Democrats Abandon 'Defund' Movement as Cities Rush to Boost Police Funding

Paul Riverbank, 3/31/2025Cities abandon "defund police" movement, boost funding while seeking balance between enforcement and accountability.

The "Defund the Police" Movement's Pendulum Swing: A Critical Analysis

Having covered American policing for over two decades, I've rarely seen such a dramatic shift in public sentiment as we're witnessing now. The once-vocal "defund the police" movement is experiencing what many of us in political journalism suspected would be inevitable – a substantial reversal.

Take Seattle, for instance. I spoke with Democratic council member Rob Saka last week about his bold new resolution. "This isn't just about reversing course," he told me during our conversation at a local coffee shop. "It's about learning from our mistakes." His proposal would effectively eliminate the city's previous pledges to defund law enforcement – a remarkable turnaround for a city that once embraced the movement.

Meanwhile, New York City presents an fascinating case study in this evolving narrative. Mayor Eric Adams – who I've known since his days as a police captain – is pushing forward with a $225 million public safety training facility. Critics have dubbed it "Cop City," but Adams isn't backing down. After a particularly heated exchange at New Mount Pisgah Baptist Church East, he dismissed his opponents with characteristic bluntness, calling them "defund-police, bail-reform candidates" who don't grasp basic municipal finance.

The mayor's point about capital dollars versus operational funding is technically correct, though perhaps oversimplified. What's more interesting is his vision for the facility as a means to break down institutional barriers between various law enforcement agencies.

But here's where things get complicated. While American cities reconsider their stance on police funding, recent events are forcing us to confront difficult questions about use of force. The conviction of former Australian officer Kristian White for using a taser on a 95-year-old nursing home resident serves as a stark reminder that community standards are evolving rapidly.

I couldn't help but think of similar cases I've covered here in the States. A retired police commander I interviewed last month made a point that stuck with me: "Sometimes the best policing isn't about having the most advanced equipment – it's about having the wisdom to know when not to use it."

From my vantage point, what we're seeing isn't simply a pendulum swing from "defund" to "refund." It's more nuanced than that. Cities are struggling to find that sweet spot between maintaining robust law enforcement and ensuring accountability. Seattle's Saka captured this sentiment perfectly when he described it as "pivoting decisively toward a better, future-focused public safety model."

Yet challenges persist. During a recent ride-along with NYPD officers, I heard firsthand about staffing shortages and expanding responsibilities. One veteran sergeant put it bluntly: "New facilities are great, but we need more boots on the ground."

Looking ahead, I expect this conversation to continue evolving. The absolute positions of 2020 are giving way to more pragmatic approaches. As someone who's watched this debate unfold from city council meetings to street protests, I can say with confidence: the future of American policing will be shaped not by slogans, but by the difficult work of finding balance between funding, reform, and public safety.

The "Defund the Police" Movement's Pendulum Swing: A Critical AnalysisHaving covered American policing for over two decades, I've rarely seen such a dramatic shift in public sentiment as we're witnessing now. The once-vocal "defund the police" movement is experiencing what many of us in political journalism suspected would be inevitable – a substantial reversal.Take Seattle, for instance. I spoke with Democratic council member Rob Saka last week about his bold new resolution. "This isn't just about reversing course," he told me during our conversation at a local coffee shop. "It's about learning from our mistakes." His proposal would effectively eliminate the city's previous pledges to defund law enforcement – a remarkable turnaround for a city that once embraced the movement.Meanwhile, New York City presents an fascinating case study in this evolving narrative. Mayor Eric Adams – who I've known since his days as a police captain – is pushing forward with a $225 million public safety training facility. Critics have dubbed it "Cop City," but Adams isn't backing down. After a particularly heated exchange at New Mount Pisgah Baptist Church East, he dismissed his opponents with characteristic bluntness, calling them "defund-police, bail-reform candidates" who don't grasp basic municipal finance.The mayor's point about capital dollars versus operational funding is technically correct, though perhaps oversimplified. What's more interesting is his vision for the facility as a means to break down institutional barriers between various law enforcement agencies.But here's where things get complicated. While American cities reconsider their stance on police funding, recent events are forcing us to confront difficult questions about use of force. The conviction of former Australian officer Kristian White for using a taser on a 95-year-old nursing home resident serves as a stark reminder that community standards are evolving rapidly.I couldn't help but think of similar cases I've covered here in the States. A retired police commander I interviewed last month made a point that stuck with me: "Sometimes the best policing isn't about having the most advanced equipment – it's about having the wisdom to know when not to use it."From my vantage point, what we're seeing isn't simply a pendulum swing from "defund" to "refund." It's more nuanced than that. Cities are struggling to find that sweet spot between maintaining robust law enforcement and ensuring accountability. Seattle's Saka captured this sentiment perfectly when he described it as "pivoting decisively toward a better, future-focused public safety model."Yet challenges persist. During a recent ride-along with NYPD officers, I heard firsthand about staffing shortages and expanding responsibilities. One veteran sergeant put it bluntly: "New facilities are great, but we need more boots on the ground."Looking ahead, I expect this conversation to continue evolving. The absolute positions of 2020 are giving way to more pragmatic approaches. As someone who's watched this debate unfold from city council meetings to street protests, I can say with confidence: the future of American policing will be shaped not by slogans, but by the difficult work of finding balance between funding, reform, and public safety.