Policing profits: forfeiture reform.

• Author: Sullum, Jacob
• Position: Citings - Brief article

ACCORDING TO a November survey by the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, 70 percent of Americans believe "law enforcement agencies should not be allowed to keep property they take for their own use." Not surprisingly, asset forfeiture reforms aimed at implementing that principle face stiff resistance from police and prosecutors.

In Indiana, for instance, an amendment to the state constitution assigns "all forfeitures" to a fund for public schools. But as reason has reported ("The Forfeiture Racket," February 2010), police and prosecutors routinely evade that requirement by exaggerating the costs of forfeitures or by contracting them out to private attorneys. In May, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels vetoed a bill that would have codified the former practice, letting law enforcement agencies keep more than 90 percent of forfeiture proceeds. He called the change "unwarranted as policy and constitutionally unacceptable."

Another method of neutralizing forfeiture reform is to seize property under federal law, which generally allows police and prosecutors to keep a bigger share of the loot. A bill that has been approved by California's Assembly and is awaiting action by the state Senate...