Reforming Police Unions Would be Good for Cannabis Policy
Last week, at the epicenter of racial justice and law enforcement, Minneapolis Police Chief Medaria Arradondo broke off negotiations with the Minneapolis Police Union. Chief Arradondo did not end negotiations because of salary grievances or disputes about days off, but because the union had an overwhelmingly negative impact on policy. The police union made the community less safe, and fostered a system that protects unjustified police violence. Chief Arradondo cited the police union being responsible for policies that guaranteed officers who commit "abhorrent acts" that are otherwise "grounds for termination" to quickly return to the streets. This is not unique to Minnesota, as former Detroit Police Chief Isaiah McKinnon also discussed in a recent editorial.
Police unions’ impact on policy stretches far and wide, and have antagonized the cannabis movement for decades. Across the country, police fund and lead opposition campaigns to medical and recreational cannabis. Proposition 64 in California—which legalized recreational cannabis—is illustrative of nation-wide mobilizations; roughly half the money against came from police unions, and organized law enforcement was vocal in their opposition. In New York, a state that has been only a few months away from recreational legalization for the last couple years, the state police unions (45 in total) are unanimously opposed to legalization.
What isn’t covered in the news is the police unions' private role in pressuring politicians. Its endorsement is very important for elected officials and candidates for public office. When I served as a political director on a statewide campaign, I advocated to the candidate to come out early in favor of legalizing cannabis for medical and recreational use. I felt it was good economically, medically, and culturally. The candidate told me he couldn’t support it. Although he didn’t personally care about the issue and largely agreed with my points, the campaign needed the police union's endorsement to stand a chance in the primary. The union made clear any candidate in favor of medical or recreational cannabis legalization would not even be considered. A month later, I later accompanied my boss to the Minnesota Police and Peace Officer Association annual meeting and watched him talk about how dangerous cannabis is to a room of nodding police leadership.
So why are the police unions so against legalized cannabis? A major reason is financial. According to the ACLU, the police spent $3.6 billion in enforcing marijuana possession laws in 2010 alone. Federal Byrne grants provide law enforcement billions a year to fund drug task forces—which creates jobs. Police receive significant revenue from asset seizures and forfeitures from cannabis arrests; California police made $181 million between 2002–12 from marijuana related seizures and forfeitures. And finally, marijuana arrests inflate arrest rates that are used to advocate for increased police budgets to governments. According to a recent Pew Research study, 40% (663,000) of drug arrests in the United States in 2018 was for marijuana—90% (~597,000) of those arrests were for possession only. As a reference, 25% of all drug arrests were for heroine, cocaine, and their derivatives.
Law enforcement policy based on creating more revenue for police is wrong, and the status quo must end. We must address law enforcement's economic motivation for continuing cannabis criminalization head-on. Many states and municipalities made the police an economic partner in the legal industry, and adopted measures that allocate cannabis tax revenue to law enforcement. However, that “carrot” is not sufficient; police stilled opposed legalization measures in spite of that economic incentive. Police should no longer receive any money from cannabis-related asset forfeitures and seizures, and municipal governments should not take into consideration arrests solely for cannabis possession when crafting police budgets.
Police unions and their affiliate associations are not going away, and so the cannabis industry should adopt an engagement and education strategy. There is clearly an education gap with police unions and the realities of cannabis. I put the onus on the cannabis industry to make their case. There is not a meaningfully organized effort to engage and win over law enforcement in cannabis legalization campaigns. Union leadership should have personal relationships with leaders in the cannabis industry, and have reliable friends to call on if they have questions. The cannabis industry should also play a larger role in municipal politics. Law enforcement is an obvious constituency for many mainstream political candidates and causes to court and engage and the cannabis industry should view it the same way.
Finally there should be radical transparency in union negotiations and its role in influencing policy. Former Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas said “sunlight is the best disinfectant.” Public safety is an issue of national importance. The opaqueness of police union collective bargaining and its influence on policy has literally been a silent killer. If the private conversations that led to law enforcement’s current posture were broadcasted for the public to read, in real-time, there would likely be a different result.
We are in a transformational moment in American history. There is a new political wave that is legitimately challenging society’s fundamental assumptions. One we have long-held is law enforcement leadership should have autonomy and privacy in making its own policy. It’s time for that one to end, and we all have a role to play in helping to make that a reality.
