“Defund the Police” focuses too closely on where public safety funds will be divested from, not where they will be invested into. Introducing Americans to new institutions of public safety requires careful, specific explanations of what those new institutions can and should be responsible for when police no longer have those responsibilities.

If, for example, a city’s rise in crime is a result of increased levels of poverty, progressives need to make clear the connection between poverty and public safety and describe how that poverty will be addressed through stronger employment programs for young residents, or better welfare services for struggling families.

There are already existing models for such strategies. Take, for example, the case of Richmond, Ca., whose city council voted to divert $3 million from the police department to social services aimed at preventing crime. Instead of utilizing slogans that are catchy but vague, organizers in Richmond were successful because they held more deliberate conversation about what a reallocation of public funds looks like for their community.