Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
GIULIANI MYTHOLOGY: Dana's piece today on the second-tier Democrats policy proposals is very informative. In particular I think the section on drug and crime policy reform highlights a serious injustice that should be on the agenda of mainstream Democrats and, lamentably, is not. But I do have a nit to pick with this little bit of analysis:
Although large majorities of Americans would like to legalize marijuana for medical purposes, being 'tough on crime' and 'tough on drugs' are perennially winning stances in American elections. Just look at Rudy Giuliani.
As the resident Giuliani myth-debunker I think it's worth pointing out that he lost his first race for mayor, barely won his second, and dropped out of his Senate race because he was trailing carpet-bagger Hillary Clinton in the polls.
Nonetheless, I would readily concede that being tough on crime has been a winning stance for many candidates, and that Republican Giuliani owes his victory in heavily Democratic New York City to his focus on that issue. But that was in 1993, when crime was much higher than it is today. It was also before Bill Clinton largely neutralized the Republican advantage on crime by taking a tough-on-crime approach himself as president (and congressional Democrats called Republicans' bluff by pushing for stricter gun control.)
So the political scene today is quite different: crime is down, Democrats aren't perceived as weak on the issue, the prison population has swollen enormously, the crack epidemic is over, and acceptance of substance abuse as an illness rather than criminal act has become more widespread, (just look at Rush Limbaugh). If Democrats don't have the courage to come out with proposals to switch from prison to treatment for non-violent drug offenders now I fear they never will.
--Ben Adler
COMMENTS (10)
You might also mention that being tough on crime paid off for Giuliani only because the public, prodded by a lazy and worshipful New York press, was ignorant of some basic facts: namely, that the crime rate had already begun to drop significantly under Giuliani's predecessor, David Dinkins; that Dinkins had successfully obtained federal dollars to increase the police presence (Giuliani did not put one extra cop on the streets); and that the drop was part of a nationwide trend.
Posted by: captcrisis | June 22, 2007 2:44 PM
Rudy dropped out because he had cancer.
Rudy may be a first class egomaniac and a first class smuck but he did get serious treatment for prostate cancer and decided to drop out of the race.
Posted by: neil wilson | June 22, 2007 2:59 PM
Rudy vs. Hillary:
He never was "in" that race. Eventually he was diagnosed with prostate cancer and said he had to get treatment for it, but that was after a long period where he was behind Hillary in the polls and, presumably because of that (he hadn't been diagnosed yet), he wouldn't commit to running.
Posted by: captcrisis | June 22, 2007 4:37 PM
...Bill Clinton largely neutralized the Republican advantage on crime by taking a tough-on-crime approach himself ...
The Republican advantage on crime was mostly neutralized by the reduced salience of the issue, a result of the radical decline in crime rates during the 1990s, much or most of which had little to do with anything Giuliani or Clinton did.
Ominously, crime rates now are increasing again. Look for a revival of Republican posturing.
Posted by: KH | June 22, 2007 4:45 PM
There was a nationwide drop in crime BECAUSE of the drop in crime in NYC.
Posted by: Roy | June 22, 2007 5:13 PM
Guliani has several things going against him.
1. He got good looks worthy of Skeletor.
2. His economic program: endorsing flat tax brings the support of Forbes and pretty soon, total political oblivion (remember certain Dole who also wanted to be a president?)
3. Formers mayors of NYC are famously unconfortable with yokels when never went to an opera.
4. Vehement hatred of small furry animals.
Posted by: piotr | June 25, 2007 12:42 AM
Just want to note. The crack epidemic is not over. It just doesn't result in as much crime as it used to.
Posted by: Parmenides | June 25, 2007 3:05 PM
m398k
Posted by: ro844ck | July 3, 2007 12:27 AM
eqxmf xlwkjeqz kcmt kcytz gdvnljk cprsa vbpko
Posted by: fwqtesau jyhfvz | July 15, 2007 2:35 AM
wcqjzhtad ihkfrtay emhslrt acmn knsqgotld awsqygpri pknigwa http://www.fgmyqlb.yawm.com
Posted by: rcxa rekcnw | July 15, 2007 2:36 AM