Going Soft on Crime

By Jill Smolowe

Soft on crime? Next to being called a politician, that was every candidate's worst fear this season. The desperate need to talk tough gave rise to a clamor for three-strikes-you're-out laws and other stringent penalties. But do those measures have anything to do with what works in the real world? A street-level look suggests that the popular wisdom has it backward:

Sneakers, a Milwaukee, Wisconsin, gang member, comes by his nickname honestly. "It's 'cause I'm so fast," he explains. "Real fast." Especially after he snatches a purse. Or burglarizes a home. Or pulls a trigger. Sometimes, though, Sneakers isn't quite fast enough. He has already served three years for two robberies. Now 21, Sneakers is a two-time loser on the prowl in a three-strike state. But he's not worried that a third felony could put him away for life. "The law don't make no difference to me because I ain't gonna get caught," he says. "I mean, if I really thought I was gonna get caught, I wouldn't commit a crime in the first place, now would I?"

The same fate could have befallen Iman Reed. At age 11, Iman liked to pick fights on the streets of Wichita, Kansas, making him a prime target for a revenge shooting. Then his mom enrolled him in a Big Brother program, which paired him with a police detective. Five years later, Iman is pulling down A's and B's in school, and has his sights set on a law degree. Reflecting back, he concludes, "If I wasn't in the program, I'd be in one of those gangs." Or dead.

Sneakers and Iman personify what's really at stake in the debate over America's No. 1 concern. Sneakers is the kind of person politicians have in mind when they claim that they can deter punks from committing a third felony by threatening to lock 'em up for good. And Iman is the sort of kid that some candidates seem to think is the recipient of "pork" when they dismiss prevention programs as a waste of money. But two new reports suggest that those politicians have it wrong. An investigative report published Oct. 24 in the Los Angeles Times documented the failure of California's three-strike law -- one of the nation's first and stiffest. The same day, the National Recreation and Park Association released a nationwide study of prevention programs, which offered compelling evidence that recreation and training can < contribute directly to declines in crime and juvenile-arrest rates. The message may be getting through. A small but growing number of mayors and judges, most of them Republicans, are breaking party ranks to say that it's prevention, not inflexible punishment, that puts a dent in crime.

The Times' review of all 98 third-strike cases resolved between the enactment of the law last March and Aug. 31 found that the law is taking a harsher toll on California's justice system than on its criminals. Third-time defendants who face the prospect of 25 years to life, as the law demands, are no longer willing to enter into the plea-bargaining arrangements that used to settle 90% of all felony cases. Instead, they prefer to sit in county jail, awaiting trial. The result is a swelling jail population, a mushrooming court docket and endless trial delays. To stem the tide, prosecutors are ignoring new "strikes," and judges are reducing felonies to misdemeanors. The result: just 1 in 6 eligible defendants has been packed off to prison for the 25-year minimum. "I've been a Republican all my life, and I'm afraid I'm starting to sound like a Democrat," Judge Carol Fieldhouse of the Los Angeles Superior Court told TIME. "I've never seen something before where D.A.s, defense lawyers and judges agree. This thing is not working."

They also agree that the biggest problem is the law's indiscriminate sweep. Unlike the three-strike provision of the federal crime bill passed by Congress last August, the law in California does not distinguish between violent and nonviolent felons. "In principal, the law is a good idea," says Judge Arthur Jean, another Republican on the Los Angeles Superior Court. "In practice, it nets in a huge number of lightweight offenders." Judges feel it excessive to dole out life sentences for such felonies as drug possession and tire theft.

California is not alone in finding three strikes more of a headache than a deterrent or remedy. At present, 13 other states have three-strike laws, while seven more are considering such legislation. "Some of the early reports we're getting from various states about three strikes are not very encouraging," says Bobbie Huskey, president of the American Correctional Association. "States are having to project a doubling or tripling of their state prison populations."

Meanwhile, in California even judges in the juvenile courts, where the three-strike law does not apply, are feeling its heat. "The punitive messages * seem to be the only ones that get out to the public, and that is a problem," says Judge Steven Perren of the Ventura County Superior Court. "As long as the community's attitude toward juveniles is 'punish,' we all lose. There is a large segment here that is salvageable."

That is precisely what prevention advocates have been arguing for years. Now they have the Park Association's report to bolster their hunch. Police in Dallas recorded a 26% drop in juvenile arrests after a gang-intervention program, sponsored by 17 civic organizations, began reaching out to 3,000 youths in 1989 with education, recreation and job-training programs. "At one time, we felt we could handle the crime problem by ourselves," says Dallas police chief Ben Click, a 30-year veteran of law enforcement. "We were forced to realize that we needed the help of people in the schools, churches and neighborhoods."

In Fort Myers, Florida, the juvenile-crime rate has dropped 27% since the start-up three years ago of STARS, an academic and recreation program targeted at youths. Moreover, where only 25% of the city's youths had higher than a C average four years ago, today 75% are getting C's or better. While it would cost $15,000 to send a miscreant youth to boot camp for a year, STARS spends just $158 a child to provide music and dance lessons, sports and tutoring. When youths participate in such programs, says Wilbur Smith III, the city's mayor, they "start experiencing activities that reward them intellectually and emotionally, and that instills hope. You don't get that from punishment."

While all this seems obvious to people who work closely with youths, preventive solutions remain a hard sell -- especially after Republican cries of "pork" led to a $2 billion cut in the federal crime bill's proposed $8.9 billion in prevention measures. Victor Ashe, however, is one Republican who remains undeterred. Since becoming mayor of Knoxville, Tennessee, in 1988, he has raised his parks and recreation budget more than 60%. And as president of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, he champions prevention as the most cost- effective weapon against crime: "If you commit a crime, you ought to be punished. But if a crime is prevented, that's better."

With reporting by Jon D. Hull/Chicago, Sylvester Monroe/Atlanta and David Seideman/New York