I am by no means an expert on this. But here are some thoughts:
1) If the city says the program has a 70% successful recidivism prevention rate, then there should be some numbers to back that up. Saying the numbers are meaningless without evidence to the contrary is kind of silly. Also the headline "but is it worth saving" is silly.
2) The list is based on frequency of property/drug crimes committed in the city center, so I understand. Basically, drug addicts caught in the cycle of stealing to get drugs to use. So, its not a "deal for jail beds" as much as its a deal to get strung out serial property crime offenders out of the cycle of drugs and stealing. Apparently it works pretty well.
3) Regarding the racism charges, I think you can get over that pretty quickly by looking at the methods they use to determine who goes on the list. I think from what I've heard they are completely 100% race neutral, meaning it is impossible for the list to be racist. Like it is a blind system where the list is based purely on drug and property crimes committed and has nothing to do with anybody's perception of the race of the offender. If I'm wrong about that, then yes definitely it would be fair to revisit the issue of whether the list is racist. If not, stop making these racism claims because they are not well-founded.
Sounds like the freecreditreport.com scam. They had me for 9 months before I caught on. I called them and eventually yelled at the guy that I hoped he was making more than $12 an hour to rip people off, at which point he refunded me all the money. I heard Obama is considering outlawing such practices.
I think that if you teach people that they are not responsible for their own situation, they will never believe in their own power to change their situation. This is a culture of victimhood.
All I see here is passing the buck. Sure, it works great in politics because people want to blame somebody else for their problems. But be serious, blaming other people isn't going to solve anything as a practical matter.
I would ask that all those waiting anxiously to jump on the "the list is racist" bandwagon hold off on that for a bit. Just because there are more of a certain racial minority on the list doesn't make it racist. Sorry if this blows anybody's mind, but its true.
Great comments on that Oregonian guy. The way you portrayed him he sounds like everything I despise about that paper. Well, not everything I despise about it. But some of the things I despise about it. I like other things about the Oregonian too. Its not all terrible. But it does insult me quite a bit. End rant.
The DA can prosecute if they want to as long as they have a witness, i.e. you.
I agree with everything in this article, and this is really great work. Unfortunately, though, one side-effect of all this protection for abused spouses is that the restraining order law is mis-used by people in custody and divorce litigation. I would like to see some public acknowledgment of this fact by people who work in domestic violence advocacy, because I get real tired of seeing it in court all the time.
What I mean is "advocates" supporting accusers and state money and legal aid lawyers representing accusers when the only evidence is an allegation. In court it comes out that the accused is equally credible, there is no other evidence, but the restraining order gets upheld because everybody wants to err on the side of protecting a potential victim.
A lot of times it is not nearly so black and white, and many many times the allegations are outright lies. It is a real cost to the system that we should acknowledge. Many accused persons have their lives literally ruined, houses and children taken away, based on the accusation of a spouse or co-parent who has everything to gain by making the accusation. I think it happens a whole lot.
Working, working, working.