Obama's Approach To Fighting Crime Actually Based On Research

American communities in the inner city have been plagued by the war on drugs since it started 25 years ago. Criminologists and sociologists have been pointing out for eons that drug laws, which have filled prisons and jails across the country to overflow levels for decades, are grossly ineffective. Rather than ending violence in the community, drug laws pull millions of people who don't really belong there into the criminal justice system, creating an underclass of stigmatized ex-cons with little stake in society. Drug laws--and surely this would pass any test for irony--actually create conditions that foster crime in the inner city.

Yet mandatory minimums, an intense policing of communities of color and a lack of rehabilitative programs remain the cornerstone of managing crime in American cities. Politicians, afraid of seeming soft on crime, have done little to revise the failed policies of the war on drugs.

In this context, Barack Obama's platform on criminal justice, woven as it is into a discussion of civil rights, is striking. Obama embraces an approach to crime that is actually informed by research and expert recommendations. Given the gross irrationality that informs most politicians' approach to crime, Obama's logical and potentially effective proposals are remarkable.

The Obama/Biden plan is neither abstract nor ideological--it targets the root causes of racial disparity in the criminal justice system in the United States. Four key suggestions in the Obama/Biden platform:

Eliminating Mandatory Minimums:

Mandatory minimum sentences, introduced in the late 1980s, were meant to tame the seemingly uncontrollable urban violence that accompanied the inner-city crack epidemic. Possessing or selling 5 grams of crack cocaine or 500 grams of powder cocaine put people in jail for at least five years. We've known for a decade that this knee-jerk reaction to drug possession costs taxpayers millions of dollars, far more than rehabilitation programs.

Eliminating Disparity in Crack/Cocaine Sentencing:

Possessing crack, a form of cocaine, holds its own unique penalties, as the example above suggests. Misperceptions of crack as a drug favored by blacks have also fueled arrests of African-Americans. "Despite the fact that two-thirds of regular crack cocaine users are white or Latino, 82% of defendants sentenced in federal court for crack offenses are African American," explains the Sentencing Project in a 2007 report synthesizing years of scholarly research on the drug wars.

Following a recommendation by the United States Sentencing Commission, effective March 2008, the Federal Court has been reexamining cases where defendants were given disparate sentences for possessing crack. Still, crack is the only drug to have a mandatory minimum (of five years) for simple possession. Joe Biden, one of the original authors of the minimum laws, called for their repeal in a bill introduced last year, arguing that the laws were based on faulty information about the differences between crack and cocaine. There's good reason to believe that this issue will receive serious attention in an Obama/Biden administration.

Establishing Reentry Programs:

We need reentry programs for formerly incarcerated men and women because of these failed drug war policies. What formerly incarcerated men and women need most after prison or jail is just what most lack prior to incarceration: decent housing and steady work. Programs that facilitate access to housing and employment help to reduce recidivism rates.

"Well-designed programs have been found to improve employment and reduce recidivism," Harvard professor Bruce Western explained in congressional testimony in 2007. Bruce urged Congress to "support prisoner re-entry programs that provide transitional employment and other services." An integrated approach is essential to reintegrating people released from prison, and Bruce urged Congress to consider providing "housing, drug treatment, and health care to improve the job readiness of released-prisoners."

Such opportunities help men and women build new lives that aren't defined by their criminal record and keep them from committing more crimes.

Establishing Drug Courts:

Drug courts create a place for low-level offenders to connect with treatment options as an alternative to incarceration. As the Government Accountability Office explained to Congress in 2005: "In most of the evaluations we reviewed, adult drug court programs led to recidivism reductions during periods of time that generally corresponded to the length of the drug court program." Drug courts can manage addicts and low-level offenders, saving limited resources to be aimed at serious criminals.

McCain's answer to these issues? His sole sop to the mess created by the drug wars is an embrace of the faith-based funding initiatives championed by George W. Bush: in other words, ineffective political pandering. Those who are most in need of reentry services, which is what the faith-based money is earmarked for, are often not connected to the churches that will receive this funding. McCain's plan does nothing to dismantle the systemic problems that have produced racial disparities in the criminal justice system. Instead, McCain's crime plan as it pertains to people of color will focus on illegal immigration, increasing policing of communities of color.

How the Obama/Biden platform presents their criminal justice platform is telling too. The Democrats wrap their suggestions for reform into a larger narrative about civil rights protections in the United States, which they suggest have been woefully neglected during the Bush administration. McCain, in contrast, wraps his crime platform into a larger narrative about strengthening law enforcement, including a statements about funneling federal money to local law enforcements agencies to send illegal immigrants back home and assurances that law enforcement will not be thwarted by "judicial activism."

Progressives have had significant points of contention with the Obama campaign this year, and they've been right to fault Obama on issues such as FISA. But make no mistake about this: there is a profound difference between McCain and Obama. These Obama/Biden proposals, if enacted, could make a striking difference in the lives of inner city residents across the country.

A civil rights lawyer for president seems like just what the country needs to fix the systemic disaster started decades ago with the drug wars.

This week OffTheBus is publishing a variety of stories that cover the policy differences between Senators John McCain and Barack Obama. If you have a policy expertise and would like to participate, please see Calling All Policy Gurus.

