Sullivan annexes support from police officers in Congress race

By Scott Benjamin

Retired Assistant U.S. Attorney David X. Sullivan, who teaches college criminal justice classes, has recently garnered endorsements from several police officers organizations in his bid to capture the seat in the Fifth Congressional District.

Sullivan, a Republican from New Fairfield, faces first-term Democrat Jahana Hayes of Wolcott in the November 3 election in the sprawling district, which stretches from Salisbury to Newtown.

He has been endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police, the Connecticut Alliance of Police, and the police unions in Middlebury, Watertown, Farmington and Danbury.

The Fraternal Order of Police is the nation's largest law enforcement organization, with more than 325,000 members and over 2,100 lodges throughout the United States.

“David X. Sullivan is clearly the most qualified law and order candidate running in this race,” said Danbury Police Sgt. John Krupinsky, who serves as president of the CT Fraternal Order of Police, according to a Sullivan news release. “He cares about the safety of people and police officers.”

Police reform has been an emotional issue since the controversial May 25 death of George Floyd in Minneapolis.

Floyd, an African-American, died after Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin placed his knee on his neck for a reported eight minutes and 46 seconds. The Washington Post reported this spring that the controversy over the police's handling of the incident "has dominated the public mind-set" as protests have been organized across the country regarding police tactics and racial profiling.

Some of Sullivan’s larger campaign lawn signs state that he has support from police unions and first responders. He has taught criminal justice classes at Western Connecticut State University in Danbury and the University of New Haven.

Sullivan said in a phone interview that he doesn’t expect Congress to approve any police reforms during 2020.

There has been a stalemate since early summer.

Patch.com has reported that the U.S. House approved legislation on June 24 in a 236-181 vote, with only three Republicans in favor, would, according to The Washington Post, ban chokeholds and establish a national data-base to track police misconduct.

Patch.com has reported that a fact-sheet distributed by U. S. House Democrats noted that body cameras would be required on police officers and that military equipment on the streets would be limited.

Sullivan said that the Democratic-sponsored legislation received “no input or little input” from Republicans in the U.S. House.

Patch.com has reported that during a virtual news conference in July, Hayes, whose husband serves as a police officer in Waterbury, said that the U.S. House Democratic police reform legislation is, among other things, "a bill for mothers" who face "difficult conversations" with their children.

According to Patch.com, the congresswoman said that she has had some "difficult conversations" with her 13-year-old son and that she believes that the circumstances have been "stealing his innocence."

Sullivan said he supports the police reform bill from U.S. Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) and criticized U.S. Senate Democrats for not considering the 22 amendments that were offered.

Washington Post columnist Marc Thiessen, a former chief speechwriter to former President George W. Bush, wrote this summer that Scott’s proposal would have made lynching a federal hate crime and create a national policy commission to conduct a review of the U.S. Criminal Justice system.

Under a headline stating: "Democrats' shameful vote against Tim Scott's police reform bill," Thiessen wrote that there was ample opportunity for Democratic amendments to the bill to be considered and that U.S. Sen. Angus King (I-Me.) said the defeat of Scott's legislation had probably nullified any possibility of a police reform bill being sent to Republican President Donald Trump before the November 3 election.

Regarding the recent state police reform, Sullivan said, “I do not” support the package that Gov. Ned Lamont (D-Greenwich) signed.

CTNewsJunkie has reported that Connecticut package includes a ban on most chokeholds, limits on military equipment, a state watchdog agency for police misconduct, a requirement for body worn cameras and provisions that would make officers financially liable in civil lawsuits.

Said Sullivan, “It was political optics.”

“There was no opportunity for public hearings,” he said in a phone interview. He added that the police unions and the police chiefs “were not afforded an opportunity to contribute.”

The Wall Street Journal has reported that a vast majority of funding for local police comes from municipal and state funds.

CTNewsJunkie reported that police officers held a “Back The Blue” rally at the State Capitol in July to protest the legislation, claiming it would be a “direct assault” on their work procedures.

Sullivan said he opposes efforts to defund police departments.

He said that even the Rev. Al Sharpton, a former Democratic candidate for president and the host of a current MSNBC program, has said the nation needs more police officers.

Sullivan said officers perform considerable civic duties beyond making arrests and issuing summonses.

He said recently, for example, the Danbury Police Department brought in equipment to help residents who were trapped by fallen trees on their lawn.

Sullivan said officers have to complete written, medical and psychological tests before they are even hired and that they also have to undergo a polygraph test and a background check.

“These officers have a very difficult job where they have to make split-second decisions.”

In 2018, NBC Connecticut 30 and The Hartford Courant reported that fewer people are seeking to become police officers.

“What you are seeing in the media is an unflattering thing,” said Sullivan regarding some of the coverage on police-related issues. He said that has been a factor in the lower number of applicants for police positions.

On a related topic, Sullivan said he steadfastly supports having resource officers in the schools.

The reaction to the School Resources Officers is generally different now than it was in some instances 25 years ago when some school administrators thought that having an officer in the building might intimidate students and staff members.

Sullivan said the School Resource Officers “protect students and staff” and in some instances even teach substance abuse classes.