Speaking of Root Causes...

...Green Party candidate for mayor of Saint Paul, Elizabeth Dickinson, unleashed her big plan for combating crime in the city yesterday.

Let's look for the big plan, here.

By the way - people ask me "why do you pay any attention at all to the Green Party candidates?" Because they're borderline-contenders in the Twin Cities; they have been elected to the Minneapolis City Council, and it's not inconceivable that one could win office in one of Saint Paul's ditzier wards; the Second (downtown and posh, überliberal Ramsey Hill) and Third (Highland Park, Merriam Park, places where Wellstone signs dot the streets where people who still support Kathleen Soliah tend their immaculate organic lawns).

Dickinson:

As Police Chief Harrington recognized in a recent editorial, and has been backed up by my conversations with scores of citizens, including current and retired police officers - although they might not use this phrase - there needs to be a more holistic approach to crime. Crime is an
endpoint and there are places of intervention - places where we can slow down
and stop crime in its tracks, if we only know where to look and we put the money and time resources in those places.

To this point, I could hardly agree more. There are many, dare I say, "root causes" of crime: poverty; the warehousing of poor, desperate people in inner cities; a largely-misguided "war on drugs"; a popular, predominant urban culture that glamorizes violence and the criminal life; disarmament of victim populations; urban "leadership" that harps on helplessnes and discourages hard work; even the long-term effects of slavery and the sense of hopelessness it ingrained in all of Black American society.

Yep. There are plenty of root causes of crime.

So what's the Green Party going to go after?

Do we need to put more officers on the street? Of course. But we _can not solve_ the problem only through those means - that's like trying to cure heart disease by building more cemeteries.

That's basically true.

Basically.

So what's the solution?

80% of those incarcerated in our prison system witnessed domestic violence as children, and become perpetrators or victims of domestic violence. Many of those incarcerated are simultaneously guilty of drug related and/or gang related activity. And the single largest category of calls to the St. Paul police are domestic violence calls. We can not put a police officer in every home. What can a mayor do?

Er, good question. Start to address poverty, warehousing, desperation, misguided drug wars, gangsta culture, helplessness and culture?

First, let's look at domestic violence. As a mayor I will support the reauthorization of the federal Violence Against Women Act which is about to expire. This act is a template to support policies which reinforce that domestic violence is a crime and should be treated as such.

Huh-wha?

So let me get this straight: Crime needs a "holistic approach", but domestic violence is a self-standing, independent plague on its own?

And even the ACLU recognizes that the Violence Against Women Act is an extremely troublesome piece of legislation. They referred to VAWA - which was part of the 1994 "Crime Bill", which was generally a disaster for civil liberties - "troubling", believed that the increased penalties and the pre-trial, extrajudicial incarceration was wrong, and that mandatory HIV testing was a gross violation of the right to privacy. The Supreme Court in US v. Morrison struck down large chunks of the VAWA, and the rest exists largely because the SCOTUS didn't address it at all. Violence against women is a bad thing; nobody argues it. But the VAWA is, putting it politely, a lousy piece of legislation. Better laws can be crafted (especially in light of research that shows that violence against men in relationships is also a serious problem, perhaps at least as prevalent as violence against women); VAWA should be allowed to die, and be replaced by better legislation.

So - will Elizabeth Dickinson get around to talking about poverty, warehousing, desperation, misguided drug wars, gangsta culture, helplessness and culture?

Second, to address other crimes including domestic violence, gangs and drug activity I will work with community councils to expand block clubs into every area of the city and work with the police department to ensure
a regular presence of police officers at the block clubs. Police need neighborhood block clubs to be the eyes and ears of the police - to notify them of any suspicious activity - whether it's graffiti which may indicate increased gang activity, or unusual comings or goings at odd hours of the night which may indicate drug or gang activity, or screaming from a nearby home which may indicate domestic violence.

OK, fair enough. Block clubs are important.

They're also, basically, extra eyes for the police department, a human burglar alarm. They address no root causes - the poverty, warehousing, desperation, misguided drug wars, gangsta culture, helplessness and culture issues we need to deal with. Right?

And again with the domestic violence. What's up with that?

