I foolishly thought that the debate over the District of Columbia’s dangerous soft-on-crime law that was passed last year was over. The House already voted to scrap the bill and now the Senate has done the same. The bill would provide no significant additional funding for the police, something that Mayor Muriel Bowser was supportive of. It would eliminate nearly all mandatory minimum sentences, offer early release from prison for most crimes, and remove or lower mandatory sentences for violent crimes committed by juveniles. Given the current state of criminal activity in the District, the bill appeared suicidal. But we have now learned that Joe Biden plans to veto Congress on this matter and let the bill pass into law.

The Senate has voted to overturn a District of Columbia law enacted last year to improve police accountability, the second time this year that Democrats have joined with Republicans to try and block the district’s crime regulations.

President Joe Biden is expected to veto the resolution, which the House passed last month. The White House said in a statement of policy that the president doesn’t support every provision of the D.C. law, which was passed in the wake of the police killing of George Floyd in 2020. But Biden supports “commonsense police reforms” that are part of it, such as banning chokeholds, limiting use of deadly force, improving access to body cameras and requiring increased de-escalation training.

“Congress should respect the District of Columbia’s right to pass measures that improve public safety and public trust,” the White House said.

Mayor Bowser’s position on the crime bill is “complicated” to say the least. She originally vetoed the bill because even she knew what a disaster it would be. That wound up not mattering when the District Council overwhelmingly voted to override her veto. But when Congress took up the matter, she claimed to oppose congressional intervention in the process. This is yet another demonstration of the ongoing backlash inside of the D.C. government against Congress’ constitutionally mandated oversight of official matters in the district.

Biden described the crime bill as “commonsense police reform,” while saying that doesn’t agree with “every provision” contained in the legislation. Even I will admit that there are a couple of elements of the bill that aren’t entirely bad. It would provide for more body cameras for police and surveillance cameras on public buildings. The “de-escalation training” mandated by the proposal should at least not do any damage, even if it’s not terribly productive.

But what does Uncle Joe find “commonsensical” about the main changes being instituted? Does he truly believe that installing revolving doors on the District’s jails and removing nearly all disincentives to the commission of crimes will make the lives of the law-abiding any better? Most of the complaints we’re hearing in D.C. these days are probably coming from gangbangers who are upset that there are so few cars left to jack.

It’s not being said aloud, but I suspect there’s more to this veto decision by Biden (or more likely his handlers) than meets the eye. And it’s related to Bowser’s opposition to congressional intervention. Team Biden probably wants to demonstrate support for more legislative independence for the District’s government as part of the effort to grant statehood. That would create two extra permanent seats in the Senate for the Democrats, which is all they really care about.

Sadly, the people who will ultimately pay the price for this are the residents of D.C. who will have to survive under increasing crime rates. As always, the worst impact will be felt in the poorer communities with larger percentages of residents of color. You’d think that the Democrats would be concerned about that, but it’s all part of a larger game plan. The District of Columbia’s gang problem isn’t quite as bad as what we see in Baltimore and Chicago, but it’s getting there. And it’s one more blue stronghold where sane people should be thinking about renting a U-Haul in the near future if they haven’t done so already.