As California's economic woes continue to threaten public services to the point where 47 pink slips were recently issued to Stockton police officers, Congressman Dan Lungren is coming under fire from the blue side of the aisle in Washington for his April 23 vote against "The COPS Improvement Act."

Democratic leaders call it a vote against public safety. Lungren thinks that the state should generally avoid using Washington, D.C. as a funding crutch for services they're required to provide in the first place.

The Community Oriented Policing Services Improvement Act, or House of Representatives Bill 1139, is designed to increase federal law enforcement grants that were originally created during Bill Clinton's administration in order to put 100,000 more cops on the streets across America. Critics of the COPS funding claim that it's a known fact the legislation never met all of its major objectives. Democrats claim the funding has made neighborhoods safer places to live and deserves to be continued under President Barrack Obama.

On April 23, the House of Representatives spoke, with the COPS Improvement Act scoring an overwhelming victory at 342 votes to 78. Part of the landslide was due to the fact that a number of House Republicans backed the legislation. One Republican who didn't was California's former attorney general, Lungren. Members of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee are now pointing out that California's cities and counties need all the help they can get at the moment to pay for law enforcement. They also say Lungren's vote calls into question his long-standing quest to portray himself as a law enforcement crusader.

"When Congressman Lungren said no to hiring over 6,700 cops, his hypocrisy reached a new low," said Andy Stone, western regional press secretary for the DCCC. "As California's former attorney general, Lungren flaunted his law and order credentials, calling himself 'tough on crime.' But when push came to shove, Lungren voted against more cops for California's streets. That's just another example of Dan Lungren doing one thing in Washington and another back home in California."

Lungren could not be reached for comment by press time, but a spokesman from his Washington, D.C. office said the congressman's vote against HR 1139 isn't a reflection of his overall commitment to law enforcement.

"He didn't feel this bill was a proper use of taxpayer funds," said the spokesman, who discussed the controversy with the Ledger Dispatch under the condition of not being identified. "He thought this entrenched the federal government on the local level. Dan Lungren is, of course, not against putting cops on the streets. But there's always a problem with the state and counties relying on Washington, D.C. to help fund things they are responsible for paying for themselves. They can become dependent on that type of funding and then, if the federal part of the money disappears, what happens at that point? They're just twisting this around to make it look like Lungren is suddenly anti-cop."

However, the spokesman's comments shed little light on why - since Lungren now opposes the concept of federal COPS funding - he did vote for House of Representatives Bill 2862 four years ago, which allotted $200 million for COPS funding and other state and local law enforcement programs.