So let's move on:

As a society, we encourage zero tolerance of crime through informal and formal community education - when neighbors know not only that they have the right to report suspicious activity when it relates to people they may not know, but they have a duty to report domestic violence even if it occurs with people they do know. Domestic violence is not a private family matter. Domestic violence affects all of society and must be recognized as a crime. And since many women withdraw charges against their batterers, we must offer the support of independent witnesses in court to ensure that warranted charges stick.

Again with the domestic violence?

We have meth labs all over the place; not a word. We have crack houses - zip. We have poverty, warehousing, desperation, misguided drug wars, gangsta culture, helplessness and a culture that preys on all the above; nothing. We have a liberal, catch and release judicial system; bupkes.

But we have relentless focus on domestic violence?

Why would that cause any problems?

As mayor I will aggressively look for continuing funding to expand on the $389,000 recently received from the U.S. Department of Justice to combat domestic violence [Seven! - Ed.] so when it runs out in two years, we will have replacement funds to continue fighting domestic violence...We must increase protection orders, since battering tends to be a pattern and not an individual event.

Huh?

So let's get this straight: Crime in general is complex, and intuitive solutions like punishing it are like "building cemeteries" to fight disease. But the root of crime is domestic violence, and the solution is to allow more restraining orders - which are both terribly abused in the current domestic court industry and nearly worthless in preventing actual violence?

I smell a lot of influence by groups with agendas.

And as noted in the Minnesota Advocates for Human Rights report, special attention needs to be paid to immigrant women, not because they are more likely to be battered [Eight - and we know there aren't any societies out there that systematically devalue women, Riiiight? - Ed.] than other groups, but because they have particular language and cultural barriers to accessing services likely to protect them. We must hire more trustworthy, bilingual interpreters at shelters and emergency rooms so immigrant women know there is a law against beating and laws to prevent your children ["Your" children? Huh? - Ed.] being taken away or to prevent landlords from evicting domestic violence [Nine! - Ed.] victims.

My head hurts.

Third, I will work with the community councils and recreation centers to get more VISTA and Americorps workers and volunteers into rec centers and libraries to start innovative programming. Vista and Americorps workers are an effective, lower cost way to help overworked staff in our rec centers.

OK, so Ms. Dickinson wants to pass the cost of staffing rec centers up to the feds. Innovative, in a sense, but not exactly a crime thing...

Additionally, besides traditional programming of sports and recreational activities, we need to develop programs to teach non-violent communication skills to parents and leaders in the community to encourage awareness that there are alternatives.

"Teaching non-violence". That's worth a post all by itself. Does Ms. Dicksinson think the people who need to be "taught" non-violence will show up? Or that they have time, stressed out as they are by underemployment and desperation and the stresses of whatever crappy situation they're in, to attend her precious classes?

Or is this going to be something that people are corralled into by force? Or just the men, perhaps?

Fourth, I will work with the SPPD gang unit to help them establish ongoing relationships with schools and rec centers to combat the formation of gangs. The community - especially kids - need to see police outside of traditional roles so they don't only perceive the police as the people who take people they know away from the community. I strongly support the establishment of police athletic and activities leagues so kids see alternatives to joining gangs and see police as trusted members of the community.

Wow. We got ten paragraphs into the statement before we got to something that actually makes sense and isn't a politically-correct dodge.

Do we understand that investments in keeping women and kids safe pays dividends of reduced crime, down both now, and in the future - so today's kids don't become victims or perpetrators of domestic violence [Ten! - Ed.], gangs and drugs? Do we understand that public investments in parks and rec centers and replacing playgrounds like the one here at the Margaret rec center give kids and parents not just a place to enjoy themselves - although that is incredibly important in this stressful world - but they also may be a lifeline - the one place a kid or parent may go to that encourages a sense of self-esteem, a sense that they are valued by the community simply because the community has given them a safe place to express their energy?

In the end, if we do care, do we care _enough_ to pay higher taxes now? Or
do we prefer to pay a higher price down the line?

Millions for cops.

Not a dime for feminist dogma.

Posted by Mitch at September 8, 2005 07:02 AM | TrackBack