Tuesday, October 7, 2008
More on the Candidates' Crime Positions
In addition to the information we've already posted about the presidential candidates' positions on crime issues, the International Association of Chiefs of Police has just published a report detailing Senator Obama and Senator McCain's responses to six questions about issues related to crime, terrorism, and homeland security that were posed to them by the IACP. This Q-and-A with the candidates is a potentially important step in helping to correct the absence of crime issues in the national political discourse, as we have already noted.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
After reading the IACP Q-and-A, here are my initial responses, in no particular order:
1. The very first sentence of both candidates' responses to the drug question uses the word "scourge" to describe the U.S. drug problem. That made me chuckle.
2. Other similarities exist, too. For example, both men name-check the Second Chance Act in their responses.
3. Despite the rhetorical similarities, their answers (not surprisingly) tend to diverge along predictable party lines. While McCain mentions shoring up interdiction strategies (a fundamental supply-reduction component of Republican drug policy), Obama mentions "robustly" funding Drug Courts and treatment programs (i.e., demand-reduction strategies), both of which tend to be favored by Democratic drug policy.
4. The following passage, from McCain's reponse, troubled me greatly:
"As president, I will commit to securing our borders and immediately deporting all illegal immigrants that have been convicted of a crime."
To me, this statement is evocative of the problematic "don't blink" mentality seemingly embraced by the McCain-Palin campaign, and embodies the ill-conceived "tough on crime" approach. (After all, "Kick 'em out and keep 'em out" is only a tiny step removed from "Lock 'em up and throw away the key.")
Some questions to consider: Would this "immediate deportation" allow time for the appellate process? I mean, how immediate is immediate? Also, does this policy apply only to felons, or to misdemeanants as well? I guess I am fundamentally opposed to immediate, mandatory, and/or knee-jerk policies of any kind, especially those that stand to tear apart families via deportation.
That's my two cents. Thoughts from others about the candidates' responses?
Not too much to go on. Dems and Reps are more similar than they are different these days are crime issues. I was rereading some 1994 Crime Bill stuff again for class Thursday night. I am still amazed that a democratic administration championed legislation where SIXTY additional crimes were eligible for the death penalty. Since that was authored to Biden, should that be any sort of gauge?
Post a Comment