Ep. 20 - The Debt Ceiling fight, Cleveland's controversial "police reform" bill, the #FJB trend

The Debt Ceiling fight, Cleveland's controversial "police reform" bill, the #FJB trend

Episode Transcript

(00:00):
This is the FCB Radio Network,Come of the best personalities and we're real
tuck lists funline at FCB Radio dotCom FCP. This is now not another
political podcast. They can't take itno more. We've been silent for to
on the FCB Radio Network and weare back episode twenty nine of the political

(00:26):
podcasts. You are in the napas always. Follow us on Twitter at
keap napp Cast and our updated Facebookpage, The Knapcast. Is that right?
Is that right? Uh? Heart? Is that? Is that?
Is that what you've been posting allthe all the great memes lately? Yeah?
Man, I think the nap theKnapcast, Yeah, on Facebook,

(00:48):
and please check us out there.Our shows are going to get posted every
week there as well. We gottabe careful Facebook jail, serious man,
man, baself and Facebook jail lastweek where you know what. We gotta
be real careful on Mark Zuckerberg's Facebookbecause that might go down at any minute.
They got whistle blowers and all typesof problem going on over there.
And the funny the whistle blower happenedone day. The next day the whole

(01:11):
thing go down. No, itain't funny, it's exactly how she meant
it. She was playing. Theythought she wasn't gonna do it right right
right? No, But that that'sreally telling to me. Man. You
know, um that they were doingsomething because they had to take the whole
thing down and reset. Somebody caughtthem robbing the bank. I don't know.
We're gonna screw, We're gonna scruball this, get all the fingerprints,

(01:33):
all the DNA evidence, and thenopening back up to the public.
Yes, yes, yes, Andas always, I'm your host, Colin
Jackson here with my co host,the new Official Dad and his first week
of infancy with his daughter. Bothdaughter and mother are doing well. Hartpaint
getting too much sleep? I heard, though, No, because my daughter's
a vampires. Why my daughter isnocturnal? She uh, she sleeps all

(01:59):
day and then stays up all night. So that's that's what I got to
find out this week. So thatwas that was That was fine, That
was great to know. That's what'sup, man, that's what's up.
So Segment one, episode twenty nineof The Political Podcast. You're gonna get
right into it, y'all. Uh, the debt ceiling. Man, I
think this was a very interesting weekfor Americans to understand that America is just

(02:22):
like your household, the same wayyou have credit cards and every other month
they send you a credit card inthe mail and ask you to extend your
limit, get some more money out. It's the same way our country works
in our checks and ballast system.Congress has to give a check off on
all the spending, as much aswe may think of it. The president

(02:43):
is not allowed to just recklessly spendmoney the way he wants to. Thank
God for Congress. Currently, thedebt ceiling is being argued about, I
would say, or at this pointhas been extended or upped for the first
time since twenty twenty twenty one earlierin July. So basically what's going on

(03:07):
here is the debt ceiling is setat twenty three twenty six trillion dollars.
And now as we come into anotherpoint in America, another point in the
Biden administration, as the administration rollsout is three point five I'll say it
again, three point five trillion dollarsspending bill. They are going back to

(03:28):
their credit card company and saying,hey, we need more money. Interestingly,
enough with this ask. Because ofthe way our elected officials are set
up where the Senate is fifty fiftysplit and Democrats control of the House.
Democrats do not necessarily need Republicans tovote to raise that debt ceiling. I'll

(03:50):
say it again, Democrats do notnecessarily need Republicans to raise the debt ceiling.
So at that point, I'll kindof stop and as hard. You
know, how do you feel aboutAmerica acting the same way we all have
to act with our personal finance.Do you think that's a good thing.
Do you think that's a bad thing. It's something that most Americans don't really

(04:13):
think about. Man, nobody cares. Nobody in the public cares until it
affects they check, right, youhave to say something like, yeah,
you know, if they don't raisethe death selling, they're not gonna send
out Social Security checks. What waita second, wait, wait, wait,
let's find out what's going on.You know, if you have a
government job, so you're you're alittle bit more aware if it affects you
directly. But the average American thatdoesn't have their income directly tied to the

(04:36):
government doesn't even realize what the deathselling really means. And to be honest,
it's just them voting to realize they'revoting to the side if they want
to raise their credit limit on adebt, they never plan on paying back
anyway, So you don't even planon paying this debt back. But you're
just like, let me see ifI really want to take out an extra
credit line over here to give me. Give see if I wanted an extrav

(05:00):
he's a credit line, knowing I'mnot gonna pay back my master card anymore.
And you know what's interesting about thatis is that that I think that
the legislators that are voting on thesebills in a way know that that there's
no plan. You know, thistrillion dollars isn't gonna get paid, This
multiple trillion dolarge isn't gonna get paidin my lifetime. So I think some

(05:20):
legislators are very willy nilly. Uh, that's a bad adjitive, but that's
what But that's what our current administration. Everything they're doing, they can't really
think this is going to affect theirlifetime. Now, you know, all
of them have to know. Butthe problem is is that their lifetime is
completely their lives. They're speaking onbehalf of general population and deciding on money

(05:46):
that is never going to affect them. Like Nancy Pelosi is worth like one
hundred and twenty million dollars, soit doesn't matter to her. I mean
it matters, but it matters inthe sense of as a person her voting
on the spending and raising the debtceiling. She's really just basically saying,
Okay, why are we raising thedeath celler for what? And what are

(06:06):
we gonna spend it on. Well, Joe is like, that money's already
spent. That's why we need toraise it, because the money's already gone.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, Andthat that's a very good point.
And I think we'll bring it backdown to an individuals standpoint. When you
are getting a new credit card,you don't necessarily have to spend on it.

