Today the House Committee on Homeland Security is considering the Countering Violent Extremism Act of 2015, recently introduced by Committee Chairman Michael McCaul (R-Tex). Muslim Advocates, along with almost 50 other community, religious, and civil rights organizations have serious concern with the bill.
The CVE Act purports to bolster our nation's efforts against the spread of "ideologically motivated terrorist activities" by creating the Office of Coordination for Countering Violent Extremism within the Department of Homeland Security--at a cost of $40 million--and stemming the flow of extremist propaganda through social media, among other things. We are concerned, however, that the CVE Act will continue to unfairly focus CVE efforts on American Muslim communities--as have virtually all CVE efforts to date--while ignoring the diverse threat of extremist violence facing the United States, especially the threat posed by white supremacist groups. In fact, in the press release announcing the bill, Chairman McCaul refers only to "Islamist extremists" and states that we need "officials working to keep ISIS from radicalizing Americans...Terrorists at home and overseas are bringing the battle into our homes through the internet." It makes no reference to any other threat of extremist violence.
With the horrifying acts committed by Dylann Roof--an avowed white supremacist who sought to start a race war by murdering nine members of one our country's most historically significant African-American churches--we have all been served with a chilling reminder that extremist violence is not rooted in one particular ideology, and is certainly not exclusive to ISIS. In recent weeks, in fact, at least three (and possibly more) African-American churches in the South have been set ablaze. The extremist threat in our county is a multi-faceted one, not a Muslim one.
The CVE activities that this Act would codify--as Chairman McCaul's own words make clear--fail to appreciate the diversity of the threat. In fact, the very term CVE has become synonymous with Countering Violent Islamic Extremism exclusively. Indeed, in announcing the DOJ pilot programs on CVE in September of last year, then-Attorney General Eric Holder referred only to Muslim threats. Then, in February of this year, the White House held a CVE summit that focused almost exclusively on Islamic extremism (in particular the threat posed by ISIS).
The disproportionate focus on the Islamic extremist threat and, consequently, American Muslim communities is unjustifiable in light of the fact that incidents of extremist violence in the United States attributable to Muslims (or those identified as Muslim) comprise only a small fraction of the incidents carried out. The vast majority of terrorist incidents in the United States between 1995 and 2011 were, in fact, committed by right-wing extremist groups; the second most by eco-terrorist groups. An FBI report detailing terrorist incidents between 1980 and 2005, found that a full 94% of terrorist acts were committed by non-Muslim actors.
Many extremist acts have actually been committed against American Muslims. Recently, a man planning to rampage through a Muslim community in New York was indicted; late last year, a man driving an automobile adorned with anti-Muslim messages ran over and killed a 15-year-old Somali-American boy in Kansas City. Sadly, the CVE Act may unintentionally exacerbate anti-Muslim hate crimes, given the stigma CVE continues to place on all American Muslims.
Moreover, even if CVE programs were administered in a way that takes into account the diversity of the threat of extremist violence, there is no indication that the programs are effective in any way. It would be irresponsible to create an office based upon practices and programs that wholly are unsupported by any empirical research.
Thus, the CVE Act would not only codify the disproportionate and unjustified targeting of the American Muslim community, it would do so with practices that are not well-founded. It would also lend credence to the false notion that American Muslims are suspects in their in own country, not entitled to the same basic First Amendment protections as other American citizens. Being able to express one's political beliefs or practice one's religion, free of government intrusion, are bedrock American rights. We cannot support their infringement. Furthermore, while stemming violent extremism in our country is a laudable goal we all support, it is not one the CVE Act would help us achieve.