“Mr. Chairman, my fellow Americans, my fellow Democrats, I proudly accept the nomination of our party.” These were the words of Democratic Presidential Nominee Hubert Humphrey in 1968 Chicago, as he accepted the Democratic nomination for president to thunderous applause. What unfolded outside the walls of the convention, however, was complete anarchy as protestors rioted in a Grant Park that was barricaded with barbed wire fences and surrounded by a police force armed with assault rifles and tear gas. Chaos reined in the streets for hours as protestors hurled rocks at police and the police responded in kind with baton beatings and tear gas. In a report issued by the Mayor of Chicago, Richard J. Daley, analyzing the protests of the convention, it was listed that a total of 500 people had been treated for injuries and 152 officers were wounded. By all accounts, the events surrounding the 1968 Democratic National Convention were disastrous and were a model of a convention gone wrong. Thoughts of 1968 are clearly on the mind of convention officials as Tampa prepares to host the 2012 Republican National Convention.
We stand in 2012 as a nation starkly divided in governing philosophy, mired in an unemployment crisis that has lasted for four years, and patronized by a do-nothing Congress that continues to bury its head in the sand rather than dealing with the problems of our economy. Politics aside, this election will have a strong impact not only on the federal government but on people’s daily lives. Issues such as healthcare reform, tax reform, Supreme Court nominations etc. will be decided by the next president and these decisions will have vast implications on our lives. As such, passions will be on full display at the Republican National Convention in Tampa. Many will come to exercise their 1st amendment rights by supporting or protesting at the convention and a careful balance must be struck between the people’s right to protest and security to be able to avoid the anarchy of the 1968 Democratic National Convention.
The proper balance is almost an insurmountable feat to achieve as security fears have always outweighed the 1st amendment rights of protestors. The amount of security that will be used during the convention rivals that of some military bases as an entire section of the city of Tampa will be completely barricaded off and closed to the public during the convention. Everything South of Brorein street and West of Beneficial Dr. will be cordoned off to create the convention area. The immediate area surrounding the convention zone will be on high alert as street parking will be eliminated and some streets will be closed to traffic. Major traffic arteries such as Platt St. and the Crosstown Expressway will be closed. Tampa is not alone in sharing the burden of onerous security as many Convention events are also scheduled to take place in St. Petersburg.
Protestors will be limited in their ability to demonstrate as the city established what I call a “free speech zone.” On May 17th, 2012, the Tampa City Council voted to establish an “event zone” next to the Tampa Bay Times Forum which would be solely used as a protest zone. This “event zone” will be the only place that is lawfully recognized where demonstrators, supporters, and protestors can lawfully assemble to express themselves. On its face, these event zones seem like something out of a dystopian novel. On the other hand, the convention organizers want to avoid a situation where convention goers are harassed or intimidated by protestors. Attendees of the convention have just as much right to attend the event with piece of mind as demonstrators have to protest outside.
Despite criticism to the contrary, the reasons for these strict security precautions are not completely unfounded as the convention will host Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney and a large number of Republican elected officials from across the country. In this respect, the security of convention goers is more paramount than the ability for protestors to wave signs outside.
The United States, however, is a country founded on the principle of peaceful protest and the ability to redress grievances and it would seem that the establishment of a “free speech zone” would be antagonistic to that idea. I find that even though the idea of limiting the locations of where protestors are able to gather and assemble might seem detestable, the content and message of the protestors is not being manipulated or restricted in any way. A protestor can carry a sign that says “DEMOCRATS KILL BABIES” or a sign that reads “REPUBLICANS ARE RACIST.” Neither of these signs will land that person in jail. If that person decides to hurl rocks at people or act in ways that are not at all peaceful, that is no longer a constitutionally protected action but rather a criminal act.
Some of these issues of public security versus speech rights were touched upon last year during the Occupy Wall Street protests that took place across the country. Tampa was no exception and has a vibrant chapter aptly named Occupy Tampa. The Occupy movement began with daytime protests in Lykes Gaslight Park in downtown Tampa with the first meet up occurring on October 6th, 2011. Mayor Bob Buckhorn and the city council allowed the protests to occur despite the lack of a permit as an act of good faith. The event went smoothly and received favorable press coverage as 600 or so protestors came and went to the park throughout the day.
The tactics of the Occupy movement soon wore out their welcome, however, as Occupy members began staying overnight in Curtis Hixon park. Sleeping bags littered the sidewalk at night as protestors were allowed to sleep only during the night and they were promptly awoken by police at 6 am. While generally supportive of the goals of the Occupy movement, Mayor Bob Buckhorn was less than enthusiastic about the methods used by the Occupy Tampa. The Mayor stated “If they want a place to sleep, they can go home or to a hotel, just because they want to occupy something doesn’t mean we are obligated to provide them with an opportunity to camp out in a public park or on a sidewalk.”
Therein lays the crux of the matter; the opposition to Occupy Tampa was not due to the content of the message but rather the methods used by Occupy. The right to protest was not being contested; rather it was the methods of the protestors. The ability for Occupy protestors to speak their mind, despite their tactics being curtailed, is a far cry from other countries that seek to quash political dissent. Three members of the Russian punk band Pussy Riot are facing up to seven years in prison for performing a song that was highly critical of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Our system is not perfect, but America does not imprison people based solely on the content of their message.
The Occupy protests did help to illuminate issues with the City of Tampa’s permitting process for protest events with more than 200 people. Events scheduled in Tampa with more than 200 people must apply for a permit no less than 60 days before the event and the organizer must carry $1 million in liability insurance to cover any damage or injuries that may occur during the event. Liability insurance of that magnitude is a costly affair that requires a serious financial investment. Since most protests are the result of spontaneity and have an inherent lack of coordination or central organization, protests such as those done by Occupy highlighted the issues with the permitting process of large protests. It seems that free speech isn’t being denied by baton wielding police but rather by a bureaucratic nightmare of regulation and permits.
Passions tend to be on full display at protests such as Occupy and the upcoming convention and these actions and policies by the City of Tampa can serve to agitate protestors because they are viewed with suspicion as actions intended to limit their message or ability to express themselves. There will no doubt be many demonstrators at the Convention that will be upset by the limitations in where they can assemble and will view this as a assault of their constitutional rights. It seems that these actions taken by the City of Tampa, although intended to avoid anarchy and chaos, will agitate protestors more. There’s no doubt that seeing police armed with riot shields, tear gas, machine guns, and full body armor will make for a toxic mix that acts as an intimidating force to peaceful protestors. It is important to remember, however, that on both sides of the fence of the Convention are people expressing their political beliefs and ideals. All sides, despite their differing views, can agree that the expression of speech is a sacred right and tradition in America that must be upheld.
As I’ve stressed before, the security protocol surrounding the Republican National Convention is an extremely delicate balance of security and first amendment rights. The security situation surrounding the upcoming Convention is not perfect and many attendees and demonstrators alike will probably see their rights curtailed as other national conventions have in the past. While no city or convention will ever perfect this mix and achieve a harmonious event, cities such as Tampa can learn from the past and make an effort to prevent the anarchy of the 1968 convention in Chicago while maintaining free speech for everyone who chooses to express themselves.