Skip to main content

George Floyd versus Union Cops: Is that the Real Story?


No one with a brain can look at the video of the Minneapolis cops putting their weight on George Floyd’s entire body, including a knee to his neck, and see his resulting death as anything but murder. The first autopsy cited pre-existing health conditions as a contributing factor in Floyd’s death. The second autopsy found Floyd’s death to be murder due to his carotid artery being crushed, cutting off blood flow to his brain. The official coroner seems to have come around to the murder conclusion, but regardless, those cops killed a man for passing a counterfeit 20-dollar bill; and because he’s dead, we can’t even find out if Floyd knowingly did so.


Were the cops indifferent to Floyd’s pain because of racism? I don’t know, and no one else does, either. The cop with his knee on Floyd’s neck is obviously responsible for Floyd’s death. The other cops, who did nothing to alleviate Floyd’s suffering when he complained that he couldn’t breathe, are at least culpable in the murder. Three of the cops are identified as Caucasian and one is identified as Asian. It seems that the color of the cops is all that many need, apparently with absolute certainty, to know that Floyd’s death was due to racism on the part of the cops.


One thing I do know, though, is that cops – law enforcement in general – kill too many people. Four years ago, John McWhorter, a professor at Columbia University, who happens to be black and is no conservative by any means, wrote an article for Time magazine entitled “Police Kill Too Many People—White and Black.” He points out that he had, for some time, asked for evidence that whites were dying in the same way as the offensive black deaths at the hands of cops, being convinced of systemic racism in police ranks. Then, somebody obliged. His article describes three senseless deaths of whites at the hands of cops. Then he points out, “The men in these cases were white, not black, and yet all three were killed by police officers under circumstances that would almost surely have elicited indignant protest nationwide if they were black.”


Watch Netflix’s Waco miniseries. Most of the scores of Branch Davidians who died were white and included women and children. You’ll see accurate depictions of law enforcement authorities lying outright only to cover their own misjudgments and culpability in their improper exercise of government’s police powers. None of that had to do with racism although lots of innocent people died.


We’ve all seen the videos of police arresting someone and roughing them up, putting on handcuffs too tightly, kicking their legs, slamming them against a car, and then when the individual attempts to protect himself, the cops pummel him and tack on “resisting arrest” to the charges. I personally don’t believe many policemen are racist. I do believe, however, that a significant number of them are bullies. Some of them are even cowards. For many, their police culture reinforces bully behavior.


In 2016, a white female police officer in Oklahoma fatally shot an unarmed black man, who was acting erratically and had drugs in his system. He was big, too. But, there was a white male officer right there with her, aiming a Taser, and who never discharged his weapon. Likely, she fired because she was scared, not because she was racist. She should have been convicted of manslaughter, but she was acquitted completely. It probably is a “white thing” to give police officers the benefit of the doubt.


We have a cop problem in this country. A relatively small number of bullying and cowardly cops are giving everyone else a bad name. But how does this minority of officers stick around? Reports have come out that the cop who pressed his knee into George Floyd’s neck had well over a dozen complaints against him. He apparently was never so much as formally reprimanded. Why not?


The mayor of St. Paul* (the son of a retired police officer and black), in a rambling answer to an interview question Sunday morning, identified the problem. Union contracts make it difficult to fire or discipline police officers. All union contracts for public employees make it difficult to hold public employees accountable, whether police officers, firemen, teachers, or any other unionized position.


Our elected officials and the people they appoint owe their entire allegiance to taxpayers as a whole, regardless of election turnout, and regardless of who helped to pay for their campaigns. That allegiance is called a fiduciary duty, an obligation to absolutely act in the best interest of all citizens. It’s a high standard. But when an elected official’s paramount consideration is to insure victory in the next election, or to favor a supporter, or to favor an organization that organizes on the official’s behalf, that official isn’t coming close to meeting the fiduciary obligation. And frankly, anything short of meeting that fiduciary duty is a corrupt act.


That’s where unions come in. Local government elections often occur on unexpected and under-publicized dates, resulting in abysmal voter turnout. That means only a small number of votes can swing an election outcome. Therefore, public employee union activity can easily make the difference in local elections. Prevailing officials naturally (though improperly) feel they owe their position to union activity, and they act accordingly, acceding to favorable contract terms for union employees. After all, the union employees essentially hired their employer. Thus, the employer (elected official) acts against the interests of taxpayers in general, an absolute breach of the fiduciary duty.


Two policy changes are badly needed in Oklahoma. All elections should be held on no more than two or three standard election dates, and public officials should be prohibited from negotiating and signing collective bargaining contracts. Right now, it is entirely possible that an election could be held somewhere in Oklahoma every single month of the year. There is simply no way to “fix” public employee union collective bargaining. It has to be ended.


