How the Soft-on-Crime Sausage Gets Made

October 2022 saw the Ronald Brownstein Of The Atlantic Write A passionate defense of left-wing progressive criminal reform movement. Claiming that there is no connection between rising crime rate and polices, “soft-on-crime” district attorneys (DAs).

This article gives you an overview of. . . Interesting. . . argument.

Brownstein admits, among other points, that

• In 2014, national crime rates saw a reversal in their downward trend.
• In the beginning, left-leaning progressive DAs were popularized in the “mid 2010s,”
• 20 percent of the country is now in the jurisdiction of a left wing progressive DA. This is compared with “essentially none 10 years ago” In the days when crime rates were at an alltime low,
• It is “no clear alternative explanation” Besides rising crime rates, the left-leaning progressive DAs are also a contributing factor.

Brownstein asserts that correlation evidence is not reliable as proof of causality. Brownstein cites two academic studies as evidence to support his claims.

Study 1 “The Red State Murder Problem”

One of the studies—conducted by the far-left The Third WayBrownstein calls it a “centrist Democratic group”—claims that Republicans, not left-wing progressives, are responsible for rising crime because “per capita murder rates in 2020 were 40 percent higher in states that voted for Donald Trump.”

This study was it reputable? It is not.

In reality, the Third Way study was ahref=”https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/10/19/murder-rates-red-states-myth/”>thoroughly debunked In the left-leaning Washington Post just the day before Brownstein’s article. The study was Widely ridiculed Because it failed to recognize the fact that nearly all “red state murders” These events took place in Democrat-controlled areas within these states. Discrediting the study’s claims about Missouri, Marc Thiessen of the American Enterprise Institute wrote:

Missouri is an example. It voted for Trump. It is also home two of the most dangerous U.S. cities—St. Louis and Kansas City—both of which are run by Democrats. CBS News earlier this year did an Analyse The “deadliest U.S. cities” The latest FBI crime data. The FBI found that St. Louis had 64.54 murders per 100 residents in 2019, making it the most dangerous city in America. Kansas City was meanwhile the eighth most murderous city with 29.88 per 100,000 residents. According to FBIIn the same year, there were approximately 520 murders within major metropolitan areas. Twenty of these occurred in cities that are not in metropolitan areas and 28 in counties outside of metropolitan areas. So, the vast majority of Missouri’s homicides took place in its Democrat-run cities.

Third Way also was ridiculed for suggesting that high crime rates in Nebraska and South Dakota were caused by Republicans. Thiessen points out that Third Way did not mention the fact these three states had 75 murders in 2019, which is less than some areas in Chicago and St. Louis.

Brownstein could have been forgiven for using the Third Way study, even though he might have known from basic critical thinking that it was fake. It had been debunked only one day earlier. On top of that, the Third Way study isn’t really the heart of his argument anyway. The second study may be more reliable.

Study 2: Violent Crimes and Public Prosecution

The main point of the article was “Violent Crime and Public Prosecution,” a new study by the University of Toronto’s Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy. Brownstein stated that the researchers who conducted the study had discovered that “homicides over recent years increased less rapidly in cities with left-wing progressive prosecutors than in those with more traditional district attorneys.”

Unlike the Third Way article, the Munk School article had not been thoroughly debunked when Brownstein’s article was published. As the study had already been published, not much had been done about it. You can get it earlier than the same day. A summary of the study is a good way to understand its claims without having to read any additional commentary.

This summary is an example of a political point-scoring strategy. It points out that “the greatest proportional increase in homicide in 2020 took place in Mesa, Arizona, a city served by a conservative prosecutor.” It is what it is doesn’t It is worth noting that Mesa (a city of more than 500,000) saw only 24 total murders in 2020. This is certainly not an indictment against conservative prosecution.

The study’s central claim, as Brownstein writes, is that “from 2015 to 2019, for instance, the study found that murder rates increased in a smaller share of cities with progressive prosecutors (56 percent) than in those with traditional prosecutors (68 percent) or prosecutors who fell in the middle (62 percent).” Although the data are interesting, they are not particularly useful as they do not include data for 202o which is the year of progressive criminal justice reform. It also doesn’t account for state and local legislation that might affect crime rates. It does not consider any changes to police budgets or policing. It only draws data from 65 cities and counties across the country. The full study also shows that New York City, Los Angeles, Dallas and Houston were included in the mix. “middle” category.

Later, the summary will present data from the study that allegedly vindicated the left-wing progressive DAs for Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Chicago and Philadelphia.

Kim Foxx, the summary claims, can’t be blamed for Chicago’s staggering 56 percent An increase in homicides in 2020 and continued increases in 2021. This is because homicides spiked in 2017, just before she took office, and then declined for three years until the pandemic in 2020. Summary doesn’t Foxx announced that she was the only one to do so. They would not prosecute Most drug offenses in 2020 Refused to face charges against those accused of rioting in 2020. Illinois also passed left-wing progressive legislation Criminal justice reform laws In 2021.

Similar excuses were offered for Larry Krasner from Philadelphia, where the summary claims that there was a combined 57 per cent increase in homicides cannot be his fault simply because the murders took place in August or December. George Gascon of Los Angeles County was also not responsible for the 12 percent increase in murders in his first year. However, murders rose by 12 percent at Los Angeles’ city center and 41 percent in the outlying counties (which were also under his jurisdiction).

The summary claims seem weak or severely flawed. However, time and further investigation by experts will determine if the study has merit.

Follow the Money

The questionable assertions of the summary and the untested data of the full study are not the only possible problems with Brownstein’s primary source. A disturbing money trail is found behind the study, which suggests possible biases.

Brownstein and the Munk School authors admit that the study was funded and commissioned by the Center for American Progress, one of America’s leading left-of-center think tanks and policy-advocacy organizations. This alone is cause for concern, but there’s more.

Todd Foglesong (lead author) is currently a Munk School fellow “In cooperation with the Open Society Foundations” and has been involved in its development. “developing a peer-based system of support for government officials that seek to solve persistent problems in criminal justice.”

Open Society Foundations This is the private charitable foundation of the famous left-wing billionaire. George Soros, who is also the largest campaign donor to left-wing Progressive DAs. Since 2015, Soros spent over $30 million to support left-wing progressive DAs all across the country. over two-dozen DAs Those who have received the money are currently in office. It seems notable that at least part of the primary author’s salary is apparently being paid by the largest campaign donor of many of the DAs being studied, but neither Brownstein nor the Munk School study makes any mention of this fact.

Open Society Foundations (OSF), in fact, is a website. Reports The $144,265 OSF grant to the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy was received by the Munk School, while $2.7 million has been received by the University of Toronto. In 2016, the largest grant was $1.3 million, which established the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy. “peer support system” Foglesong is currently working on criminal justice reform.

Behind the Curtain

This is how soft-on-crime sausages are made.

Brownstein’s article, and countless others like it, instruct readers to ignore the evidence of their eyes and ears because “the experts” You may have come to different conclusions. One quick look under the hood will reveal this. “the experts” are either incredibly biased or completely debunked, but most people don’t have the time or patience to look deeper so “the experts” get accepted at face-value.

On social media, protestors and activists assure the crowd that the experts are correct, and that they would vote for such changes. A candidate emerges from nowhere with a lot of money (from the same megadonor that funded the experts) as well as a group of activists to take the city into a new era. When the left-wing progressive is elected and the destruction of their policies is felt, the same experts come forward again to explain that it’s not their fault, the media rushes to report the expert testimony as fact, and the whole process starts over again. Rinse and Repeat.

American cities need to break this vicious cycle to escape the scourge left-wing progressive utopian experiments.