Raman Clarifies Shift on Police Funding Stance

Los Angeles City Council member and mayoral hopeful Nitya Raman has moved away from her earlier advocacy for defunding the police. Recently, during an interview, she faced questions about her past statements supporting decreases in police funding.

“You’ve faced attack ads from the Los Angeles Police Department, claiming you’re anti-police and want to reduce officer numbers,” CNN’s Jessica Dean noted. “Yet now you’ve stated the city needs to keep its police force size. What accounts for this shift?” Dean asked Raman.

Raman’s opponents in the mayoral race include current Mayor Karen Bass and former reality TV figure Spencer Pratt.

In response to the question, Raman emphasized the importance of being able to answer calls for help, stating, “Public safety is crucial, and police forces have been significantly reduced. If someone needs assistance, it’s vital that the city can respond promptly.”

Dean pressed further, asking, “So you no longer support defunding the police?”

“No,” Raman replied definitively.

When asked what prompted her change of heart, Raman reiterated, “We need to ensure the city can respond to service calls related to safety. Right now, maintaining the police force size is necessary for that.”

Raman did not clarify the reasons behind her change in stance, leaving some to speculate about her motivations. Did she recently realize the necessity of police presence for safety issues? Perhaps she adjusted her views to appeal to more moderate voters, or to avoid alienating certain factions who favor a more cautious approach to policing.

Initially, in 2020, Raman aligned herself with the “defund the police” movement, a stance common among several prominent Democrats at the time. She stated, “Now is the urgent time to tackle the racial, environmental, and moral crisis of homelessness in Los Angeles. Our leaders must listen.” This earlier rhetoric included calls for funding social services and housing, alongside her support for reducing police budgets.

While it’s hard to label Raman’s intentions as naive, it raises the question of whether her current position is genuinely rooted in new insights or a strategic move to build her political base. Trust in her judgment, now, might be something voters will have to reconsider.