Predictably, the initial congressional efforts to reform policing in response to the sweeping Black Lives Matter protests have come to naught. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) pushed an inadequate proposal to a vote, and when Democrats voted not to proceed, the measure died.

A House measure from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D) appears more substantive – incorporating steps to ban the chokeholds that killed George Floyd and numerous others, create a national registry on police misconduct, and require body cameras for all officers on duty.

Yet no bill Congress tries to rush through before November – without hearings or committee sessions – is likely to be enacted, and if passed, to accomplish much. That’s not how the legislative process works.

The nation’s conscience has been aroused, dramatically, but translating outrage into effective reform will take time.

As it happens, Congress should be far readier to enact reforms at the other end of the criminal justice system – prisons and jails. A more mature movement has effectively outlined how treating substance and mental health disorders as illnesses and not as crimes could reverse the “mass incarceration,” unique to the United States, that has afflicted us since the 1980s.

In both instances, however, we must recognize that Congress has a limited role. There is no national police force, nor is there likely to be. States and municipalities run police departments, and if we are to reform them to counter institutionalized racism, we’ll have to start there.

Nevertheless, the federal government, among the fiscal disasters brought on by the coronavirus shutdown, could play a vital part, taking a leaf from federal programs half a century ago that provided financial incentives attached to requirements for change.

No, we’re not talking about the ill-advised policy tying federal transportation funding to a 21-year-old drinking age, which, like the drug laws, created another large class of routine lawbreakers. Instead, it was Great Society programs to overhaul state finances, create Cabinet-style executive departments – and encourage more effective policing – that did, or could have, accomplished their goals.

Most of the funding dried up in the Nixon years, privatization of government services became the watchword, and institutional problems in policing have festered ever since.

No one knows exactly what measures should be mandated in exchange for funding – regional training academies, codes of conduct, and effective disciplinary standards with civilian review are among the possibilities – but that’s why research, reports and hearings are always part of legislation that not only passes Congress, but does something about the problem.

Emphasizing effective policing, rather than just trying to weed out “bad cops,” is preferable for another big reason: incentives work better than punishment. The reality is that most police officers who will be with us in five years are already employed.

They have dangerous jobs – we can’t exclude tightening our ridiculously lax gun laws from the “to do” list – and many have well-founded fears for their safety. As professionals, they already have extensive training, but clearly we need better training, as well as messages throughout the system that racial prejudice is as unacceptable in the precinct house as it is on the street.

For rural states like Maine, federal support for policing can take alternative forms. Those federally funded studies from the 1970s found that, to be effective, police departments need at least 10 full-time officers. Today, with new forensic evidence techniques figured in, that number would be higher.

By this standard, most of Maine’s 100-odd municipal departments are, by definition, understaffed. Yet in the handful of towns that disbanded departments, among them Standish, Bethel and Lebanon, the reason was usually an inability to hire and retain officers.

Departments in cities like Portland, Lewiston and Bangor could indeed benefit from programs that emphasize better relations with all those in the community, but elsewhere, the ability to investigate and solve crimes, as well as providing more effective patrols and response, might be more important.

Counties are the logical alternative to tiny municipal departments, and Maine’s 16 counties all have elected sheriffs whose primary duty is, or should be, to keep the peace. County jails are no longer needed, and should be merged into the otherwise integrated state court system, but improved county police patrols make a great deal of sense.

Left to their own devices at the municipal level, this will never happen, nor has the Legislature shown any inclination to take on the problem. Federal grants, maintained over a multi-year period, could change that calculation.

Police should play a significant role in maintaining and increasing public safety. Given the right carrots – and sticks – that’s at least one important change that could emerge from our present travails.

Douglas Rooks, a Maine editor, reporter, opinion writer and author for 35 years, has published books about George Mitchell, and the Maine Democratic Party. He welcomes comment at drooks@tds.net

Comments are not available on this story.