The Wrong Way to Criticize the Crime Bill

The 1994 Crime Bill, signed by Bill Clinton, was endorsed by the NAACP and supported by the Congressional Black Caucus. At the time, the main argument was that police forces were neglecting crime in predominantly minority neighborhoods due to institutionalized racism.

Now we know that the provisions in the Crime Bill went too far, creating a new set of problems. Crime is down, but unnecessary incarceration is way up. Jailing people for small, non-violent drug offenses harms individuals, families, and communities, and it’s especially problematic when drug use is about equal across races but drug-related punishments are disproportionately high for blacks and Latinos. That needs to be addressed.

This is how problem-solving works in the real world. Try to address current problems while also reducing the likelihood of negative side-effects. Always be willing to evaluate what happens, reassess, and course correct.

“You supported something 20 years ago that was well-intentioned but had bad results” is a serious criticism against someone who stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the negative consequences. It doesn’t help at all against someone who recognizes those consequences and wants to address them.