) no matter where they work?

Since I write about small, rural and remote agencies, let’s answer that by addressing three common misconceptions about pay and rural policing.

1. POLICE WORK IS A CALLING SO COPS WHO WORRY ABOUT PAY ARE IN IT FOR THE WRONG REASONS

It may be a calling, but most cops are not volunteers with lucrative day jobs. Having bills to pay and families to support does not negate a sense of mission, or mean that officers who want decent compensation are greedy. It means they’re normal humans, with a sense of responsibility for their families and personal obligations, as well as their communities.

Wanting to be able to participate in recreation is healthy and helps to manage stress, but even camping costs money. Wanting to be able to pay off debts, build up savings and provide for a child’s education is responsible, not mercenary. Wanting to rent or buy a house in a safe neighborhood is sensible, not pretentious.

Problems created by extremely low pay in law enforcement came under much-deserved scrutiny after the investigations in Ferguson, Missouri in 2014, but the problems didn’t go away. Simplistic search results of national averages for police pay camouflage the very low pay factoring into a mean of about $60,000 a year. There are still plenty of places – hundreds, if not thousands of agencies – where officers are paid in the low 30s each year.

2. IT COSTS LESS TO LIVE IN RURAL AREAS, SO LOW PAY IS FINE

This one is simple: in a lot of rural places, it’s really expensive to live. Rural and remote policing takes place in and near tourist destinations like national parks, coastlines and ski resorts. Rural cops work in vast ranchlands, mountains and deserts that have become trendy rich-people playgrounds, driving up prices for buyers and renters. In many western states, where distances are huge and geography is hostile, there simply may not be housing as urban dwellers know it, affordable or otherwise. Rising rents and lack of availability force officers into commutes that devour ever-larger shares of their household budgets.

[RELATED: When housing costs hinder hiring]

In one example, Park County, Colorado covers more than 2,000 square miles, with only about 18,000 residents. The sheriff needs 18 deputies; he has eight. A recent pay hike increased deputy starting pay to $48,000 per year but the average house in Park County costs close to $600,000, and there is nearly no multi-family housing. Chiefs and sheriffs in Colorado and Idaho are cutting overnight patrols, launching fundraisers for basic equipment like ballistic vests, and going to war with their county or city administrations over inadequate budgets. Those constraints overflow into lagging pay for officers, with few adjustments for cost of living, let alone raises.

Small increases are promptly consumed by higher employee costs for healthcare coverage and retirement contributions. Smaller employee pools and fewer providers drive up insurance premiums, keeping officers from ever seeing an actual increase on the pay stub. The more remote the place, the more expensive are groceries, car repairs, gas prices and medical care. Smaller towns also make it harder to find jobs for spouses and to find child care when the jobs are available.

3. THE BENEFITS MAKE UP FOR THE PAY, THOUGH

While that was probably true once, it’s not anymore.

Until the past 30 years, law enforcement was considered a stable, if not high-dollar career path with a brass ring at the end in the form of a modest but dignified retirement. Healthcare was a given. Now healthcare as a benefit still technically exists, but the costs of premiums fall more and more on the officer rather than the employer. Once upon a time, healthcare benefits that covered the officer and dependents were a given; now it is common for only the employee to be covered. Coverage for dependents is “available” with the premium deducted from payroll, sometimes subsidized by the agency, but often at full price. When that is the case, dependents may be barred from shopping on the ACA market for more affordable options because, technically, they already “have insurance available.”

And retirements? Those still exist, but they’re not the Golden Parachute the public thinks they are. Even in a solid defined-benefit system, they pay only a percentage of base pay; the lower the base pay, the lower will be the pension, and many law enforcement officers are not eligible to participate in Social Security.

Some states are experimenting with hybrid or defined-contribution (401K style) retirement plans as cost-cutting measures, and the change is negatively affecting retention. As recruiting lags and seasoned officers leave, taking institutional knowledge with them, Alaska and Kentucky are reworking their retirement plans. What they lose outweighs the savings. Likewise, Utah cut its retirement percentage to a meager 35% of base pay after 25 years, instead of the previous 50% at 20 years. The state’s first responder agencies have paid the price in turnover, as burned-out and disappointed workers left for other states or other fields. Like Kentucky and Alaska, Utah’s legislators are backtracking, hoping to stem the hemorrhage.

IT’S NOT GREED OR INGRATITUDE, IT’S JUST ECONOMICS

Law enforcement as a profession differs from urban to rural areas only in scale; in all settings, the job has become more complex. Training and education requirements are higher, and there are increasingly fraught interactions with the public at very high legal and social stakes. It’s no longer a career field where a high school graduate can learn on the job and make a solid middle-class living.

Instead, we’re getting a real-time economics lesson in compensating wage differentials: jobs that are unpleasant, that require higher skill levels, or that are dangerous, require higher levels of pay to attract enough people to do the jobs. It really is that simple. Officers in lower-paying localities, with marginal benefits and variable leadership, can read headlines announcing Target’s new starting pay and wonder if they are making a wise choice. When Walmart raises starting pay for truck drivers to $110,000 per year, it’s easy to see how a job requiring a gun, a Kevlar vest and the possibility of getting prosecuted for a mistake might seem less attractive than it used to be. There may not be Target stores in the country, but truck drivers can live there if they want to.

Market pressures are squeezing current officers and applicants alike. The need to adjust pay scales arises from “a failure of consideration” – in other words, what was once an acceptable level of compensation has so decreased in value that officers simply are no longer willing to do the work for the same rate of pay. In fact, they can’t, and they’re voting with their feet.