« South Carolina Supreme Court takes up pacing of state execution plans | Main | Unanimous Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court finds state's prohibition of switchblades violative of Second Amendment »
August 27, 2024
Prison Policy Initiative briefing discusses "10 ways that mass incarceration is an engine of economic injustice"
The quoted portion of this post title is the title of this new briefing published by the Prison Policy authored by Eric Seligman and Brian Nam-Sonenstein. Here is how the discussion starts:
Money is power in the United States, and mass incarceration plays a major role in determining who can wield power and who can’t. As we’ve noted repeatedly over the years, it is no coincidence that the poorest and most vulnerable communities are also the most policed. The criminal legal system erects significant barriers to employment and the ballot box, economically and politically weakening entire communities. Importantly, this arrangement impacts all workers: employers use this massive class of disadvantaged people to threaten all workers with replacement and increasingly risky unemployment if they dare to demand better wages and conditions. Mass incarceration also weaves a narrative that pits people with similar economic interests against one another, reducing systemic inequality to matters of individual choice. Fortunately, understanding mass incarceration as the wealthy’s preferred economic policy clarifies that ending it is necessary for all movements for justice and equality — all working people benefit from solidarity with criminalized people.
In this briefing, we compile ten examples of how mass incarceration blocks progress toward economic justice. We argue that our massive system of criminalization is not an isolated issue, nor is it someone else’s problem; it is an engine of inequality that traps people in poverty, weakens worker power, and undermines political organizing toward a more prosperous future for the vast majority of people.
August 27, 2024 at 02:32 PM | Permalink
Comments
Between this post and the one about public defenders and racial bias, you are really going “full Socialist”, Doug.
Never go “full socialist.”
It states the following as if it is a bad thing: “As we’ve noted repeatedly over the years, it is no coincidence that the poorest and most vulnerable communities are also the most policed.”
My favorite though: “We argue that our massive system of criminalization is not an isolated issue, nor is it someone else’s problem; it is an engine of inequality that traps people in poverty, weakens worker power, and undermines political organizing toward a more prosperous future for the vast majority of people.”
Worker power! 👊 It’s only missing the image of Lenin gazing off into the future.
What an embarrassing and historically ignorant post. Actually, people are richer than ever. Our poor are obese, and in most ways, live better than the richest people of 1900 before all of this “criminalization” (whatever the hell that means).
Posted by: TarlsQtr | Aug 28, 2024 2:40:32 PM
How’s this for “economic injustice?”
https://libertyunyielding.com/2024/08/05/shoplifting-rose-24-this-year-and-continues-to-rise/
This is what decriminalization did for those suffering from “economic injustice.” It, along with Biden spending like a drunken sailor in a whorehouse, created higher prices for everyone including the poor.
So, which has done more damage to more poor people? Keeping criminals out of prison so that the minority mother trying to make ends meet has to pay more for everything because of theft or putting bad actors in prison?
I know. I know. This is the type of conversation frowned upon. Too partisan and rude, for sure. The “other side of the story” hurts Doug’s virginal readership even more than a verbal gut punch from federalist.
Now back to your regularly scheduled echo chamber.
Posted by: TarlsQtr | Aug 28, 2024 3:04:08 PM
Here’s another one.
After Ferguson, traffic stops plummeted due to the wailing and gnashing of teeth by the the likes of the writers in Doug’s post. We can’t have that when we are looking for more, “Worker Power!” ™️
The result? An additional 12,500 traffic deaths.
I wonder if any poor people died in those accidents?
“ Accompanying the reduction in traffic enforcement has been a significant increase in traffic fatalities. Since the Ferguson riots data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and an estimate for 2023 by the National Safety Council put the increase in traffic fatalities at 32%, amounting to over 12,500 additional deaths.
It is difficult to determine how many serious and violent criminals have avoided detection and arrest due to the restrictions on traffic stops but it is undoubtedly substantial.”
Substantial, indeed.
Weird how these stories are never discussed by the “academia” running and frequenting this blog.
https://www.crimeandconsequences.blog/?p=10587#more-10587
Posted by: TarlsQtr | Aug 28, 2024 4:04:49 PM
Yet another relevant piece gone unreported and not commented about on this blog.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2024/08/28/law_enforcement_collapse_masks_rising_crime_rates_151529.html
“FBI data shows arrest rates plummeted over the last few years, starting in 2020. For cities with over 1 million people, the arrest rate for reported violent crime averaged 41% in the 24 years from 1996 to 2019, but it dropped to 20.3% in 2022 – a 50% drop. The lowest arrest rate in the preceding 24 years before COVID-19 was 32.6%. That is still 61% higher than the rate in 2022.
The arrest rate for murder fell by 37%, rape by 58%, robbery by 50%, and aggravated assault by 54%.”
