DAVIS MUST STOP STALLING ON RACIAL PROFILING

FIRST the California Highway Patrol reported that its data showed officers
didn't practice racial profiling. Then, when challenged by civil rights
groups, the CHP admitted it had not included information about who was
subjected to searches. Now the CHP has released information showing that
cars driven by African Americans and Hispanics were searched at
disproportionately high rates. However, the agency was quick to assure us,
that's not because of racial profiling.

Enough already. The CHP data games make it clearer than ever that we need
uniform statewide data collection to determine once and for all whether law
enforcement agencies are stopping motorists and treating them more severely
because of the color of their skin. Gov. Gray Davis needs to stop his
inexplicable resistance to such information gathering and step up to
support legislation that would require it. Is he afraid to find out the truth?

Since racial profiling by law enforcement officers (or "Driving While Black
or Brown") came to public attention, some 70 California law enforcement
agencies have voluntarily collected the data; the CHP was ordered by Davis
to gather the information. Several agencies, including San Diego, San Jose,
Stockton and San Leandro, found that minorities were more likely to be
stopped or searched than whites.

Law enforcement agencies in other states made similar discoveries once they
collected the information. While Gov. Christine Todd Whitman of New Jersey
adamantly denied the state police there practiced racial profiling, once
she saw the data, she had to admit she was wrong. More to the point, she
began to implement policies to make sure the practice is stopped.

It seems so obvious that getting the information is the first step to
getting to the bottom of the problem that frankly we're baffled by Davis'
resistance. Last year he vetoed a bill that would have required the data
collection across the state, and this year he backed a so-called compromise
bill on racial profiling that did not include information gathering. It
would be like doing an investigation without interviewing the witnesses.

Indeed, the CHP data on which motorists were subjected to searches is a red
flag. While Hispanics made up 26.1 percent of the traffic stops and 30.4
percent of the population, they accounted for 42.8 percent of the searches;
African Americans were 7.6 percent of the stops, 6.8 percent of the
population and 9.2 percent of the searches. The fact that the percentage of
Hispanics and African Americans who were searched is higher than the
percentage who were stopped raises the question whether officers were more
likely to search Hispanics and African Americans once they were stopped.

While the voluntary data collection efforts are good, their lack of
uniformity undermines their usefulness. With one agency using one method,
another including certain data, and others doing something else, we end up
comparing apples and oranges and failing to get a clear picture of what is
happening across the state.

Davis' desire to please the law enforcement lobby apparently outweighs his
interest in resolving the problem. The leaders of many law enforcement
agencies actually support the data collection to clear up the issue. If
officers are not practicing racial profiling, then the data will document
it. If they are, or if they are in certain areas and agencies, then the
data will identify the problem and the agencies can begin putting a stop to
the practice.

Let's get the information using uniform methods statewide, use the data one
way or the other to establish sound policing practices and move on to solve
the next problem. What is Davis afraid of?