(06:29):
You can use that the payoff otherdebt. So people are or how
it's being presented is that the infrastructurebill is directly connected to the debt ceiling
being raised. That is not completelytrue, but the indirect effect is,
you know, if I get anew Amex next week, now more likely

(06:50):
to spend more money. Even ifI was going to spend some money already.
Now, if I get a newAmex, I'm definitely gonna spend that
So that is where most Americans,or a certain presenter of Americans come to
a bit of worrisome, worrisome andsaying that, well, I can't do
that with my personal finances. Idon't particularly like if some election officials were

(07:13):
to do the same thing. Iwant to get into the political edge of
this. Oh, real quick,hard, I know you know this.
The original plans of Joe Biden's administrationwas to spend eleven trillion dollars on programming.
That number came down to six andwhether that's the American Rescue Planned,
the American Job Plan, Infrastructure Plan, all those have kind of merged together.

(07:36):
But the plan was always to spendmoney. I just want to make
that real clear. The plan wasnever to gain any more money. It
was always to spend money. Sowith that being said, if your plan
is to spend money, you haveto take ownership of that. And as
we said earlier in the segment,Democrats had the vote in both houses to

(07:56):
spend that money. Now, whathas been happening in the last two weeks
leading up to this bill actually beingsigned with that Democrats wanted to shirk that
responsibility. They wanted to make itseem like well, I need a Republican
to vote on this, when thereality of it is they did not,
And as we always talking about,this is all about politics, is all

(08:18):
about votes. The reason they didnot want to do that is because if
they are the only party pushing forthis new spending or three point five trillion
dollars whatever Joe wants to spend aday, and also pushing for the debt
ceiling to be raised, then theyown that issue hard. What does that
say to you when someone's trying todo something so like Democrats wanted to spend

(08:41):
more money, raise the debt ceiling, but they don't want to completely take
ownership of it. What does thatsay to you as far as what they're
trying to do and how they thinkthat's really going to impact the country.
Well, they're not only they're notreally taking ownership, but they're turning around
and it's more distraction. So it'slike, we want to raise the debt

(09:03):
ceiling, but we're really arguing overwhat are we going to spend that new
money on. Like so so it'slike in the sense of it's not our
fault if the money gets spent incorrectly. The money that's already been spent.
Is not our fault that they've messedit up. Now what are you gonna
spend the new money on? Andthat's that's true. And I'll just say
that they keep blaming and this isthis is the other thing with Joe and

(09:26):
the president. You know this isyour boat. Now. You can't keep
saying you can't keep saying the debt, all the debt is George Bush's fault
or president. But the thing aboutit is how to spend more? How
can you blame them when your wholecamp, by your whole presidency, to
your point earlier, was to spendmoney. So you're saying we're in debt

(09:48):
because they spend money. But theway we're gonna get out of that is
to keep spending money that don't evenmake that don't even make no sense.
How can like what like where?Where is the logic in that? And
the words of Judge mathis that soundslike a crackhead move right. There's money,
so I can get out of debt, but since I can't. And
the and the crazy part is that'sthat's how a lot of that's how they

(10:11):
tell you to get out of financialdebt. As the regular person, if
you're if you're in debt at twentythousand, they tell you to stop spending
money. So if I guess,if you get in debt, you know
twenty thirty trillion, the it worksthe opposite way, and now you just
spend money to get out of debt, because that is madness, you know.
I I don't know, man Um. Look, I don't want to

(10:37):
see Social Security stop for people.I think social Security is a program that's
needed. I think there needs tobe adjustment Mason system. I think that
the uh expenditures we do towards socialwelfare are important as a safety net,
not as necessarily a crutch. Butat the same time, I think our
government needs to get to the pointwhere they're being honest with the American people

(11:00):
about what they're spending and what it'sgoing to be the real impact of it.
Right, Well, here's my questionto you real quick, and not
to cut you up, but howcan they be on this when it really
is off the backs of the Americanpeople? So we can't really tell you
how the system works. Like,mind you, social Security really probably shouldn't
even be tied to a lot ofthis. It shouldn't. Social Security may

(11:22):
should be its own separate health isright, So you know, I mean,
so a lot of things are intertwinedthat shouldn't be and they're not never
gonna tell American people the truth fromwhy and wish it is because it normally
boils down the money and who's gettingpaid and where it's coming from. Yeah.
No, no, And you're rightthe concepts. I mean, we

(11:43):
talked about it before a trillion dollars. Most people can't recognize what a trillion
dollars is. What they can recognizethis on my own kitchen table. I
have to decide where I'm gonna signup for this next credit card. I
gotta make these credit card the otherday just because I want to go buy
something and they offered it to me. But personally hard, I don't like
signing up for credit cards. It'salmost I feel like that I'm just setting

