WYPR News in Maryland
How crime stats measure up in Maryland's gubernatorial race
So which is true? Governor Ehrlich's charge?
Ehrlich Ad: "(Music) ... In Baltimore's criminal justice system, there is talk, and there are facts... O'Malley was caught manipulating crime statistics to make the city look safer..."
Or is the truth found in Mayor O'Malley's rebuttal?
O'Malley Ad: "A desperate Bob Ehrlich has turned to misleading attacks on a city that's dramatically reduced violent crime and murders. Attacks on a police department whose monthly crime statistics are validated by Ehrlich's own state police and published by the FBI..."
Well, both are true - and false. Governor Ehrlich says Mayor O'Malley is wrongly taking credit for a drop in crime that's linked to a 1999 audit of crime records. Many simple assaults from that single year were re-classified into aggravated assaults. Those are violent crimes. Because so many lesser crimes were moved up into the violent crime category, the total number of violent crimes for 1999 went up. In the following year, the crime records were not audited. And lesser crimes were not re-classified into violent crime categories like aggravated assault. Thus, in 2000, violent crimes went down.
Nolan: "If you're uh, looking at the 1999 numbers, and they were increased from 7,000 plus to 10,000 plus, because of the audit, that is, they were adjusted, then comparing an adjusted number to an unadjusted number would be like comparing apples to oranges. And I wouldn't want to make that sort of a comparison."
Criminologist Jim Nolan came to assist the Baltimore police department after they'd started their 1999 crime audit. He says for an accurate picture, voters should compare the crime rates from two un-audited years or unadjusted years, like 1998 and 2005.
Nolan: "They are limited in what they can do, I think that it's more rather, the community is willing to participate."
And when the 1998 numbers are compared to the 2005 numbers - violent crimes, including homicides - show a real drop. Criminologist Nolan says that's a significant decrease.
Mayor O'Malley has thrown barbs of his own. He says Governor Ehrlich has done little to reduce crime, particularly in the troubled juvenile justice system. Political Scientist Don Norris says O'Malley is overstating the Governor's actual power to fight crime.
Norris: "It's much more of a responsibility on local police to deal with those sorts of things than it is for the federal police. So I think the same thing applies in the state that a governor or a mayor doesn't have a whole lot of ability, I don't think, to fix those problems."
So, if the Governor can't really cut crime because he's hasn't got real power and the Mayor is taking credit for a big crime decrease but some of that's on paper: what's a Maryland voter to think?
Walters: "I'm not sure that these accusations about who is more responsible for the crime rate, especially in Baltimore City, is going to have much impact on this election."
University of Maryland political scientist, Ron Walters:
Walters: "Crime, of course, is somewhat less a concern for the average voter, than uh, other issues; like the state of the economy, like jobs, like um, obviously the war in Iraq."
It's also easy to shout about cutting crime on 30 second ads. But real crime fighting isn't sexy. Criminologist Mike Maltz of the University of Illinois says if voters want to stop crime, they have to invest in programs that don't pay off right away.
Maltz: "We know for a fact that head start works in reducing crime, but it's a 15-year lead time."
But if you're a mayor - or a governor - you've only got four years to prove yourself. And no politician wants to share crime fighting credit with a successor, especially if it's a political enemy.
I'm Korva Coleman, reporting in Baltimore, for 88.1, WYPR. © Copyright 2009, wypr
(2006-10-31)
BALTIMORE, MD
(wypr) -
The two major party candidates for governor have been trading fierce accusations about crime fighting. Republican governor Robert Ehrlich says Baltimore mayor and Democrat, Martin O'Malley, misled voters about his crime record. O'Malley says the governor has failed to keep promises to fight crime and instead is making baseless charges. WYPR's Korva Coleman takes a look at the charges:So which is true? Governor Ehrlich's charge?
Ehrlich Ad: "(Music) ... In Baltimore's criminal justice system, there is talk, and there are facts... O'Malley was caught manipulating crime statistics to make the city look safer..."
Or is the truth found in Mayor O'Malley's rebuttal?
O'Malley Ad: "A desperate Bob Ehrlich has turned to misleading attacks on a city that's dramatically reduced violent crime and murders. Attacks on a police department whose monthly crime statistics are validated by Ehrlich's own state police and published by the FBI..."
Well, both are true - and false. Governor Ehrlich says Mayor O'Malley is wrongly taking credit for a drop in crime that's linked to a 1999 audit of crime records. Many simple assaults from that single year were re-classified into aggravated assaults. Those are violent crimes. Because so many lesser crimes were moved up into the violent crime category, the total number of violent crimes for 1999 went up. In the following year, the crime records were not audited. And lesser crimes were not re-classified into violent crime categories like aggravated assault. Thus, in 2000, violent crimes went down.
Nolan: "If you're uh, looking at the 1999 numbers, and they were increased from 7,000 plus to 10,000 plus, because of the audit, that is, they were adjusted, then comparing an adjusted number to an unadjusted number would be like comparing apples to oranges. And I wouldn't want to make that sort of a comparison."
Criminologist Jim Nolan came to assist the Baltimore police department after they'd started their 1999 crime audit. He says for an accurate picture, voters should compare the crime rates from two un-audited years or unadjusted years, like 1998 and 2005.
Nolan: "They are limited in what they can do, I think that it's more rather, the community is willing to participate."
And when the 1998 numbers are compared to the 2005 numbers - violent crimes, including homicides - show a real drop. Criminologist Nolan says that's a significant decrease.
Mayor O'Malley has thrown barbs of his own. He says Governor Ehrlich has done little to reduce crime, particularly in the troubled juvenile justice system. Political Scientist Don Norris says O'Malley is overstating the Governor's actual power to fight crime.
Norris: "It's much more of a responsibility on local police to deal with those sorts of things than it is for the federal police. So I think the same thing applies in the state that a governor or a mayor doesn't have a whole lot of ability, I don't think, to fix those problems."
So, if the Governor can't really cut crime because he's hasn't got real power and the Mayor is taking credit for a big crime decrease but some of that's on paper: what's a Maryland voter to think?
Walters: "I'm not sure that these accusations about who is more responsible for the crime rate, especially in Baltimore City, is going to have much impact on this election."
University of Maryland political scientist, Ron Walters:
Walters: "Crime, of course, is somewhat less a concern for the average voter, than uh, other issues; like the state of the economy, like jobs, like um, obviously the war in Iraq."
It's also easy to shout about cutting crime on 30 second ads. But real crime fighting isn't sexy. Criminologist Mike Maltz of the University of Illinois says if voters want to stop crime, they have to invest in programs that don't pay off right away.
Maltz: "We know for a fact that head start works in reducing crime, but it's a 15-year lead time."
But if you're a mayor - or a governor - you've only got four years to prove yourself. And no politician wants to share crime fighting credit with a successor, especially if it's a political enemy.
I'm Korva Coleman, reporting in Baltimore, for 88.1, WYPR. © Copyright 2009, wypr


