[ad_1]<\/p>\n
\n Democrats have a dangerous predilection for getting bogged down in statistics, defensively pointing at facts \u2014 treating political disagreements like Oxford-style debates. If they don\u2019t shift gears, the party risks broad electoral losses and a giant step backward in a policy area where they\u2019ve made significant and meaningful progress in recent years: criminal justice reform.<\/p>\n Yes, Democrats are the party of science and facts \u2014 advocates for vaccines and not dewormers \u2014 but it\u2019s fruitless to try and convince people of something they don\u2019t feel. It\u2019s understandably frustrating that third-hand anecdotes, high-profile cases distorted by politics,<\/a> viral videos and apps<\/a> insidiously designed to make every neighborhood feel like it\u2019s under siege, often have more impact than scientific and academic studies.<\/p>\n Advocates of progressive reforms can tweet till their fingers fall off about historically low crime rates and studies<\/a> showing crime is worse in Republican-led \u201ctough on crime\u201d jurisdictions, but playing defense is of limited use.<\/p>\n With an election looming, there\u2019s little room for nuance in today\u2019s politics.<\/p>\n People fear crime and want better public safety. They always have and always will. And for a variety of reasons, fair and unfair, it\u2019s a top concern these days. So, yes, Democrats need to state facts but not waste time arguing the numbers. Respect voters by meeting them where they are \u2014 acknowledge their feelings and offer solutions \u2014 because the solutions Democrats support are popular and effective.<\/p>\n In 2012,<\/a> 2014,<\/a> and 2016,<\/a> ballot initiatives that reformed California\u2019s \u201cthree strikes\u201d sentencing, changed certain low-level crimes from felonies to misdemeanors and increased opportunities for nonviolent prisoners to be paroled, were all approved by at least 60% of voters. More recently, a 2020<\/a> initiative to eviscerate those initiatives failed by more than 20 points, and the governor who supported the reforms (and effectively banned the death penalty<\/a>) twice won 24-point victories. I worked on each of those campaigns, and they all won by directly connecting reforms to improved public safety.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Here are six strategies that worked in California, where criminal justice reform has won overwhelming majorities again and again over the past decade:<\/p>\n \nReform is<\/em> public safety:<\/strong> There are many worthy reasons to reform the criminal justice system, from reducing racism<\/a> to saving money,<\/a> but the primary purpose of reforms is to improve public safety.<\/a> Democrats can\u2019t allow the choice to be framed as reform against public safety. The exact opposite is true: safety and reform<\/a> are two sides of the same coin; one can\u2019t exist without the other.<\/p>\n \nAttack root causes:<\/strong> Voters know we can dramatically improve public safety by addressing issues like mental health<\/a> and substance abuse<\/a>, poverty and homelessness, and the massive quantities of illegal guns<\/a> in the wrong hands. Of course we have to keep prosecuting crime when it occurs, but everyone would rather prevent crime from occurring in the first place.<\/p>\n \nMake the contrast:<\/strong> Voters are making choices, so Democrats have to remind voters that the Republican crime agenda has proven to be a heavy-handed wasteful failure. Republicans want to take us backward, to the unsafe and unjust policies of the past. Democrats want action on guns, mental illness and homelessness. So stay on offense and explicitly make the contrast with Republicans who only support longer prison sentences and more guns.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n