(12:05):
myself up for failure. At thesame time, though, I think the
American government as it's constructed right nowagain has to be honest with the American
citizens about what the long term costof increasing the debt ceiling, increased spending
on these pet projects of Democrats,and be less focused on the political impact

(12:28):
of telling people the truth. Ithink that's what I really saw from this
whole process, because at the endof the day, the only reason Democrats
wanted Republicans to vote on this billwas so they don't own it, so
that when the elections come up nexttime, no one could write a campaign
as saying X Democrats spent show granddaughter'spiggy bank allignance before she even got it,

(12:50):
and and and and and That's whereI think politics and economics are very
important, and understanding how government worksvery important, because you can lie to
me if I don't understand those things, you can make me feel away and
just say, oh, Republicans arebad, people who don't want to spend
this money are bad, when reallythere is that legitimate reason for why we

(13:13):
have to be cautious about what we'respending money on and where our debt is
as a country. No, Iagree, I agree, and that but
again we're talking about votes. Thenthat that that that can cause you votes.
You have to you have you haveto be willing to be completely transparent
with the voter and let them makethat decision. And as as we see

(13:35):
politicians and like that, they're notjust going to give you all the information
and let you decide for a showwe need to put that we didn't paint
this narrative, like you said,timing. The timing is if I paint
this, if I get this offnow, then I can definitely you know
you you you won't be able touse it against me when I'm really worried
about it. So that's the Imean, it's noble of you to ask
for that type of transparency from yourlocal politicians, but I don't I don't

(13:58):
really think that that's how to systemis designed for us. So as as
we Previleys stated the debt ceiling willbe raised. I'm sorry the infrastructure bill
is going through as in the nearfuture here, but I think it's just
important for Americans to seek out thattransparency from politicians, look for what the

(14:22):
real impact of it is. Andat the end of the day, you
know, America is all of ourcollective houses. We are under the same
rule as you are on your individualstances, on your individual position as an
individual country. And as we lookat the politicians and what they're telling us

(14:43):
about what we need to do andwhat we need to spend money on,
think about it. If this isyour kitchen table and you know, vote
like it. If you see someonespending more money than you have at your
kitchen table, you probably shouldn't votefor them next time. And with that
will end Segment one, Episode twenty. Not another political podcast. You're in
the NAP, not another political podcast. This is the NAP. Segment two,

(15:16):
not in the political podcast, Episodetwenty. The following interview we will
record will be with someone who's onthe other side of a political discussion with
us. But we want you tohave this conversation for the preservance of a
public form and civility. NA absolutely, and but I do want to say

(15:37):
this one thing though. Whenever wehave guests on whoever they may be,
the thoughts and opinions expressed by thoseguests are there's there's a low and do
not reflect the show because we arenot trying to get canceled. In fact,
we need you to go to yourbet you're streaming podcast platform and click

(16:00):
on the NAP give us five stars. If you give us four stars,
I'm definitely gonna think you heying,So do that. And again, the
thoughts and opinions expressed by whoever guestswe have are there's and there's a lot
so with that, Segment two isgoing to be about ballot initiative Issue twenty

(16:21):
four, that is a local policereform issue that is on the ballot in
Cleveland, Ohio. And we arevery, very very blessed to have the
good sister miss Garrett, miss alot of Garrett, the activists on the
ground and Cleveland on many issues,but particularly on Issue twenty four. A
lot of how they're going, I'mwell, I'm well, how are he
is? I'm good? Thank youfor being here. We really appreciate it.

(16:44):
And with that, you know what, we kind of want to get
into it, and rather than megiving the initial explanation, I'll open it
up to eat you a lot ofwhat is exactly Issue twenty four that's going
to be on the ballot for Clevelandvoters in its upcoming election. So issue
for in and it's a charter amendment. It's a piece of legislation that we

(17:06):
want to get enacted that will makethe city the Cleveland Community Police Commission permanent,
that will give more civilian oversight topolice misconduct, and then will also
allocate a very very small portion zeropoint five percent and police budget to issues
that directly impact our community as faras trauma, informed care, more people

(17:33):
that are involved in helping with issuesrelating to violence and mental health and things
like that. It is a policereform bill. The mayor council still have
very much power. I always haveto say that because if they do not
say that when they're explaining this.This initiative was pushed by the families,
about three families who are mostly impacted, who have been directly impacted, who've

(17:56):
been fighting for this for almost fifteento twenty years. Now, after Cleveland
got a consent decree, we're underour second constent decree. The consid decree
is said to be removed. Wewere sanctioned under a second constent decree after
the case of Tunisia Anderson to ManyWressell when they were gunned down unfortunately one

(18:18):
hundred forty seven shots, right,one hundred and forty seven shots and I'm
actually Marissa Alexander, not Tunisia.That was another police shooting. My apologies.
We're gunned down with one hundred andthirty seven shots. So after that,
Federates they came in, they saidall of these things about like hey,
Cleveland police got to change. Oneof them is if they put this
community Police Commission in place. Thatcommission is set to leave, and so

