asts of reruns of The Untouchables imaginernfor a second that this labyrinth ofrnbureaucracies has made American societyrnany safer than it was before any ofrnthem existed?rnMoreover, since the “incorporationrndoctrine” was foisted off on the legalrnsystem, the federal courts have presidedrnover what is nothing less than a nationalrnrevolution in criminal law wherebyrnevery unsolicited confession of a streetcornerrngrifter and every poke of a policeman’srnnightstick in the ribs of arnpimp or a pusher yields yet another newrnrevelation of a hitherto latent meaningrnof the Bill of Rights. By slyly reshapingrnthe Constitution’s limitations of federalrnpower into restrictions on state and localrnauthority, the courts have managed tornwreck most of what remains of effectivernlocal law enforcement in the countryrnand to centralize and censor its commonsensernprocedures. What the courtsrnhave been unable to reach with their legalrnfictions has been mopped up byrnaffirmative-action programs that mandaternthe hiring of unqualified minoritiesrnand women as policemen and preventrnthe promotion of qualified officers.rnNor will federalizing (more properly,rnnationalizing) law enforcement stop inrnthe new age of Mr. Clinton and his policyrnharem of Hillary, Zoe, Kimba, Donna,rnand/or Janet. It took the new Presidentrnneariy the whole of the first monthrnof his administration to locate an AttorneyrnGeneral who both supported himrnand was also sufficiently square with thernlaw to pass the scrutiny of the cheekbouncers,rnsecret-leakers, plagiarists, andrnwoman-drowners on the Senate JudiciaryrnCommittee, and when he finallyrndiscovered the incumbent Ms. Reno,rnshe at once announced that her first priorityrnof business as the nation’s toprngangbuster would be the welfare of children.rnMr. Clinton himself probablyrnknows no more about law enforcementrnthan any other public responsibility, andrnhe probably cares about it even less thanrnhe does for those things he may knowrnsomething about, but he too wentrnthrough the charade of “tough onrncrooks” earlier this year when he vowedrnto push for the hiring (largely with federalrnfunds) of yet another 100,000 policemenrnto put on the nation’s streetsrneven as he also promised to sign morernfederal handgun legislation.rnThat, in a nutshell, is the longstandingrnliberal-ncoconservative law- enforcementrnstrategy; disarm the citizensrnand swell the power of the federalrnleviathan. It has nothing to do with protectingrnAmericans from criminals orrnpunishing the criminals themselves, letrnalone with restoring to the communitiesrnand citizenry the force they naturallyrnneed and ought to have to protectrnthemselves. It has everything to dornwith enhancing the power of those whorncan expect to gain from an enlargedrnbut largely incompetent federal lawenforcementrnapparat and making certainrnno one outside the federal niegastaternand the professional police agenciesrnthat profit from it has any power atrnall. The nationalization of law enforcement,rneven when it claims to be “toughrnon crooks,” is a fraud that converts localrnpublic authorities into vestigial organsrnof the mcgastatc and robs social institutionsrnof the force that disciplines society.rnFrom at least the days when FranklinrnRoosevelt’s first Attorney General,rnI lomer Cummings, barnstormed aboutrnthe country stumping for what he variouslyrncalled a “national police force,”rnan “American Scotland Yard,” a “superrnpolice force,” and, on one occasion, arn”Federal Army of Justice” to wage hisrn”war on crime,” the grand design of thernarchitects of the managerial state hasrnbeen to replace what they view as thern”chaos” and “backwardness” of local andrnstate police departments with the scientificallyrnplanned, humanely progressive,rnand fashionably therapeutic experimentationrnof law enforcement administeredrnfrom the purportedly cleaner corridorsrnof Washington. Cops who knowrntheir beats and keep the peace on them,rnand sheriffs who can tell the differencernbetween local ne’er-do-wells and dangerousrncriminals, arc supposed to yieldrnto over-educated young ladies with master’srndegrees in womanology.rnBut law enforcement, like most ofrnthe other social functions Washingtonrnclaims to be able to perform better thanrnanyone else, is really not a yery complicatedrnmatter. Most societies in historyrnhave never had much of a problem withrncontrolling criminals, and they’ve neverrnneeded science, therapy, special trainingrnand task forces, centralized bureaucracies,rnor indeed very many cops torndeal properly and speedily with killers,rnthieves, and rapists. What they neededrnand what they had at hand that we dornnot have was precisely the force that “inrnone shape or another . . . determinesrnthe relations between human beings”rnand the will to make use of it. If Americansrnreally want to take back theirrnstreets, their cities, and their suburbsrnand to teach some manners to the clodsrnand crooks that are pushing them outrnof their theaters, parking lots, shoppingrnmalls, and restaurants, a little force andrnthe will to use it are all they need to accomplishrnthe task.rnLIBERAL ARTSrnNUEVE-UNO-UNOrnOnce limited to schoolrooms and voting booths, bilingualism has now entered fire stations.rnIn the Chicago suburbs, the Northlake Fire Protection I^istrict has subscribedrnto a multilingual telephone service that will enable it to respond to emergency callersrnwho do not speak English. Reacting to local Hispanic activist Jesus Espinoza’s concernsrnabout how Northlake dispatchers would answer emergency calls from the district’srnlarge Spanish-speaking population, the district voted last December to hook uprnto the AT&T Language Line, which provides links to translators who speak more thanrn120 languages. Following on the heels of DUCOM, the centralized dispatchingrnservice for DuPage County, Illinois, that has used the AT&T system for over a year,rnNorthlake taxpayers have opted to pay a $490 initial hook-up fee and $50 monthly servicernfees to sign up for the language line. But activist Espinoza is still not satisfied; arguingrnthat the line is not a solution and that Spanish-speaking Hispanics should hernhired instead, he has filed an unfair-hiring complaint against the district with the JusticernDepartment.rnMAY 1993/9rnrnrn