Congressional Democrats returned home last week to tout new federal legislation intended to stop a surge in retail theft. It’s an interesting concept, but the trio might also consider explaining to members of their own party how coddling criminals can encourage wrongdoing.

On Wednesday, Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto and Reps. Dina Titus and Susie Lee were in Las Vegas to promote the Combating Organized Retail Crime Act of 2023, which all three have co-sponsored. The proposal, which would give federal prosecutors increased power to go after organized theft rings, comes in response to an increase in inventory “shrinkage” at businesses large and small in many areas of the country.

Thieves “are becoming increasingly aggressive, and our associates are threatened every day with knives, guns, Mace, bear-spray, stun guns — you name it,” said Scott Glenn, vice president of asset protection for Home Depot. Indeed, in recent years it has become common to see surveillance video of brazen thieves in San Francisco, Chicago, New York and elsewhere walking out of a store after helping themselves to whatever they can carry.

But why would that be? It couldn’t have anything to do with misguided “defund the police” policies that became all the vogue in progressive circles, could it? It’s all completely removed from leftist district attorneys who have vowed not to prosecute offenders for crimes such as shoplifting and vandalism, isn’t it? And surely it couldn’t be related to Democratic legislatures, including in Nevada, redefining what constitutes a felony when it comes to those looking for the five-finger discount, right?

There’s nothing wrong with criminal justice reform and ensuring that those who make a mistake have a chance at redemption. But when such good intentions morph into willfully turning a blind eye to antisocial and criminal behavior, they become a detriment to public safety and a threat to law-abiding citizens and their neighborhoods. Just ask the people of Oakland, where NAACP leaders recently requested that a state of emergency be called as a result of rampant crime that goes unpursued by the authorities.

Making improvements doesn’t entail locking up a mother who steals baby food or a teenager who lifts a candy bar. It simply means sending the message that there are consequences for engaging in illegal behavior — particularly over and over again.

Expanding federal statutes to attack large-scale retail theft operations may do a modicum of good by adding more resources to the fight, although state and local laws already exist to combat such activity. But it might be just as effective for voters to recognize that Democrats who advocate defunding the police or ignoring whole portions of the criminal code are neither compassionate nor working in the best interests of their constituents.

— Tribune News Service