TL;DR: REP. RABB’S CONTROVERSIAL VOTES WERE RIGHT.
Rep. Chris Rabb has been criticized for being the sole member of a House committee to vote against legislation directed against trafficking children. But as I explained in this post, he did the right thing. Anyone who knows the history of how the criminal justice system has criminalized poverty and been racist in its outcomes would recognize that these two bills were deeply problematic. And he didn’t just do the right thing. He also took a stand of conscience against legislation that sounds good but isn’t—even though he knew it would cost him politically.
I’m even prouder of my support for Rep. Rabb today than I was two days ago. He is a politician of uncommon character and integrity.
Chris Rabb is getting pummeled for doing the right thing. Please share this and set the record straight.
THE WHOLE STORY
Like many of you, when I first heard that Rep. Chris Rabb was the sole representative to vote against two bills that were said to be directed against trafficking children, I was surprised.
My first thought was that this was a bad political move. It’s a bad look to be the one legislator who stands against Democrats and Republicans and opposes legislation that is supposed to help victims of abuse.
But my second thought was to resist reaching any conclusions and look more deeply at what these bills were and why Rep. Rabb opposed them.
I hesitated to condemn him for two reasons.
The first is that I know a fair bit about the history of criminal justice policy in the United States. I taught a course on the subject in my first teaching job, and I’ve tried to keep a bit current.
One thing this history teaches us is that many so-called “reforms” meant to improve the criminal justice system and reduce crime—and that received bipartisan support—backfired terribly. Instead of reducing crime, they often criminalized more behavior that was best dealt with in other ways than the criminal justice system. And they were enforced in ways that were biased against those who were Black or brown or who had low incomes.
For example, the invention of the juvenile justice system was put forward as a reform that would divert children from adult courts, treat them with compassion in the new juvenile courts, and keep them out of harsh prisons. But the reality turned out differently. The new juvenile justice system brought far more children under the courts’ supervision. The juvenile courts proved as punitive as the adult courts. Reform schools were cruel and dehumanizing places where children suffered greatly. And the children who came under the control of this system were disproportionately poor, Black, and brown.
And need I remind you that the crack-down on crime in the 1970s and ’80s led to the great expansion of mass incarceration we sadly still live with today?
The second reason I hesitated to condemn Rep. Rabb is that I know he’s very aware of this history. We talked about it many years ago.
So, when he released his statement on this vote, I was not surprised to see that it is a product of his deep thought and in-depth knowledge.
On H.B. 910, Rabb said the following:
“As a descendant of Black women, men and children legally bought and sold under the imprimatur of state law, my opposition to human trafficking is unwavering. So, it goes without saying that no child should ever be bought, sold or traded — and Pennsylvania law already treats that conduct as a serious felony. However, what H.B. 910 actually does is blur the line between organized exploitation and the desperate, often heartbreaking choices made by vulnerable parents, risking felony charges against people who need support, not a prison sentence. We can protect children without criminalizing poverty and desperation, and that’s exactly why I could not in good conscience support the current version of the bill in committee.”
H.B. 910 is put forward as legislation to close a loophole and apply human trafficking rules to infants. But as Rep. Rabb recognizes, closing this loophole might lead to the prosecution of people who are desperately poor and turn their infants over to others because they cannot care for them.
It’s not a sufficient response to this claim to say that “this would not happen”—for our entire history teaches us that it’s precisely this kind of thing that happens to desperately poor and vulnerable people.
About H.B. 2443, Rabb said the following:
“Yesterday, I voted no on H.B. 2443 in committee because I refuse to build a house on sand. Child victims deserve our full commitment — and full commitment means funding that actually works. This bill funds a child welfare program that may never materialize. Fines and fees have chronically low collection rates because many people simply can’t pay. Worse, the fund’s existence becomes dependent on continued criminal legal system involvement, creating a perverse financial incentive to lock up more people. I am prepared to file an amendment to this bill so that when it comes up for a floor vote, I can vote for it, given my strong support for this legislation’s underlying goal.”