U.S. National Guard soldiers stand guard behind a protective fence on the perimeter of Capitol Hill, Jan. 9, 2021.
U.S. Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-Washington, D.C., recently introduced a bill seeking to remove the fence still erected around the Capitol to ensure the capital “doesn’t look like a dictatorship. She argued that the authorities could protect the area in a more modern way.
Norton introduced a new bill last week that would ban permanent fencing around the Capitol. This is partly in response to a proposal by Capitol Police Chief Yogananda Pittman. Pittman proposed a permanent fence around the Capitol.
Norton said, “I’m very aware that security officials believe that there is still some demand for fencing in the short term. And I understand that there is concern that it [the fence] may be in use for several months longer than I had previously anticipated. I’m sure that’s based on intelligence.”
“But my goal, the goal of my bill, is to make sure that the nation’s capital doesn’t look like a dictatorship and that the openness of the capital, which is one of the hallmarks of the capital, is not destroyed because we failed to do our job on Jan. 6.”
On Jan. 6, protesters stormed the Capitol, interrupting a joint session of Congress. Law enforcement’s preparation for and response to the incident is under intense scrutiny and is also being investigated by lawmakers. In addition, the chief of the Capitol Police and two security officers in both the Senate and House of Representatives have resigned out of concern over the January 6 incident.
Norton is by no means the only member of Congress pushing for the fence to be removed. Earlier this month, 42 Republicans asked House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to remove the wire fence and bring the National Guard Home.
They wrote, “In particular, we are concerned about recent reports that the fence around the Capitol could become permanent.”
On Jan. 7, then-Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy told reporters that the 7-foot-tall, “non-retractable” fence would remain in place for at least 30 days.
Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat, said late last month that city officials “will not accept additional troops or a permanent fence in Washington, D.C., for the long term.” She added that “in due course, the fences around the White House and Capitol, like the plywood we’ve seen in business for too long, will be removed.”
A spokesman for Bowser has sent a request for comment to the Capitol Police Department.
Norton said the fence has affected the quality of Life of nearby residents, for example, by preventing them from using the area around the Capitol for sledding after recent snowfall. In a recent letter, she told Pittman and other members of the Capitol police Board that a permanent fence “would send the wrong message to this country and the world by transforming our democracy from accessible and civil to exclusionary and citizen-fearing.
Shortly after President Biden took office, his administration called a halt to the construction of the southern border wall. Biden declared that the wall was unnecessary.
Norton told that the decision was made because “the most advanced kind of measures” are now available, adding, “If we’re not going to use a wall at the border, then why do we need a fence at the Capitol?”
Norton said one way to enhance security without a fence would be to increase intelligence gathering.
“We’re now able to see what people are thinking and what they’re doing by the devices that they’re using.” She said, “And those (devices) are available to intelligence officials.”
In the Senate, she told colleagues that a permanent fence is “a kind of security theater – it makes the Capitol ‘look’ secure, but it masks the inadequacy of state-of-the-art security measures that might actually prevent future attacks.”
She believes that most Democrats also want the fence removed, potentially launching a bipartisan effort.
Curtis Kalin, a spokesman for North Carolina Republican Rep. Ted Budd (R), told via email that Budd “certainly agrees with the premise that the Capitol should not have a permanent fence,” but declined to comment specifically on Norton’s bill.
For now, the legislation could be used as a tool to block Pittman’s attempt to make the fence permanent, should he continue to push for it.
Norton said, “Putting it (the fence) up, (at that Time) did not require the passage of a bill.” She said, “It seems to me that we (could) also take it down without passing a bill. But if it can’t be taken down without passing a bill, then I (now) have a bill to make sure it’s taken down.”
Recent Comments