An urgent debate is playing out right now in the Democratic Party about policing as cities see sharp rises in violent crime. The fight to control that disorder is also a battle for the direction of the party — do police departments need more resources to fight crime? Do they need to be restrained, given a long record of abuses and controversial policies like stop-and-frisk? How do the police earn more trust from Black and brown residents? Which tactics are right, and which tactics violate our rights?
Nowhere are these questions more fully joined than in New York City, where two leading Democratic candidates for mayor, Eric Adams and Maya Wiley, have had a running war of words over race, policing and civil rights. Their clashes reflect an important debate within Black communities that stretches back decades. And if Mr. Adams or Ms. Wiley wins in Tuesday’s primary, he or she would become a national voice on crime; their arguments are revealing about the trade-offs facing Democrats and the urban voters who help make up the party’s base.
“Eric thinks the solution to every problem is a badge and a gun,” Ms. Wiley said this month. “Sometimes armed police are the solution, but some problems we actually make worse when we bring in a cop who isn’t trained for the situation rather than a mental health specialist who can actually keep everyone safe.”
For his part, Mr. Adams has slammed Ms. Wiley repeatedly, saying she wants “to slash the police department budget and shrink the police force at a time when Black and brown babies are being shot in our streets, hate crimes are terrorizing Asian and Jewish communities, and innocent New Yorkers are being stabbed and shot on their way to work.”
The debate reflects a cruel, decades-old dilemma: Black neighborhoods are often over-policed and under-policed at the same time. The Kerner Commission study of inner-city riots in 1960s found a widespread belief in Black communities that “the police maintain a much less rigorous standard of law enforcement in the ghetto, tolerating illegal activities like drug addiction, prostitution, and street violence that they would not tolerate elsewhere.”
When aggressive profiling and brutal use of force exist side-by-side with a lenient acceptance of low-level criminal behavior, a toxic downward spiral follows, as criminologist David Kennedy has noted: “Being overpoliced for the small stuff, and underpoliced for the important stuff, alienates the community, undercuts cooperation and fuels private violence: which itself often then drives even more intrusive policing, more alienation, lower clearance rates and still more violence.”
Mr. Adams and Ms. Wiley are proposing two distinct paths.
Mr. Adams, a 22-year veteran of the N.Y.P.D., has a public safety plan centered on hiring, training and deploying police differently. He wants to create a new version of the department’s plainclothes unit to target illegal guns, surge officers into high-crime neighborhoods, and reassign 500 cops who currently do work that could be handled by civilians.
He also has laid out a process where community boards and precinct councils can help select local precinct commanders, and has vowed to create a more diverse police force, including by naming the first woman police commissioner.
Ms. Wiley, a former chair of the Civilian Complaint Review Board, has been vocally critical of the N.Y.P.D., most notably in a hard-hitting television ad that starts with jarring images of police officers clashing with protesters following the death of George Floyd, after which Ms. Wiley says: “It was an injustice to those of us who know Black lives matter. … As a mom and civil rights lawyer, I’ve had enough.”
Her plan calls for “a radical reimagining of policing” that includes freezing incoming classes of cadets for two years, thereby reducing the N.Y.P.D. head count by 2,500 officers; creating a civilian commission to oversee the N.Y.P.D.; overhauling the Patrol Guide and removing cops from mental health crisis cases, traffic enforcement and school safety.
All of these ideas should receive scrutiny and debate, because if one of these candidates wins, the N.Y.P.D. could become a laboratory of sorts for policing reforms and practices. Unfortunately, Mr. Adams and Ms. Wiley have tended to caricature each other’s positions, and some interesting nuances about their careers have been lost in the sniping.
While Mr. Adams did, indeed, spend two decades in the N.Y.P.D., he joined at the specific urging of the Rev. Herbert Daughtry, a fiery activist who helped lead demonstrations against the department and recruited Mr. Adams and others to become police officers with the specific mission of making change from the inside.
And Ms. Wiley’s career includes a three-year hiatus from civil rights work to work in the U.S. attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York and a couple more years as a top adviser to Mayor Bill de Blasio. She later became the head of the Civilian Complaint Review Board, and has drawn criticism from some activists who think she didn’t do enough to reform the N.Y.P.D. from her powerful perch.
Ideally, the next mayor will blend both of their approaches. A Mayor Adams would have to take seriously the public’s demand to fundamentally change the mission and mind-set of the N.Y.P.D. in ways that go beyond bureaucratic tinkering. A Mayor Wiley would quickly discover that a much wider range of tasks than she imagined requires the use of force and must be entrusted to the cops we have, not the cops we wish we had.
Police officers, especially Black ones, are constantly navigating the tension between keeping neighborhoods safe and remaining true to deeply held community values of the need to fight for racial justice. My late father, Edward Louis, a 31-year veteran of the N.Y.P.D. who retired as an inspector, often spoke with pride about traveling with a contingent of Black cops to the 1963 March on Washington as volunteer marshals helping with crowd control. My father loved the sounds, sights and people of his native Harlem, where he grew up and spent most of his career — but he also understood the need to do battle, including physically, against the gun-toting drug pushers, armed robbers and pimps who had disrupted, degraded and destroyed countless lives in his beloved neighborhood.
Many years later, I find it heartbreaking and infuriating to read about killings and shootings going on in the same streets and public housing developments my father patrolled — and equally disheartening to read about abuses of police power that erode trust in the ability of the N.Y.P.D. to help keep communities safe.
We arrive at this crossroads for public safety at a peak moment of Black political power in New York. Black leaders currently lead four of the five Democratic county organizations in the city (Staten Island is the exception), and the State Legislature is run by the Assembly speaker, Carl Heastie, and the Senate majority leader, Andrea Stewart-Cousins, who both command supermajorities. And the seven Black members of the New York congressional delegation are the largest number of Black politicians ever sent to Congress from any single state in American history.
In the past, Black leadership has periodically embraced harsh law enforcement tactics and tough-on-crime messaging. The controversial 1994 federal crime bill was passed with support from desperate Black officials in communities devastated by drug addiction and violent street crime. After other moments, like last year’s wave of Black Lives Matter demonstrations, more than 100 laws reforming bail, incarceration and police accountability were passed all over the country.
It now falls to Black Democrats to show up and vote in big numbers in this primary election to resolve a debate where they have the most at stake, and offer judgments on two candidates who understand the issue and whose decisions as mayor would resonate beyond the five boroughs.
Will we see a major investment of public dollars moved from the N.Y.P.D. into social services, as Ms. Wiley wants, believing that more community initiatives like youth programs and mental health services will translate into less crime? Or will we start with an Adams-style crackdown on guns and gun violence as a first step toward restoring safety and order in Black and brown neighborhoods? Or might we end up with some combination of both approaches?
The 2021 election for mayor will be a moment that we’ll look back on — in satisfaction or in horror — at how New York chose to handle the twin challenges of public safety and civil rights. More so than in most elections, Black Votes Matter.
Errol Louis is a longtime New York City journalist and the political anchor of NY1, where he hosts the weeknight show “Inside City Hall.”
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.
Source: Elections - nytimes.com
