We Should Oppose the Imaginary National Emergency on Crime
By Josh Hoe, Senior Policy Manager
Many political pundits suggest a Democratic response to President Donald Trump’s federalization of law enforcement of DC would be a mistake. This stems from the belief that celebrating decreases in crime ignores its victims and the voter’s perception of crime. But we cannot surrender to these narratives. In doing so, we would ignore successful reforms, cede elections, hurt the unhoused, and cement in place failed tough-on-crime politics and inappropriate police power for the foreseeable future.
Ignoring the Decline in Crime is Dangerous and Counterproductive
Over the last three years, the United States has had one of the largest declines in violent crime in the history of crime statistics. Jeff Asher, a widely respected data-scientist who specializes in crime statistics, stated on his Substack, that “the nation’s murder rate for 2024 was down 26 percent from 2020’s figure” and “violent and property crime rates stand at the lowest levels since the 1960s.” This same decline extends to Washington DC. In fact, even in the face of President Trump’s criticism of crime statistics reporting, the decline has actually been quite significant.
There is a massive difference between pretending crime doesn’t exist and rightfully saying that we have had a huge decline in violent crime. To conflate the sharing of verifiable crime reductions with ignoring victims and embracing crime is irresponsible and inaccurate.
Crime statistics are not only important in identifying the scope of the problem, they are the prime mechanism we use to determine which crime prevention methods work and which ones do not. Statistics are collected from law enforcement at the local, state, and federal levels and corroborated in a multitude of ways. We know what we know about addressing crime because crime stats exist and devaluing them gets rid of our ability to map success or address failures.
In my years of criminal justice reform work, I have engaged in using data to find reforms that improve public safety and bring people back from incarceration. 95% of people in state prisons will eventually come home, and nothing is more important to public safety than ensuring they come back ready to positively contribute to our communities.
Ignoring statistics does not help victims or ensure an effective response to crime. Instead we would become a nation unable to imagine broader and more effective policy options, stuck forever in cycles of failed policy and ever-increasing police power.
Normalizing Militarized Police is Dangerous for Americans
It is also dangerous to go along with the false narrative of a national crime emergency and to accept the normalization of using the United States military to address domestic crime. No matter what political party you support, the barriers between the military and local enforcement are essential in the prevention of a possible police state. The federalization of DC potentially sets a precedent that could be used in other states and cities, and this could be counterproductive to reducing crime and military readiness, and also be bad for the protection of civil rights and liberty.
By standing down during this crisis, we are risking the lives of our most vulnerable Americans. We should not be using unhoused people as fodder for crime-reduction cosplay. It will not reduce crime, or homelessness, but it will make people’s lives worse.
Accepting tough-on-crime narratives without question comes at a cost. Too often, we conflate arrests with solving crime, and that is rarely the case. , Incarceration–even accounting for incapacitation–increases crime and tough policing fails to reduce crime, increases public anger at police, and even makes the fear-of-crime worse (which is helpful to demagogues, but unhelpful to everyone else).
Embracing Criminal Justice Reform is Good Policy and Good Politics
We can, and should, always find new ways to improve criminal justice data and data collection. But, if we want to achieve different results and change the political narrative, we should include different voices.
Instead of continuing to spotlight the same talking heads, we need to turn the microphone over to politicians in cities with success implementing innovative and comprehensive crime policies and the people on the street implementing those innovations.
We need to hear from Mayor Brandon Scott and Mayor Michelle Wu about what is working in Baltimore and Boston. We need to learn from the massive declines in Chicago from Mayor Brandon Johnson, and about winning elections against tough-on-crime opposition from District Attorney Larry Krasner in Philadelphia and Governor Pritzker in Illinois. And, we also need to remember that trends in crime often happen outside of political narratives. But, more importantly, we need to hear new voices and new ideas.
Beyond the returning panelists on major news networks, we should put the spotlight on people in communities who have been part of successful campaigns of violence interruption or campaigns removing employment and housing barriers for people directly impacted by our justice system. When we talk about incarceration, we should include the voices of formerly incarcerated people who have done successful work to bring people back better.
Embracing this approach to criminal justice reform is not just good policy, it is good politics. We know when people encounter more crime based coverage, it can create a fear of crime. The way we speak about crime and who we choose to be its voice can be transformative. When we lead with public safety, control the narrative around effective crime reduction, and focus on real solutions, we deliver a message that resonates and wins.
