House Republicans push for more control over public safety in nation’s capital with new crime bill

House lawmakers looking to restore congressional oversight over the District of Columbia passed a bill Wednesday that would give Congress more control over public safety in the city.

The D.C. CRIMES Act, introduced by Florida Republican Byron Donalds, passed the House on a 225-181 bipartisan vote, with 18 Democrats assenting.

The proposed legislation would strip the District of authority to determine its sentencing guidelines and remove some protections for young offenders that city leaders have written into the criminal code.

The bill faces long odds in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, Maryland Democrat, characterized the bill as an election-year stunt that hampers the District’s ability to respond to crime surges. He pointed to local legislation passed quickly and unanimously earlier this year that contributed to a sharp decline in street crime.

Mr. Donalds said the D.C. Council’s recent history of soft-on-crime legislation laid the groundwork for a citywide crime wave last year. Congress shot down a rewrite to the criminal code for being too offender-friendly.

“The D.C. City Council has had ample opportunity to fix these issues in D.C., and they have refused until very recently,” Mr. Donalds said. “So it’s just a matter of just simple logic, that unless Congress actually decides to use its authority, what would it make us think that the D.C. City Council will actually act in the interests of the citizens of the District?”

The bill’s stipulation about criminal sentences was largely in response to the now-defunct criminal code, which lowered penalties for most violent crimes.

Proponents argued that removing protections for adults in their late teens and early 20s would hold a key group of offenders accountable in a way D.C. law does not.

Mr. Donalds mentioned that some of his colleagues were victimized during the District’s most violent year this century.

Rep. Angie Craig, Minnesota Democrat, was assaulted inside her apartment building by a man with 12 prior arrests.

Rep. Henry Cuellar, Texas Democrat, has his car stolen at gunpoint by his Navy Yard apartment building less than a mile from the U.S. Capitol.

Congressional staffers were also victims. That included an aide for Sen. Rand Paul who was stabbed at random by a man recently released from a lengthy prison sentence and a member of Sen. Katie Britt’s staff who had her car keys stolen by armed assailants.

Last year ended with a 26-year-high in killings, a record-high number of carjackings and several ambush-style robberies on city streets.

Young adults were major players in the yearlong crime wave, which was why bill proponents argued that removing protections for them was key to putting the crime wave in the past.

Current law considers convicts younger than 25 to be “youth offenders,” giving judges the option to hand them lighter sentences.

Mr. Donalds’ bill removes those protections for anyone 18 and older. Supporters said the move aligns the District with the rest of the country.

“It seems the Washington city council believes something magical happens on someone’s 25th birthday,” said Rep. Tim Burchett, Tennessee Republican. “They seem to believe that one day, dad-gummit, you’re a child who cannot be fully accountable for your actions, and the next day you can serve in Congress. They are trying to be politically correct as always, but not prosecuting criminals and the city is suffering because of it.”

The legislation also calls on D.C.’s attorney general, who oversees the prosecution of youth offenders, to operate a public database on juvenile crime in the city.

The bill has been universally opposed by D.C. leaders, including Mayor Muriel Bowser, Council Chair Phil Mendelson, Attorney General Brian Schwalb and council member Brooke Pinto, the public safety chair who authored the city’s Secure D.C. Omnibus legislation in March.

Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District’s nonvoting congressional representative, lambasted the legislation as “radical, undemocratic and paternalistic.”

“This bill would be the biggest rollback of D.C. self-government in a generation,” she said.

Ms. Norton argued that the proposal’s language could be interpreted as preventing the city from creating any new criminal statutes.

Mr. Raskin said such open-ended wording could have prevented the city from enacting laws against organized retail theft or carrying a gun with a tampered serial number.

He said the Secure D.C. package passed this spring did just that and more with other laws and tougher penalties. Mr. Raskin credited city leaders with helping produce a 26% drop in violent crime and a 14% drop in total crime so far this year.

If Mr. Donalds’ bill had been law at the time, Mr. Raskin said, city leaders couldn’t have responded to the crime spikes as nimbly as they did.

“Now, amazingly, the gentleman proposes this naked power grab against Washington, denying them the crime-fighting tools they need despite the fact that they’ve done a good job,” Mr. Raskin said.

Some Republicans disputed that the bill would prohibit new criminal laws, but the issue wasn’t clarified during the floor debate.

Mr. Donalds swatted away accusations that he was trying to boost the Republican Party’s profile ahead of the presidential election this fall.

“These are not political talking points,” Mr. Donalds said. “This is real life, and it’s easy for the members to come in and out of this building — we have a security apparatus around us every single day — but not take seriously what is happening in the streets of the nation’s capital. This legislation takes that seriously.”