(18:41):
what the families and what many residentsafter this came together. They garnered so
many petitions, so many signatures ona petition to get this on a ballot.
It's on the November election ballot twentyfour is all the way on the
back. So remember it turned overyour ballots to read it. But that's
basically what this is. It's policefor form and it's about getting citizens engage

(19:04):
in democracy and really holding police accountable. So I just got a quick question,
Yeah you go first heart. Okay, No, So um, I'm
again because we spoke prior and I'mnot as familiar with this. What are
some of the matrix or is theirdata that supports the kind of the positive
results that the commission has been gettingas far as to justify it or or

(19:29):
to the voter to kind of persuade. Yeah, So the thing is this
balladiship is going to expand the powerthat already happens with the Police Commission.
So if you go on the website, you read a lot of finding.
So there is like the actual commissionersalready in place. They have their own
website. If you read about CivilianRevieword. They have their own website and
it talks about like what they've beenable to accomplish, but there's also has

(19:53):
been some limitations to what they havebeen able to accomplish due to them not
having as much power. So oftentimesthe Pelmission can make recommendations. The Civilian
Review Board when they're reviewing cases,they're at the mercy of the Safety Director
and the Chief of Police in orderto even get what they need from the
Office of Professional Standards to really reviewthese cases, and everything is always funnel

(20:17):
back up to those two and soeverything just come as these are recommendation,
these are our fine days, butno actual disciplinary action is actually set in
stone by the people. It isalways set in stone by police chief,
by those who are still empowered bythe police. So this is saying,
hey, when these recommendations come down, when these people are saying on the

(20:37):
view board that we need investigation,we need public records requests, you have
to follow that. So and Alana, I'll jump in here. So you
know, a Galla pole came out. I think this was last year talking
about and this sudden we say onthe podcast all time we talk about policing
is that, you know, afterAmerica's particular, because we are impacted in

(21:02):
a different way. Uh. Youknow, we do want police in our
community, and the thing about itis that we want good policing. And
basically what we kind of say isthat we want police in our community,
but we don't want to be gettingbeat up and and and unjustly targeted by
those police officers. So in asense, you know, when I first
heard about the bill, I waslike, Okay, it's like a school

(21:25):
board for a police um. Andwhat you're kind of saying is that now
it's going to be like a kindof a more uh school board, more
teeth, and that you know,even when you read something the language in
the bill, there's going to betermination that can be done by this body.
Uh. And some of that powerthat you're talking about is going to
be I don't want to say takenaway, but moved closer to the community

(21:52):
and further away from police officers,like maybe the chief. UM My question
to you is, you know,do you think that's going to be something
positive for the community And what's thatgoing to do as far as us keeping
police in our community that actually wantto participate in that type of justice or
not justice, but that that typeof arbitration system where the community that can

(22:15):
actually fire police officers. I thinkthat it is definitely one going to boost
morale. I think it's going toimprove trust, and I think ultimately it's
going to be a way of holdingpolice accountable and the chief of police and
the mayor they still have power.Where we're really talking about those issues of

(22:36):
misconduct. It is those issues ofwhen we know that there's bad policing that
takes place. And I go furtherto say that oftentimes black people won't say
they want policing in our community becausewe haven't seen any other structure that is
a way to decrease violence in ourcommunity due to we don't invest in other
community programs. And so this isan opportunity unity for citizens to get involved

(23:00):
to say hey, and it's notjust firing, it's looking at Okay,
what is the issues that people aresaying that we have with this officer?
How many cases and reports of incidentsthat people have had on this particular officer.
Okay, this is what we find, this is what we believe.
How can we work together to makesure that this officer is held accountable.

(23:22):
This is what we believe this hasto be passed, like it is a
way for a smart government, forpeople to have direct input on the disciplinary
access of these police, and alsosaying, hey, we acknowledge crime as
a problem, let's put some moneyover here to help with that problem.
And you bring up money real quick, carp, I just want to throw

(23:42):
this one in here. You bringup money because you talked about it being
point five of the budget, andthis goes to the whole defund the police
conversation, which can be polarizing,and you know, it isn't usually the
best thing to put on the ballotwhen you're trying to get an initiative pass.

(24:03):
But I just want to be clearwith listeners right now, the budget
in Cleveland is somewhere around two hundredmillion dollars for a police officer, which
you mean that this body would thenbe in charge of about two point two
million dollars? Can you tell meor explain to people, you know,
saying point five is one thing wetalked about this earlier in the episode.

(24:26):
People don't really have a good conceptof how much money that really is,
so how exactly it's two point twomillion dollars of taxpayer money worth this because
everybody on this thirty people commission isgoing to get paid. So how does
that work? So the pay isa small cycling like that isn't even had,

(24:47):
that's not even a quarter. That'sthat's very limited in the budget.
I think one thing is to putthis in contact. Since two ten,
the City of Cleveland has paid fortyseven million dollars out in settlements due to
misconduct, right, and that's taxpair of dollars. When these police do
stuff and there's a settlement that isnot coming out of their pension, that

(25:07):
ain't coming out of any of thatthat's coming out of but that's our but
that's my our money. So fortyseven million justice two thousand and ten has
gone just in police settlements. Sowhen we're saying two point two million or
whatever, well we're saying is,hey, this is going to trauma inform
care centers. We are doing mentalhealth prevention, mental health remedies. How

(25:29):
can we help that, How canwe help with violence prevention programs for our
youth? That is what this moneyis going to. We understand that in
any type of investigations to William willBe board members. Now they get like
a small site but I think it'sfor the whole year, maybe forty five
hundred. I'm not sure the exactnumber, but it's not that hasn't even
been discussed, understood, understood Commissionmembers. We're getting less than that.