Even with standardized election dates increasing general turnout and dissipating union voting, unions will influence elections. Their influence intentionally has the effect of breaching a fiduciary duty to all taxpayers in general. Even without collective bargaining, employees can still associate in an organization and might seek to influence their bosses, but the kind of corruption (like when bad cops aren’t fired) that comes with public employee collective bargaining would be less common.


Would this completely solve the problems with race we have in this country today? No, not when you have race-baiting ideologues at the New York Times pushing a historically inaccurate and purposely provocative narrative handed over to schools that, sheep-like, dutifully teach it as fact. And not as long as race baiters sell false narratives to what has clearly become a hyper-sensitized subset of a community who interpret every cross look and every stop by a policeman as an overt act of racism. 


A scene in The Mule depicts a Hispanic man, pulled over because his vehicle matches a description, saying a police stop “is statistically the most dangerous five minutes” for a minority like him. Based on what teachers say of their minority students’ beliefs, these kinds of erroneous “facts” are common and a source of feelings of persecution. Maybe we should all share our experiences with being stopped for the most minor of traffic infractions just so a bored police officer can size us up. It might just be that the experiences of people of different ethnicities aren’t all that different, like McWhorter’s discovery about people being shot by cops, most of whom, I’m betting, belong to unions.


*An earlier version of this blog incorrectly identified him as the mayor of Minneapolis. 


Byron Schlomach is 1889 Institute’s Director and can be contacted at bschlomach@1889institute.org.


The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of 1889 Institute.


Popular posts from this blog

Licensing Boards Might Violate Federal Law: Regardless, They Are Terrible Policy

Competition is as American as baseball and apple pie. “May the best man win” is a sentiment so old it doesn’t care about your pronouns. The beneficial effects of competition on economic markets are well documented. So why do we let powerful business interests change the rules of the game when they tire of competing in the free market? Most of the time when an occupational license is enacted, it is the members of the regulated industry who push hardest in favor of the license. Honest competition may be fundamentally American, but thwarting that competition through licensing seems to be fundamentally Oklahoman. Oklahoma doesn’t have the most occupational licenses, but when they do license an occupation, the requirements tend to be more onerous than the same license in other states. But what if, instead of merely breaking the rules of fair play to keep out would-be competition, Oklahoma licensing boards are also breaking the law? Normally a concerted effort to lock out competition would v

Undo 802

Why is it that when conservatives suffer a major loss, they give up, accept the new status quo, and fall back to the next retreat position? When progressives suffer a major loss, they regroup and try again. And again. Until they finally wheedle the American public into giving in. I propose a change in strategy. The Oklahoma Legislature should make undoing State Question 802 its top legislative priority for 2021. This will not be an easy task (legislators seem to prefer avoiding difficult tasks) but it is a critical one. The normal legislative process, with all its pitfalls and traps for the unwary, will only bring the topic to another vote of the people. So why spend so much political capital and effort if the same result is possible? Three reasons.   First is the disastrous consequences of the policy. Forget that it enriches already-rich hospital and pharmaceutical executives. Forget that it gives the state incentives to prioritize the nearly-poor covered by expansion over the des

Liability In the Time of Covid: When Should Businesses Be Sued for the Spread of Infectious Disease?

When businesses reopen, what liability should they face related to the spread of Covid? Can businesses who remained open during the pandemic, or those who were open before the lockdowns began, be held liable if their customers caught the virus within the businesses’ walls? If so, what would a customer-plaintiff need to prove?   Defending even a meritless lawsuit can be prohibitively expensive. For this reason, it is important to define ahead of time what harms can lead to successful lawsuits. Limitations on causes of action can reduce unwarranted suits by kicking them out of the legal system earlier in the process. So what should businesses be liable for? There are two distinct categories of business liability that might arise from Covid. The first is products liability. The second is liability for infection spread within a business.   Products Liability First, any willful fraud perpetrated in relation to Covid should be severely punished. This would include selling f

How Biden/Harris and Well-educated Sophisticates Are Wrong in the Age of COVID-19

Vice President-elect Kamala Harris often declared during the campaign that “We believe in science.” And judging by the tendency of the college-educated , especially among the sophisticates living on the coasts, to agree with Harris’s positions on everything from climate change to proper precautions amid COVID-19, belief in “science” seems to many a mark of knowledge and wisdom. But is it? The modern belief in “science” increasingly appears to be a religion wherein the words of certain recognized experts are received with the reverence once reserved for the Pope. A college diploma almost serves as a permission slip to suspend one’s own judgment and reason in favor of taking the word of certain experts to heart, especially if they work in government, certain universities, or gain media credence.   This tendency to turn experts and the media into high priests of all knowledge is nothing new. In 1986, 60 Minutes ran a story about a phenomenon people experienced in cars with automatic tra