3 ms·

This might be true if the lawsuit damages were paid out of police budgets, but in many instances this isn't the case – the lawsuits are paid out of a combinatio

This might be true if the lawsuit damages were paid out of police budgets, but in many instances this isn't the case – the lawsuits are paid out of a combination of municipal liability insurance claims and the general city budget, eg) https://abcnews.go.com/US/millions-lawsuit-settlements-hidden-cost-police-misconduct-legal/story?id=70999540 https://abcnews.go.com/US/millions-lawsuit-settlements-hidde... or https://www.npr.org/2020/09/19/914170214/police-settlements-how-the-cost-of-misconduct-impacts-cities-and-taxpayers https://www.npr.org/2020/09/19/914170214/police-settlements-... There's a broad disconnect between the police departments, their hiring and disciplinary practices, and the consequences of the lawsuits their actions generate.

lotsofpulp 4y ago
Tax revenue is fungible, it does not make a difference which budget it comes from. The city’s residents are still going to have the same expectation of police services. It has to be individual police that are liable.
- msbarnett 4y ago
  The overall fungibility of tax revenue is irrelevant to the criticism of the perverse incentives at play here. Tying the payouts specifically to the police budget would mean that when the city's residents' policing service expectations failed to be met, one could point to that being a direct consequence of police actions costing them their own policing budget, increasing pressure on the public to do things like elect effective police oversight commissioners who will act to reign in their abuses and provide good value-for-cost policing. The status quo instead disconnects the oversight from the consequences, leading to the quiet defunding of other services for political reasons (since it would require city counsels to constantly vote to cut police budgets in proportion to each damage award, rather than happening "neutrally" by centering the legal defense and payouts within the police budget to begin with).
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    > Tying the payouts specifically to the police budget would mean that when the city's residents' policing service expectations failed to be met, one could point to that being a direct consequence of police actions costing them their own policing budget, increasing pressure on the public to do things like elect effective police oversight commissioners who will act to reign in their abuses and provide good value-for-cost policing. This is a very tall order that I predict would not come true. It is already very easy to see how much police misconduct costs a city’s tax base, but push come to shove, most people will think they are isolated cases and will not happen to them. > The status quo instead disconnects the oversight from the consequences, leading to the quiet defunding of other services for political reasons This political reason is that voting in local elections is not common. 100% of the police and their allies will be voting, while most others will be spending their evenings on things other than paying attention to local politics. There are a few exceptions, but overall, I would not expect voters to react to feeling the pain of reduced police budgets with “let’s dig into why police budgets are getting smaller”. By and large, they will simply vote for the politician that provides the simplest message, which is the incumbents are refusing to properly fund the police department, and if you vote for me, I will properly fund it. The only solution I see is holding individual cops accountable, including for criminal charges like perjury for lying such as the detective in this case clearly did.
aidenn0 4y ago
I have a friend who is a cop, and when testifying in a use of force case, he was pressured by his superiors to express his opinions in a way that would minimize liability for the department, so at least anecdotally they care about lawsuits.
- michaelmrose 4y ago
  They care enough to lie and manipulate where it is trivial to do so that isn't a high standard.

lotsofpulp 4y ago

Tax revenue is fungible, it does not make a difference which budget it comes from. The city’s residents are still going to have the same expectation of police services. It has to be individual police that are liable.

msbarnett 4y ago
The overall fungibility of tax revenue is irrelevant to the criticism of the perverse incentives at play here. Tying the payouts specifically to the police budget would mean that when the city's residents' policing service expectations failed to be met, one could point to that being a direct consequence of police actions costing them their own policing budget, increasing pressure on the public to do things like elect effective police oversight commissioners who will act to reign in their abuses and provide good value-for-cost policing. The status quo instead disconnects the oversight from the consequences, leading to the quiet defunding of other services for political reasons (since it would require city counsels to constantly vote to cut police budgets in proportion to each damage award, rather than happening "neutrally" by centering the legal defense and payouts within the police budget to begin with).
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  > Tying the payouts specifically to the police budget would mean that when the city's residents' policing service expectations failed to be met, one could point to that being a direct consequence of police actions costing them their own policing budget, increasing pressure on the public to do things like elect effective police oversight commissioners who will act to reign in their abuses and provide good value-for-cost policing. This is a very tall order that I predict would not come true. It is already very easy to see how much police misconduct costs a city’s tax base, but push come to shove, most people will think they are isolated cases and will not happen to them. > The status quo instead disconnects the oversight from the consequences, leading to the quiet defunding of other services for political reasons This political reason is that voting in local elections is not common. 100% of the police and their allies will be voting, while most others will be spending their evenings on things other than paying attention to local politics. There are a few exceptions, but overall, I would not expect voters to react to feeling the pain of reduced police budgets with “let’s dig into why police budgets are getting smaller”. By and large, they will simply vote for the politician that provides the simplest message, which is the incumbents are refusing to properly fund the police department, and if you vote for me, I will properly fund it. The only solution I see is holding individual cops accountable, including for criminal charges like perjury for lying such as the detective in this case clearly did.

aidenn0 4y ago

I have a friend who is a cop, and when testifying in a use of force case, he was pressured by his superiors to express his opinions in a way that would minimize liability for the department, so at least anecdotally they care about lawsuits.

michaelmrose 4y ago
They care enough to lie and manipulate where it is trivial to do so that isn't a high standard.