Has Tom Tiffany supported defunding the police?
The fact brief examines claims about Tiffany’s votes on police funding and related programs.

SOURCE CHECK
TAP FOR WHYWisconsin Watch is a nonprofit local newsroom with a stated reporting history and a named reporter. The brief identifies its fact-checking partnership and methodology and lists news and congressional sources, though this short format offers limited detail about its reporting process.
- Source type — Established nonprofit local-news organization with a stated focus on Wisconsin reporting.
- Editorial standards — The page identifies the fact-brief format and points readers to its methodology.
- Author attribution — A named reporter is credited.
- Transparency — The brief lists news and congressional sources for its findings.
The brief makes a clear, verifiable distinction between votes affecting police funding and votes on other programs, and it cites congressional records and other sources. Its concise format limits detail about individual votes and offers little direct response from Crowley.
HOW WE SCORE ↗The brief presents Crowley’s claim and explains why it concludes the votes did not defund police, while also noting a vote against direct local police funding. Its compact format does not include a direct response from Crowley or much broader context.
- Counterarguments presented — The claim being checked is stated, and the brief explains the evidence supporting its conclusion.
- Source diversity — The listed sources include congressional records and news reporting.
- Omitted context — The brief does not include a direct response from Crowley or detailed discussion of each vote.
- Loaded language — The article uses little loaded language.
The brief uses a direct fact-check format and neutral language, evaluates the claim against the measures described, and reports Tiffany’s past opposition to the movement without evident partisan framing.
- Language tone — The wording is restrained and focused on whether votes affected police funding.
- Framing — The brief states its conclusion and explains the distinction between police funding and other programs.
- Source selection — It lists congressional records and other reporting as sources.
A Wisconsin Watch fact brief concludes that Tom Tiffany did not support defunding the police, saying none of the six House votes cited by David Crowley would have cut law-enforcement funding. It distinguishes those votes from Tiffany’s opposition to bills and grants for police and related programs.
Wisconsin Watch’s fact brief says Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, the Democratic nominee for Wisconsin governor, claimed that U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany voted six times to defund the police. The brief concludes that none of those votes would have taken money from law enforcement, though Tiffany voted against a bill that would directly fund local police departments.
The brief describes other measures Tiffany opposed, including funding for federal agencies, violence-intervention grants, and grants for mental-health professionals to respond to some emergencies. It says it found no evidence Tiffany backed reducing police funding, and notes that he opposed the defund-the-police movement in 2022 and criticized it in 2026.
Community verdict
VOTING CLOSEDNo good or bad look here
This story reports what happened without casting Tiffany in a good or bad light, so readers don’t rate it and it doesn’t count toward Tiffany’s record.
People in this story
Wisconsin representative and Republican gubernatorial nominee whose voting record is being fact-checked
Discussion · 0
Loading comments…
