As Texas Gov. Abbott pushes defunding police pledge, it’s about politics, not policy
Gov. Greg Abbott isn’t on the ballot next year, hasn’t said whether he’s running for another term and doesn’t face any declared opponents yet.
But he’s found his next political opponent: The “defund the police” agenda.
First, Abbott came to Fort Worth, where voters recently approved a 10-year extension of a police-funding sales tax, to support a freeze in the property tax rates of cities that cut police budgets. Then, he declared the state should consider taking over the Austin police when the City Council voted to slash funding for cops.
And on Thursday, he’s making a show of a new pledge to oppose any “defund the police” measures, asking candidates of all parties to sign on.
Abbott is far from alone. Many of his fellow Republicans in Texas and nationwide are putting their names to a similar pledge sponsored by Heritage Action, a Washington-based conservative advocacy group. Among Texans, Sen. Ted Cruz is the most prominent so far.
Any proposal to shift significant resources away from crime prevention, slash the number of officers or cut their pay is a bad idea. But these ironclad political pledges are often ill-defined and yet manage to take on lives of their own.
States and cities will soon face vast budget shortfalls from the deep recession wrought by the coronavirus pandemic. The conservative approach would be to scrutinize all government programs, and in many cities, there’s no bigger line item than the police department. Are these the lone government entities that somehow manage to operate with no waste, the only place where operations can’t be tightened?
Heritage Action spokesman Noah Weinrich said that his group’s pledge is focused on broad cuts that are “ideologically driven,” not the product of a bad budget year.
“If it’s a tight budget and police have to go first,” such a vote would violate the pledge, he said. But “if it’s really a tough budget situation and there’s an across-the-board cut, we would not consider that defunding. We would not want police to be the first thing on the chopping block.”
The group plans to use the pledge to nudge elected officials, asking members to contact local and federal representatives, as part of its “Fight for America” campaign tied to the November elections. It will soon post billboards advertising the pledge in Dallas, New York and Atlanta, Weinrich said.
Cruz, too, said the idea is to block sweeping anti-police campaigns that gained exposure after the killing of George Floyd by a Minneapolis officer, though he didn’t say directly where he would draw the line on funding votes.
“Defund the police” is a “rallying cry to push policies that attack the men and women in blue who patrol our streets to protect us from lawlessness and violent crime,” Cruz said in a written statement to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. “Where this dangerous idea has been implemented, the results have been catastrophic, jeopardizing public safety and the safety of law enforcement officers dedicated to protecting civil society.”
The lack of specifics on what the pledge means could become a problem. Weinrich said Heritage Action would probably “score” votes in Congress on cutting police programs. That means its report cards declaring how conservative a lawmaker is (or isn’t) would consider votes on police legislation.
Many politicians live in fear of such score sheets from ideological or issue-based groups. They make easy fodder for an opponent, especially in a primary, to cite a seemingly authoritative source proving that the incumbent isn’t conservative or progressive enough.
What they don’t make for is thoughtful voting or compromise on issues. What if, for instance, compromise legislation comes along that would include improved training standards and limits on union protections for officers but also cut federal funding if departments fell short of measures to reduce brutality? Is that a vote to “defund the police?”
In a political season with so much uncertainty over the pandemic and the economy, the law-and-order message against riots in American cities and efforts to curtail crime-fighting are a lifeline for Republicans. And if that serves to refocus our policing debate on preventing officer brutality while keeping streets safe, it’s useful.
But hiding behind simple slogans and pledges to avoid the complex issues in American policing won’t help when it comes time to craft precise police reforms — or when tough budget decisions must be made.
This story was originally published September 9, 2020 at 2:23 PM.
