Top 5 Reasons Pennsylvania May Not be the next DNA collection State

Today's Supreme Court decision that upheld Maryland's preconviction DNA collection law was pretty much atrocious, as pointed out earlier by my colleague Ngani. But there's no guarantee that Pennsylvania will be next. Here's why, from the home office in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.

5. Last year the state Senate passed a preconviction DNA bill. It was rejected by the state House. In October, the House passed an amendment by a freshman Democrat, Representative Brandon Neuman of Washington County, that gutted the bill, including the DNA collection provision with 132 votes in favor of the amendment. This bipartisan coalition included the Speaker of the House.

4. The public safety arguments fall flat. In 2011, Maryland collected 11,000 DNA samples from people charged but not yet convicted of a crime under its law. That led to nine additional convictions for unsolved crimes. Not 90. Not 900. Not 9,999. But nine. Plus, under the commonwealth's current, postconviction DNA law, the Pennsylvania State Police (PSP) has a backlog of eight months to test DNA samples, a backlog that will only balloon if the legislature passes a preconviction collection bill. No one can argue with a straight face that preconviction DNA collection protects public safety.

3. It's expensive. PSP has estimated that preconviction DNA collection would cost $13 million.

2. The right to privacy under the state constitution is robust. Pennsylvania courts have consistently ruled that Article I, Section VIII of the state constitution provides greater privacy protections in search-and-seizures than the Fourth Amendment of the federal constitution.

1. The ACLU of Pennsylvania is on it. And we're awesome.

What happened in Harrisburg?

So the dust has pretty much settled from budget month at the state capitol. What didn't happen is as noteworthy as what did happen.

No defund of Planned Parenthood. Although House Bill 2405 was introduced with great fanfare- because everything primary sponsor Rep. Daryl Metcalfe does is done with great fanfare- the bill was referred to the House Rules Committee and was never heard from again.

No preconviction DNA collection. There were murmurs throughout the spring that the House would take up Senate Bill 775, mandating the collection of DNA from all persons arrested- but not convicted- for a felony or one of several enumerated misdemeanors. In June, the House had already debated expanding the power of the government and civilians to wiretap us and a ban on "secret compartments" in vehicles. Taking up DNA collection of people who are innocent under the law may have been a bridge too far toward the police state, but we are on alert for the possibility that this bill comes back when the legislature returns to session in the fall.

No ID for public benefits. With the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, Joseph Scarnati, as the primary sponsor, it seemed that the passage of SB 9 was a foregone conclusion. But the bill went through a serious game of legislative ping-pong. It was amended and passed in the House, forcing it to return to the Senate. It was amended and passed in the Senate, forcing it back to the House. The bill was brought up for consideration on the House floor at 11:45pm on Saturday, just as the governor was preparing for the signing ceremony of the budget and related legislation. When the House Republicans returned from the ceremony, SB 9 wasn't taken up.

SB 9, in its current form, mandates applicants for public aid to show ID to be eligible for the aid, with some exceptions. No ID, no aid. As we've learned throughout the debate over voter ID, there are some citizens who do not have and who would have a difficult time obtaining ID. In the House, Rep. Metcalfe (that guy again) stirred the pot further by adding a provision that would create a third-degree felony if an undocumented immigrant possesses a benefits card, an obviously unconstitutional provision since there are legitimate reasons for an undocumented immigrant to possess a card. For example, he might have it because his citizen child participates in food stamps.

It's hard to predict where SB 9 will end.

No taxpayer-funded private school vouchers. Vouchers proponents are claiming victory after the passage of an enhanced version of the Educational Improvement Tax Credit program, in which private corporations can get a tax break for donating to a scholarship fund. But the fact is that "EITC 2.0," as it's been called, was Plan B after the defeat of vouchers, which would have given public funds directly to students to attend private and parochial schools....well, parochial schools because the amount of the voucher could only cover the tuition at a religious school and not at a secular private school.

We lost on a new E-Verify mandate for public contractors, Senate Bill 637, Pennsylvania's first E-Verify mandate. The governor has not yet signed the bill, but he is expected to do so.

All told, though, we escaped the torture of budget month in Harrisburg with civil liberties relatively unscathed. All in a day's, or month's, work at the ACLU of Pennsylvania..... And that sounds like a good reason for you to donate today!

A swab in the cheek while the State Police cracks

Today the Pennsylvania Senate Law and Justice Committee and the House Judiciary Committee held a joint hearing in Gap, Lancaster County, on the plans by the Pennsylvania State Police to close its barracks in Ephrata and to downgrade the status of Troop J, the local PSP headquarters, to a substation. The latter move would lead to numerous services of the state police moving elsewhere.

PSP Commissioner Frank Noonan testified and was followed by several local leaders. Noonan said that the state police is currently 435 troopers short of its full complement, statewide, and expects to be at 500 short by the time the next class of cadets graduates from the academy. The locals, including the chairman of the county commissioners, the district attorney, and the chief of police in the city of Lancaster, protested PSP's planned closure.

Could PSP use $13 million? That's Noonan's estimated cost of Senate Bill 775, a bill to collect DNA from people who have not been convicted of a crime but who have been arrested for a felony or one of several designated misdemeanors. We oppose this bill because taking a DNA sample from someone is a search, and in order to conduct this search, the government needs a finding of probable cause that it will produce evidence of a crime. The high state court in Maryland recently came to the same conclusion. DNA collection from people who have not been convicted of a crime turns innocent-until-proven-guilty on its head.

The pricetag isn't the only significant practical problem with this bill. PSP's DNA caseload will increase from 23,000 samples per year to 121,000 samples per year, according to an article published in the Philadelphia Inquirer in February. Under current law, in which DNA is taken from those convicted of a felony or one of the designated misdemeanors, it takes eight months to analyze a DNA sample. The wheels of justice could come to a grinding halt if SB 775 becomes law.

Incredibly, in this environment, the House Judiciary Committee is rumored to be taking up SB 775 before the end of June. While local leaders gnash their teeth over the closure of a nearby state police barracks and while PSP leaders decry their shortage of troopers, the legislature may take up this bill to place a new and expensive burden on the state police.

How many troopers could the state hire with $13 million?