HCONRES-98-119
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
What it does
This concurrent resolution would express Congress's formal support for America's law enforcement professionals. It would place on record a series of findings about officer safety, crime trends, and staffing levels, and would call on all levels of government to provide law enforcement with more personnel, better training and equipment, tougher penalties for assaulting officers, and increased mental health resources. As a concurrent resolution, it would not carry the force of law, create new programs, or appropriate any funds.
Who benefits
The approximately 840,000 active law enforcement officers in the United States, who would receive a formal congressional expression of support and recognition. Families of officers killed or injured in the line of duty, who would be formally honored. Law enforcement advocacy organizations, whose policy priorities — more staffing, better equipment, tougher assault penalties — would be elevated in the congressional record. Communities that support increased policing resources may see their position reflected in official congressional sentiment.
Who is hurt
No group is directly harmed by a non-binding resolution. However, advocacy groups and individuals who favor reducing law enforcement funding, restructuring policing models, or prioritizing civilian oversight may view the resolution's framing as lending congressional legitimacy to one side of an ongoing policy debate. The resolution does not address perspectives on police accountability, use-of-force reform, or civilian oversight, which some stakeholders argue are equally important to public safety.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that law enforcement officers face documented and growing dangers — nearly 86,000 assaults in 2024 alone, a 54% higher suicide rate than other workers, and staffing levels still more than 5% below pre-2020 levels — and that Congress has a responsibility to formally recognize these sacrifices. They contend that the resolution reflects broad, bipartisan public support for law enforcement and that acknowledging officers' contributions is a necessary foundation for any serious public safety policy discussion.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that a resolution praising law enforcement without any mention of accountability, oversight, or civilian rights presents a one-sided picture of policing in America. They contend that Congress's credibility on public safety requires acknowledging both the contributions and the documented challenges of policing — including use-of-force incidents and disparate enforcement — and that a resolution silent on these issues may signal opposition to accountability measures rather than genuine, comprehensive support for public safety.