(25:56):
So it is that that money isn'tlike, it's not a full top position.
This is more of an opportunity forcitizens to just be engaged in a
volunteer basis because of the amount oftime that they that we know it's spent
on investigation. There's a small pipingthat is granted to them and that's it.
You only conserve two years, andthere specific criteria you have to meet.
There's an application process. The mayorwill appoint four people. Yeah,

(26:19):
we'll talk about that. Make thewhole thing, yes, yeah, yeah.
And I think for taxpayers we haveto weigh if there's two point two
million dollars, how much is thatreally going to affect the forty seven million
dollars we're paying out um. AndI think that's a question for all taxpayers
to consider it when they're looking atthis bill. It's just two point two

(26:40):
million dollars going to reduce that fortyseven million by a by a considerable amount.
Harp. I know you got one. I know you got you got
a question over there. Yeah,I just didn't want to kind of you
guys were kind of flowing. Ididn't want to break up the floor.
My question really went back to thedisciplinary actions and the kind of commit commission
over the disciplinary actions. What happensif there's a disagreement between like the mayor,

(27:03):
chief of police or someone who normallywould have that decision making power and
now has has it been kind ofthought about? How um, you know,
I guess, for lack of abetter term, the tiebreaker would be
if there's a clash on Let's saythe commission wants somebody fired, and to
your point earlier, they want somebodyfired. Hey, this person's had x
amount of disciplinary actions. We wantto fire for whatever the reasons justifiable to

(27:27):
fire. And then it's just ano, so how does that? How
does that work at that point?So it's a it's a complete system that
it's gonna have thorough investigation, there'slegal determinations there in the event, I
believe if something of that nature,the commission has the opportunity to hire an
outside lawyer to investigate the caseum,to further their show the findings that comes

(27:52):
up with what is it supposed tobe? We know in anything, there's
going to be some type of conflict, there will be arbitration. If it
has to go to a further levelof court, then that may as it
be. But it's really about theway that the language and it is written
in the ballot is that if thisis what the commission says, this is
how it stands. Okay, correct? And I love that you're going back

(28:15):
to ballot language and Alanta again,I want to say thank you for having
this conversation because we're we're I mean, we're getting the nitty gritty here of
a twenty four page ballot initiative thatsomehow they're going to put on the Board
of Elections ballot. I have noidea how much they're gonna how they're gonna
do that, because it is notI've already voted. It is a very
maybe small, two paragraph thing.Well that's how they get twenty four pages

(28:38):
of the two paragraphs. That's that'ssome heavy writing right there. Man.
That's that's heavy because they take thingsout right like they only gonna the changes
to the amendment, because there isa charter amendment already that talks about the
commission everything that's already in legislation fromwhen the consent degree came in. So

(28:59):
that makes sense in the parts thatare we're asking to be ratified, and
I did find so with the commission, and similar to how it is now,
there's an executive director that's higher andthey have a small staff as well,
and then the actual commission of thethirteen members there will be compensated of
just seventy two hundred a year forall of the additional work they have to

(29:22):
do. Seventy two hundred plus theexecutive director and staff. Yeah, got
it. So that's gonna be that'sgonna be part of your two point two
million. So just the last kindof two things I had on the battlet
language as it's written in the charter, there is a bit of concerned about
if this even it's going to stand, based on the police unions and the

(29:45):
agreements they already have. So that'sone thing to think about when we're thinking
about if we're voting for this,this is even gonna stand, it's definitely
gonna get some pushback in court,which happens with most charter a minute,
So so we'll leave that one.I mean, I think I feel like
that one's open. The last oneI kind of want to talk to you
about. It's committee makeup. Allright, Basically, this committee is supposed

(30:07):
to stand for different races LGBTQ pluscommunity immigrants or people who are not English
speakers. So those are some ofthe requirements of who's going to be on
the committee. You know, we'regonna have a certain amount of people that
do that. All these people,of course, are appointed by the mayor,
and right now we're in the mayorelection. But there's also like two

(30:30):
big parts that I want you tokind of explain to me and try to
figure it out. Those who havebeen directly impacted by police violence or family
members of a person who's been killedby police. And then attorneys with experience
representing victims of police misconduct or criminallyprosecuting police misconduct. So my question is,

(30:52):
with those two groups, do youfeel their presidential And that's my question
with those two groups, how canyou ensure to the citizens, Because I
understand this boards about accountability, howdo we ensure to the citizens that these
people aren't going to bring in theirown maybe personal bias that maybe justly you