Comments

[redpepper]

Senator Obama has not the slightest idea what it takes to reduce crime or anything related to crime. After all he came from Chicago didn't he. The crime capital of the world. He needs to go back to being a do nothing Senator as he has been in the past. He has not passed any legistlation of anykind so what makes wnyone think he can do anyting about crime. REALLY!@

[KELLI2L]

< I thought we already have these re-entry programs - what we need are programs of some sort to teach children right from wrong so they don't become criminals >

[KELLI2L]

Obama may know something about crime - working as a Community Organizer in Chicago. But from what I know about him - he would like to take the guns away from the citizens - so only the criminals will have them.... That isn't my idea of fighting crime!!!!!

[twiggy2]

racsim is a product of ignorance - ignorance is color blind - ie.. ignorance comes in all colors.
barak and bidens policy on crime is needed to combat the ignorance on all levels. finally someone will combat the injustice of all americans despite their racial make up.
will we be able to say ?
We hold these truths to be self -evident that all men are created equal,that they
are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
LET'S MOVE FORWARD AS AMERICANS OF AFRICAN DECENT!
OBAMA/BIDEN 08
YES,WE CAN ! IN THE U.S.A.

[NielsH]

Excellent position. With more than 1 in 100 people being in prison, the USA has an incarceration rate 10 times higher than European countries. Consider the money saved by having less prisons and more people working and paying taxes.

[redsongia]

We definately need drug courts. It's retarded to mix drug offenses together with real crimes.

[ReElectNoOne]

Please also check out this site. I have been working with these fine folks for almost 20 years.
http://www.curenational.org

[KISHAGREEN]

That's one question that I would like for Ifill to ask during the vice presidential debates considering Joe Biden's record on anti-crime legislation, particularly mandatory sentencing laws. And also seeing how Sarah Palin is an NRA member and opposed to any restrictions on assault rifles. Does she have any idea or framework to defend that position based on the murder rate in the inner cities? Does she even understand these kinds of issues particularly as they relate to urban areas?

Mandatory sentencing laws disproportionately affect people of color and have had a devastating effect on minority communities. This is something that MUST be dealt with.

[BOin08]

I'm sorry, but OB needs to boot ol'Joe.....we got no bump from him in the polls and Deleware isn't a critical swing state....Joe needs an convenient "medical" emergency-just bad enough to bounce him off the ticket, but not out of the Senate. Nothing personall Joe, but we need the Hilary voters--time to take one for the team. Inside word is he'll make the call early next month. We just can't aford to take the chance on another Republican run.

[KELLI2L]

We need mandatory sentencing because without it the people being sentenced would be at the mercy of a Judges personality and preferences - this is what we have learned through trial and error. How young are you that you don't realize that? Or don't you know your American history?

[CeciliaBertrand]

Obama has been vocal about his approach to fighting crime since he hit the campaign trail. In fact, he has said nothing new since "I met him", and joined the grassroots effort. He is the same man today - that he was yesterday, representing the 21st century - going forward. I am grateful his standards and views are finally getting some press in the last days. We are a heartbeat away from an update into humanity and morality into our criminal system via the Obama/Biden Whitehouse.

What is most apparent is that one candidate (McCain) represents 19th century change while the other, (Obama) represents 21st century global change- forward. That is the risk we are talking about - do we continue living backward in tribal warfare as usual, or do we accept the reality of the unknown FUTURE which is staring us in the face?

[scared4ALL]

We must move forward. What would be a crime is if he didn't get elected.

Dem registration is way up so polls aren't accurate.

Many racists vote in polls who won't vote in elections.

The only votes McPalin can get are racists, greedy rich and the ignorant who aren't paying attention.

Don't be offended by the word, ignorant. It only means void facts. Ignorant can learn but stupid can't.

Good people will choose the moral & correct side when they hear true facts. When decent people hear truth, they recognize it, so we have that on our side, too.

Decent, thinking people, rich, poor & middle class can save us by not voting 4 the 2 cons or anyone else but Obama. Even Warren Buffet, one of the richest men in the world is behind Obama & so should we all be.

Inform & help get people out 2 vote anyway you can.

Write & make copies of what you want to say 2 persuade everyone you know 2 vote Obama. Place in envelopes 2 give them. Maybe even strangers, huh?

Maybe there are others we'd like to see win, like Ron Paul, but unfortunately none are electable. Voting for them will only take away from our chances to keep McCain from being elected.

Wake them up 2 register & vote>>>

Michael Moore's Slacker Uprising

http://slackeruprising.com/download/

It's free.

Please forward this & donate. Can't afford not to. Our children & future generations, depend on us.

https://donate.barackobama.com/page/contribute/main

[BOin08]

Hmmm....calling anyone who doesn't vote for our man a racist loses credibility with the independent voters and we need to stop it....Gore and Kerry both lost with about 50% of the popular vote- same as current polls show now...50% OB vs 47% McCain. How can we cry racsim if the country is still evenly split? Neocons are going to vote Republican no matter who runs on our ticket, so that means, by your logic, democrats and independants will be the "racists" who decide the election--that's not the battlecry we need to advertise, bro.