“Despite what the Democrats and the news media keep claiming, the Bureau of Justice Statistics measure of total crime (reported and unreported) has soared under the Biden-Harris administration. The Democrats and the news media only cite the FBI count of reported crime, despite more than half of police departments either not reporting any data or reporting only partial data to the FBI.
But here is the puzzle: Even if Democrats and the news media want to rely solely on the FBI, the FBI data shows the arrest rates plummeting to unprecedented levels. How can they then ignore the collapse of law enforcement? Why is it surprising that crime rates are rising?”
Posted by: TarlsQtr | Aug 28, 2024 7:22:54 PM
Tarls: I cannot figure out what John Lott means by FBI data on "arrest rates" since he does not seem to be using the term the way that the FBI often uses it. (EG: Here is an FBI 2019 release stating: "The arrest rate for violent crime (including murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault) was 156.3 per 100,000 inhabitants." https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/topic-pages/persons-arrested)
Because Lott does not link to his source data, I'd guess he is referencing what is usually discussed as "clearance rates," which I believe hit record lows in 2020 for homicide and other crimes. But I do not think a low clearance rate impacts reported crime data --- eg, I have seen no reports that the record low clearance rate in 2020 impacted the record high reported increases in homicides that year.
I did not see Lott's piece until you noted it, and I am still not sure of what data he is referencing or what he means by "arrest rate" in his effort to assert crime rates are rising. That said, I do think a lot of folks have long been concerned about low clearance rates. Encouragingly, this Jeff Asher piece suggests homicide clearance rates improved in 2023: https://jasher.substack.com/p/murder-clearance-rates-probably-rose
Posted by: Doug B | Aug 28, 2024 10:45:59 PM
Tarls: I just came across this notable piece with an interesting state-by-state break-down of problematic clearance rates for violent crimes (which is discusses in terms of "unsolved violent crime"): "The Accountability Gap: Unsolved Violent Crime in the United States" https://projects.csgjusticecenter.org/tools-for-states-to-address-crime/the-accountability-gap-unsolved-violent-crime-in-the-united-states/
Interestingly, a number of the states with the geatest problems with clearance rates --- eg, Florida and Texas --- are not states that I'd expect to experience a "collapse of law enforcement" based on failures to support or fund police forces.
Posted by: Doug B | Aug 28, 2024 11:01:44 PM
Doug,
Clearance rate, I believe, requires a conviction.
Arrest rate would be crimes reported to the police ending in any kind of arrest.
What he is saying is that crimes reported to the police are ending up in fewer arrests.
Thus, fewer crimes are being reported to the police and they are making a lower percentage of arrests from those reported crimes.
Posted by: TarlsQtr | Aug 28, 2024 11:44:51 PM
Just to clarify…
People are not even bothering to report crimes to the police, most likely because they don’t feel the juice is worth the squeeze. This is true of a close friend of mine who was gang raped but never reported it because it was by a biker gang consisting mostly of veterans and ex-LEO.
Posted by: TarlsQtr | Aug 28, 2024 11:51:24 PM
Tarls: here is how the FBI explains clearance: "Offenses Cleared: In the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, law enforcement agencies can clear, or “close,” offenses in one of two ways: by arrest or by exceptional means." https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/topic-pages/clearances
Here is how Texas explains it: "A clearance refers to the resolution of offenses by law enforcement. An offense is considered cleared when an offender is arrested."
https://www.dps.texas.gov/sites/default/files/documents/crimereports/22/2022cit.pdf
So, it seems you misunderstand the term, and it seems Lott creates confusion by talkng about FBI data on "arrest rates" when I suspect he is using FBI data that the FBI calls clearance rates (or actually "percent of offenses cleared"). But I am still unclear as to exactly what FBI data Lott is using as well as still unclear about Lott's terminology as well as unclear what he is claiming the data shows about "crime rates."
I believe Lott is primarily discussing reported crime when he is discussing “arrest rates,” but I am still not sure because he does not provide any source data and he (and you) seems to want to discuss both reported and unreported crime.
These are complicated matters, aggravated further in recent years by COVID and changes in FBI national data gathering. And this is why I often link to reports from crime data experts like Jeff Asher and folks at CCJ, who work hard to be as clear as possible in their analysis and presentation of crime data. It is also why I tend often to focus on homicide data, which is subject to fewer reporting issues/problems (for a number of reasons) and is tracked in real time by many police forces and well aggregated here by Jeff Asher: https://www.ahdatalytics.com/dashboards/ytd-murder-comparison/
I have yet to see anyone claim that the historic drops in homicides (and rates) in the last two years are the result of problematic clearance rates or homicides going unreported. I guess it is possible some police forces know of ways to "cook the books" on homicides, though it would likely be easier for police to fudge the numbers on clearance rates than on the actual number of homicides.
Posted by: Doug B | Aug 29, 2024 12:16:22 AM