(31:15):
know, had into their decision making. How do we how do we say
that this board isn't just going tobe going after police they may be missed
when they were trying to criminally prosecutethem, or other situations where people may
have certain feelings towards police. Youknow, what, where's the balance in
the board, Because I think that'simportant for people to know when they're voting

(31:37):
on this. Yeah, I mean, I think it's also important to note,
right like, if there is somethingthat happens with any of these commission
members, the mayor has the powerto remove them, So it's not like
just because they've been appointed, they'regoing to be appointed all the time.
Also, you have to have peopleengage in the remedy process that have been

(31:59):
direct impacted by what it is thatwe are trying to put on the ballot
that we're trying to implement, becausethese are the people with direct experience that
can say, hey, this ismy experience, this is what I know.
Especially when we think of times whereit's not just people who have been

(32:19):
who have a family member who's beenharmed by police, but also family members
who have been victims of gun violence, people who have been incarcerating formally incarcerating.
You want to make sure you havea good mix of people that actually
have something invested in this system.It is a model of restorative and transformative
justice that we have to make surethat we're practicing what we preach and giving

(32:43):
these people an opportunity to seek justice, to share their expertise, because right
now we've only had people who havegone to school who studied the law,
who are attorneys as the only peoplewho are making this decision. And police
cannot police police, and that isthe way it's a some is currently set
up that police are policing each otherwhere there's no type of buying from people

(33:06):
who say, look, I've dealtwith police on a day to day basis
and there is a criteria. There'sstill an application process. Oh of course
there's still up. It's still tothe mayor at the end of the day,
though. Are there ex police?Are there ex police on here as
well? Actually, hard, youcan't be on this committee if you've been
an ex police officer or correct meif I'm wan't wrong. A lot of

(33:28):
or have had any professional involvement withpolice activities, So that means nobody that
works in any administration, nobody that'son the phone, you know, taking
down one calls. In that sense, you are excluded from being in on
this commissioner. But what it saysis the exact language is that there actually
will be three police associated representatives thatare allowed to be represented as a part

(33:53):
of this. But you cannot haveserved within five years before appointment as a
law enforcement officer. Yeah. Thatthat that's the that's the party. Five
years. So there can be officers, there can be former officers on,
just not within a five year periodof them. Yeah, it can't be
immediate. And the mayor may appointno more than three representative of police associations

(34:15):
and so you you can have policethat are involved that will be you have
three police associated representatives. Because UM, as someone who served on a subgroup
of the previous commission, we didhave UM police officers who were on the

(34:36):
subgroups. On the working groups withus, I was on the Community Problem
Oriented Policing in which we made recommendationsof how we wanted certain changes to be
implemented. UM. Just as faras general police orders, one of the
ones we were asking for is thatif there's a dispatch call for someone who's
mentally ill. We wanted officers notto arrest them, but to take them

(34:59):
to a facilit And there were officerswho were in the room who weighed in
like that's a good idea. Letme tell you the barriers, this is
what's needed, and things like that. Um so police officers have been on
the commission on the work groups,like directly, I've saw that. And
then even with this one, itsays that there will be the re police

(35:20):
associate representatives. Yeah, yeah,and and and you know, we kind
of got to wrap the segment becausewe could talk about this all day.
I think I think it's a realuh not only interesting topic, but an
important one, right. I thinkwhat constituents have to balance out when they
go to this ballot this that thatTuesday in November, is does this commission

(35:45):
as it's written in the charter asit's written now, because we got to
go if it doesn't represent what wethink it's going to represent, we're going
to go back and do a wholeanother charter amendment and change it if that
would be the remedy for it.Does this strike the balance of a police
reform, the voices that need tobe heard from the outside and the inside.

(36:06):
Is this the balance and the tonewe need to strike? And ultimately
that becomes the question. And Ithink that you've given a lot of information
on this twenty four page ballot initiativewhich is useful to making that decision.
Hopefully, you know, we willsee after November where our community is and
if that balance is being struck ina tone that represents citizens and making sure

(36:30):
that everyone is held accountable when itcomes to policing. Um, a lot
of you know, thank you man, This was it was a conversation.
I'll say that for the least itwas. It was great. It was
great having you to answer those questions. So lastly, you want to say
when the initiatives on, who's pushingthis? And and uh, you know

(36:52):
what you hope voters know when theygo to the ballot. Yeah, I
will leave in close. We cannotforget that this is the second time the
federal government has had to come inand say that we've had been under a
consent decree and you can look itup. They had to come here twice.
So the old system isn't working.It's not working at all, and

(37:15):
we have seen across the country.Then when you have boards and things like
this in place. It has decreasedMisconda and it has few of more trust.
I am through and through an abolitionistalways will be. However, I
understand it that takes time. Thisis a way for us to begin to
imagine what does it mean for citizensto be involved in our criminal justice process,

(37:39):
holding helps accountable and remedying what wethink is the causes of crime or
what we know to be the causesof crime. And I think that's very
important that some voters have to realize, like the old system isn't working,
and we have to trust each otherthat we are able to make these type
of decisions as a community so thatwe don't have to keep having instances that

