When I was running for Congress during the George Floyd protests, I heard that Democrats wanted to “defund the police.” I thought this must be a Republican talking point to try to discredit the Black Lives Matter movement, but I quickly learned that no, this actually was the agenda of a distinct swath of the Democratic progressive base. This agenda would come to be widely blamed for the hemorrhaging of moderate suburban voters from the Democratic fold in 2020 and subsequent elections.
Which brings me to the city of Atlanta and the law enforcement training center debate. Much like “defund the police,” I strongly suspect this will contribute to the continuing sense of alienation that moderate Democrats and swing voters feel towards the Democratic party. Certainly, from my suburban vantage point, it looks like downtown progressive activists, supported and funded by national activists and donors, are going crazy over a well-intentioned effort to improve police training in Atlanta.
While letting people vote may help settle the waters on the matter, the debate is clearly not about voting, or about the environment, or about the cost of the center, or its location. The focal point of the protest is “Stop cop city” with the implication that building a training center will lead to police “militarization,” or implicitly, funding for police training will lead to the brutalization of Black men.
Credit: Steve Schaefer
Credit: Steve Schaefer
But the logic of this is confounding: One of the major proposals coming out of the Black Lives Matter protests was improved training for police in techniques like de-escalation and simulations to help police respond effectively and appropriately in high-stress, high-stakes situations. This kind of training for police should lead to better, more thoughtful policing - not worse. Further, as far as I or anyone on the outside can tell, absolutely no one who is at the table has the remotest interest in training that would lead to “militarization.” The training center has been a long-term project of the Black leadership of Atlanta and will support police trainees and continuing education for police, many of whom themselves are likely to be Black.
Prior to George Floyd’s death, as I was campaigning for the 7th Congressional District, I heard many concerns about “driving while Black” and other well-founded anxiety about police brutality, but I also heard significant concerns from Black voters, particularly those who lived in low-income areas, that they didn’t have enough police to keep their neighborhoods safe. The goal of having good policing – where everyone has confidence in our police and feels safe in their community -- is quite different from no policing or underfunded and poorly-trained police, which is the alternative that the protesters seem to be proposing.
On a policy level, the protest does not make a lot of sense, but worse, this issue has the potential to do extensive damage to the city and to critical Democratic causes. Should the protesters succeed in bringing down the law enforcement center, I would not be surprised if this breathes new life into the Buckhead secession movement. If crime ticks back up in the city, I’m sure the protest will be blamed. And I am pretty confident that this will continue to alienate suburban swing voters who despise Donald Trump but look at the law enforcement center and the “defund the police” protests as the Democrats’ own form of crazy.
Meanwhile, other critical causes languish: hundreds of thousands of Georgians don’t have health insurance, hospitals are closing and gun violence is rampant. If protesters are intent on throwing themselves on a grenade for a cause, how about one of these? These are issues that have a much broader base of support and I would wager even a modest win on any one of them would go further to saving Georgians’ lives, including Black lives, than taking down a well-intentioned effort to better train Atlanta’s police.
Carolyn Bourdeaux is a former member of Congress from Georgia’s 7th District.
About the Author
