PLAYING POLITICS AT SCHOOL

The passage of HR 5295 was an expedited affair. On September 19, the
Student and Teacher Safety Act of 2006 went to the floor of the House
of Representatives without a hearing or vote in committee and was
passed by a voice vote of the two dozen or so Representatives in the
chamber at the time. "School officials should have the authority to
handle potentially dangerous situations and take the steps necessary
to intervene when the safety of our children is in jeopardy," said
House majority leader John Boehner, praising Kentucky Republican
Geoff Davis, the bill's author, in a statement released the same day.
But because there was no roll call, there is no way of knowing
whether Boehner or the seventeen Republicans who joined Davis as
co-sponsors actually turned up for the vote.

The legislation would mandate that all school districts adopt
policies empowering searches for weapons and narcotics. Those that
fail to do so would be stripped of funds from the Safe and Drug-Free
Schools and Communities Act of 2002, used by schools for programs to
combat drugs and violence. Supporters say the law is necessary to
keep drugs away from children and to address "the recent trend in
escalating school violence." But critics claim the bill is a
political stunt designed to make Republicans look tough on school
safety and to give Davis a legislative achievement to tout in his
close re-election race against Democratic challenger Ken Lucas. A
broad group of opponents--including

Congressional Democrats, the National Parent Teacher Association, the
American Association of School Administrators, the American Civil
Liberties Union and Students for Sensible Drug Policy--argue the bill
is unnecessary and may jeopardize students' constitutional rights.

On the morning of November 5, 2003, police officers burst into
Stratford High School in Goose Creek, South Carolina, forcing
students to the ground at gunpoint and putting some as young as 14 in
handcuffs as a drug-sniffing dog tore through their book bags. The
raid, initiated by the principal on suspicion that a particular
student was suspected of dealing marijuana in the hallways, went
ahead even though the student was known to be absent from school that
day. No drugs or weapons were found in the sweep of nearly 150
students, of whom more than two-thirds were African-American at a
school where African-Americans make up less than a quarter of the
student body. Caught on school surveillance and police cameras, the
incident provoked a national outcry including a demonstration led by
the Rev. Jesse Jackson.

Civil liberties advocates fear that the Davis bill will encourage
similar tactics. "The intent here is to broaden the powers that
school officials have to search students," says Graham Boyd, director
of the ACLU Drug Law Reform Project. "One of the foundational aspects
of the Fourth Amendment is individualized suspicion--that you have
done wrong, not that wrong has been done.... This legislation is
quite mischievous because it purports to tell school officials that
they can search whole groups of students."

During the floor debate on his bill, Davis denied this charge: "This
act does not issue a blank check to anyone to conduct random,
unfounded or mass searches. It does not change the Fourth Amendment
standards on search and seizure." But Democrats disagree. "We must do
everything possible to keep our schools safe and drug free," says
Ohio Democratic Representative Dennis Kucinich. "But we cannot
suspend the Constitution." (Davis's office did not respond to
requests for comment).

Supporters say the bill provides much-needed clarity. "The
legislation simply clarifies what's already in the case law and gives
a floor to what kind of policies school districts should have," says
Shilpa Reddy, lobbyist for the National Education Association, which
endorsed the bill. Conversely, Steven Crawford, superintendent of
schools for Byng, Oklahoma, believes those behind the legislation are
simply posturing. "We already have policies and requirements at a
state level that are thorough and complete. We don't need the
strong-arming of the federal government on this issue," says
Crawford. "This is just a hot-button topic of the day for them.
School shootings are in the newspapers, so they think 'we'll make 'em
do something'.... But schools already go to great lengths to maintain
safety. Most schools are safer than Wal-Mart."

Other critics go further, claiming that Davis was desperate for a
legislative victory to court voters in his district, where opinion
polls have him locked in a statistical dead-heat with Lucas. "[Davis]
clearly wants a piece of legislation that lets him say that he stands
for school safety," says Mary Kusler, assistant director of
government relations for the American Association of School
Administrators. "This is typical in an election year--we see
legislation passed with fancy titles that isn't substantial policy."

Perhaps just as typically, Democrats and other opponents have charged
Republicans with hypocrisy on school safety. Not only does Davis's
bill put at stake the very money schools use to keep students and
teachers safe, Congressional Republicans also cut those same funds by
20 percent--more than $90 million--in the 2006 fiscal year and are
proposing cutting another $36 million this year. In a bizarre
budgetary twist President Bush is proposing eliminating the funding
for Safe and Drug-Free School Grants altogether in 2007, while
Davis's bill calls for any noncompliant schools to lose this funding
after 2008. So if Bush and his allies get their way, Davis's
legislation would end up threatening school districts with the loss
of nonexistent funds. To date, Davis appears to have made no public
statement opposing Bush's proposal.

The Congressman's mind may be elsewhere, however. Made up largely of
affluent Cincinnati suburbs, his district in Kentucky is considered
the most staunchly Republican in the state. But Davis's controversial
attacks on Democrats, his ties to disgraced Republican Congressmen
and the nationwide impact of the Mark Foley scandal have made the
single-term incumbent one of the most vulnerable Republicans in the House.

In November of last year Davis sparked outrage when he accused
liberals and Democrats of siding with Al Qaeda. Responding to
Congressman John Murtha's call for withdrawal from Iraq, Davis
declared: "[Al Qaeda's leaders] have brought the battlefield to the
halls of Congress. And, frankly, the liberal leadership have put
politics ahead of sound fiscal and national security policy. And what
they have done is cooperated with our enemies and are emboldening our
enemies." Inspired by the ensuing backlash, the national Democratic
Party recruited Lucas--a former three-term incumbent who beat Davis
in 2002 but declined to run in 2004--to take on his successor.

Democrats have also seized on Davis's campaign funds as an election
issue. Aided by appearances from both President Bush and First Lady
Laura Bush, Davis has a significant lead in fundraising, but
contributions to his campaign include a $10,000 donation from the
Americans for a Republican Majority Political Action Committee
(ARMPAC), once led by recently ousted House majority leader Tom
DeLay, who is under indictment in Texas for violation of campaign
finance laws. Davis also received donations from former Republican
Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham, convicted of mail and wire fraud
and conspiracy to commit bribery for taking money and gifts from
defense contractors, and Congressman Bob Ney, convicted of conspiracy
and making false statements in relation to the Jack Abramoff
corruption scandal. Unlike many other Representatives, Davis has
chosen not to give back the money.

Lucas has been quick to make electoral hay of Davis's connections to
corrupt Republicans, as well as the scandal that has erupted over
Republican Congressman Mark Foley's sexually explicit text messages
and e-mails to Congressional pages. He recently called on Davis to
"put politics aside" and join him in demanding House Speaker Dennis
Hastert's resignation over his failure to keep the high-school-aged
pages safe from Foley. Davis has so far declined the invitation. As
he and his colleagues trumpet their achievements on children's safety
on the campaign trail, his bill remains stalled in the Senate
Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. Opponents like
Steven Crawford are hoping that is where it will stay. "It's a waste
of our time and their time," says Crawford. "It won't make schools
safer at all."