(38:00):
calls for um a George Floyd oreven locally the victims and the families and
who are pushing this who are seekingjustice. We have people um Alicia Kirkman,
Samaria Rice, um Brenda Bigger Staff, um Leshia Goes, the kreem
Um and these are people who havebeen fighting for justice, who have lost

(38:22):
family members over this um and sowe have to make sure that there is
justice being served. The people whoare the who've been directly impacted in Cleveland
they are the people who are thefront lines of this initiative. And there
were organizations that got behind them andother citizens. And yeah, this would
have got on the ballot if thatwasn't community people's signatures that were collected to

(38:45):
get this on the ballot. Andand and that is a good point.
But I think you giving up thosenames or presenting those names give up people
an opportunity to find out who thosepeople are. And and and knowing you
know who's behind whose funding. Thisis also very important. Listen, Cleveland,
do your research, make your owndecisions. What we are here to

(39:07):
do on the NAPIST present to youa different conversation. Uh, and this
was a candid one. So Alna, once again thank you for coming.
Uh. Segment to nine other politicalpodcasts. This is the NAP, but
again, do your research, Cleveland, not another political podcast. This is

(39:27):
the KNAP. Segment three, episodetweet nine of the political podcasts. You
are still in the NAP And asyou all know, this is our cultural
segment. And then the culture nowexists on the internet, on Mark Zuckerberg's
Internet. I don't know what we'regonna do if they if they ever shut

(39:50):
all this down, how are wegonna do a third segment part if they
take black Twitter down next, Idon't know what we're gonna do for a
third segment. Shure, We're justgonna have to go go with Black Twitter
started the barbershop in the neighborhood asthe first black Twitter, so we just
have to go there. They justhave to hear more hood stories. That's
what's up. That's what's up.No, no, no, man,

(40:12):
that's crazy. Man, Like youwrite all these conversations that we see on
Facebook, and if you're following uson Facebook at the Knapcast on Facebook or
on Twitter, you know we havethese same conversations originally in the barbershop.
Da't mean it's just some dude whowalk in and be like, hey man,
y'all see what happened on what's thename? Or you y'all see what

(40:34):
happened on the street the other day. We was having those conversations there,
and it's just interesting to see thatwhen the new barbershop of Facebook or Twitter
goes down, we don't really knowwhat to do, so we gotta get
back to barbershops. I agree withyou their heart yeah, not that definitely,
definitely, but black Twitter is alwaysthe sorts of good information, random
random information I don't didn't know Ineeded to know about. Yeah yeah,

(40:57):
yeah, yeah yeah, but yougotta fact check that stuff sometimes, so
us On black Twitter this week,the meme that was going around was Joe
Biden cuts funding to HBCUs. Andjust like everything can see on memes,
please go Google learn learn what crediblesources are because there's usually a good amount
of truth to it, but it'salso a good amount of sensationalized media there

(41:22):
as well. So we'll go aheadand talk about what Joe Biden's administration did.
Essentially, there was a three pointfive trillion dollars budget recons It was
a new three point five budget billout there. Okay, three point five
trillion, I should say. Um. Originally, Joe Biden told the black

(41:45):
community, which he has been anchoringhis presidency on, that we were going
to get forty five billion dollars toHBCUs and the upcoming bill that actually got
cut down to about two billion dollarsum And even though it's not necessarily a

(42:06):
full cut or taking money away,it is definitely a situation that's harps all
the sense to me. Politicians teamseem to overpromise and underdeliver, so hard
go ahead, so so here,So here's my thing with that. Just
on that point, it's like theywhen they cut it, when they cut
it down. I've heard the counterpointof whether he still has such and such

(42:30):
billion in there for spending and itis used, And I get that,
I absolutely and get that, andI encourage that, and I'm happy that
there is still something there. Butthe point of accountability is for the fact
that something is promised to you anddelivered. So right, So, now
that he's promised all these things,and we continue to move forward to his

(42:51):
administration and see he's not delivering.Now at some point you have to ask,
okay, every little cut now,you know, you might have had
the benefit of the doubt prior,but now all these budget cuts here and
there randomly, now you have tocount for those because you haven't done anything
else that you've asked for or thatthat you promised previously. Yeah, yeah,
yeah, yeah, And I think, um, you know this bill,

(43:14):
you know, the the infrastructure billwhatever he's calling it now, the
thing that's going to cost a threepoint five trillion dollars. Uh, When
when the rubber met the road andDemocrats couldn't even get their own people to
vote for the bill. They startedprioritizing things. Um, and we talked
about it all the time. WithJoe Biden's presidency, it's felt like the

(43:35):
underlying you know, priority was eliminatingracism in this country. Uh, and
and and getting to racial equality,which is all good things. Issue I
have now is it seems like whenhe had to cut some stuff, we
we as African Americans HPC used inthis particular situation, were one of the

(43:59):
first in line on the chopping block. Let me ask you a question,
and it just literally just popped inmy head right now, do you think
Joe Biden might be going rogue onhis own party? Like? Because the
lot the party message throughout the campaignwas minorities, minorities. Everybody told that
line. Yeah, and then Joegets in there was like, Nah,

(44:21):
I'm gonna get y'all something. I'mgonna just get y'all a little bit and
maybe maybe he's smarter and let's seenow than we think you. I don't
know about that, but I willsay that what he presented himself as during
the campaign that different moments was constantlychanging. Uh. You know, as
far as the left consider Joe Biden, they consider him a moderate. I
don't know if I necessarily consider himthat, but that's what they consider him.

(44:45):
And some of those things that theysee him as moderate are like climate
change, you know, economics,and also I guess he's a moderate on
equality issues, at least when itcomes to black people. So is he
moderate or is that that? Ishe the whole other way, you know,

(45:06):
in comparison, in comparison, incomparison to some of his far leftier
liberal i'll say, socialist agenda peopleon his party. But I think I
don't think I don't think he's goingroll. I think he's just I think
he's just being who we've always knownhim to be, if that makes sense.
And I don't think his party votedfor that. Yeah. But the

(45:28):
thing about it is, if he'swhat we've always thought he to be,
like, he's he's the same fortyforty years that he had politicians from,
forty years of political experience he hadprior to being elected to the presidents is
who he was. That's who he'salways been. But he gave us about
eighteen months of good old uncle Joe, good old uncle Joe, good old

(45:50):
uncle Joe. Yeah, but hishis forty year political career prior to that
was something completely different. And thenwe just tell everybody to turn the blind
eye to the fact that he's stillthe same person man, and nothing really
changed. You know what's funny thatentire political career was completely flipped in the
last seven days by black Twitter.They essentially adopted yo catch phrase along with

(46:15):
much of the country, the FJBcrew as they call them, and as
you would say, man, JoeBiden. And it's so crazy. I
just found this out right before theshow. I didn't even know people were
chatting this, But I'm glad peopleare starting to get on the train of
who this man really is and andand expressing it in the way in which

(46:37):
I can agree with. I mean, they verbalize in it now, man.
And then it's interesting to use themedia trying to trying to silence your
voice and the collective voice of thesepeople at football games and NASCAR events.
And I might have seen one breakoutat a school board meeting. I mean,
how do you feel having yo catchphraserepeated by by thousands and thousands of

(47:02):
people emphatically in the nation right now? I don't know, if it's so
much of my catch phrases, ifit's my daily slogan, is that I
used more often rather than not like. And that's that's part of the reason
why the whole negotiation of the podcast. My whole contract was I get I
get to say Joe Biden on air. So that was the whole contract negotiation.

(47:23):
So I'm glad that's what son.I'm glad that the line of thinking
is getting there because y'all I'm butlike I told y'all up, they're gonna
get the call up for the backupin them in a minute. They're about
to get the call in the backupquarter. They're gonna talk about Joe sick.
He gonna catch the flu pneumonia downfrom COVID. It's a chance he
goes somewhere and go down from COVID. They might put a whole plot in

(47:44):
narrative together that some unvaccinated person gavegave COVID to Joe Biden and now he
got to step down from being thepresident. I don't put nothing past them.
But my question, my biggest questionis how do y'all feel those that
supported Biden to the umps de Greeklike ums degree of he's the best thing

(48:05):
coming to save our black people andbring us out of the plight of white
terrorism. Like, is, howdo y'all feel now knowing he the same
person he always been that whole time, Like because I walked, I walked
and outdoors, and they wasn't alwaysnice and people, y'all, Joe Biden,
you're good Uncle Joe fans not reallythe nicest people in the world for

(48:28):
real. Yeah, like yeah,you know what I mean. Maybe that's
why y'all ride so hard for Joe, but y'all definitely not that. But
anyway, sorry about that. Feelgreat. I feel great that people people
are chanting in the NFL stadium,the sixty seventy thousand people change of Joe
Biden for the for a substantial amountof time during the NFL game. So

(48:50):
no, I definitely feel great aboutthat. And just so our podcast does
get stricken down, we are notimploring any of our listeners to take any
action to infect, assassinate, orany way anyway harm any politician, but
especially um. And and that isyeah yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah,
clean up there, yeah yeah yeah. And also getting the vaccine is

(49:15):
your choice, you know. Uh, there's so many things that you have
to clean up nowadays to not gettaken off Mark Zuckerberg's or Al Gore's Internet.
But you know, again, youheard it here. I would say,
first, that's the first time Iheard that phrase. Uh you saying
at harp um and the position anduh, the vocal nature of black Twitter,

(49:38):
of uh sports fans, of ourco host Alic Harper. It's something
I appreciate about America, and Ihope that whether it's positive or negative,
however you want to say that freedomof speech continues to be supportive. But
again, we have to be ableto ask the question and answers answer it

(50:00):
honestly, how do we feel aboutour current president? There was no problem
saying that when it was President DonaldTrump, and there shouldn't be any problem
saying that when it's President Joe Biden. An accountability, You are accountability.
It's what's most important here. Soapplause to black Twitter, Applause to Alex
Harper, applaud to all the Americansfor holding Joe Biden accountable, even if

(50:22):
it's only four, two or threeseconds a meme on Twitter or maybe in
your local barbershop. With that wewere end Segment three. None other political
podcast episode Twinny. Thank you allfor listening. The FCB Radium Network first

(50:43):
class broadcasting worldwide