In June of 2004, Judith A. Greene, a New York-based criminal justice researcher for Families Against Mandatory Minimums and other groups, release a paper entitled "Crime Trends and Incarceration Rates in Oregon".

Ms. Greene’s paper puts forth two main points:

• Measure 11 deserves little or no credit for Oregon’s dramatic decrease in violent crime rate from 1995 to 2002 because violent crime rates decreased sharply in many states during this period.

• Measure 11 is not a smart response to violent crime.

This response, written by Howard Rodstein of Crime Victims United, points out:

• Oregon experienced seven consecutive years of decreasing violent crime rate after Measure 11 took effect, one of only six states to do so. In the period 1995 through 2002, Oregon led the nation in decrease of the violent crime rate, returning to levels not seen in 30 years. From 1995 through 2002, Measure 11 accounted for 10,400 prisoner-years worth of incapacitation of violent criminals and serious sex offenders. It is highly unlikely that this had nothing to do with Oregon’s nation-leading decrease in violent crime rate.

• The cost of Measure 11 has been far less than initially predicted and is a small fraction of total taxpayer expenditures. Using an estimate proposed by Ms. Greene's paper, the prevention of an estimated 8,500 violent crimes (robberies, aggravated assaults, forcible rapes and non-negligent homicides) can be attributed to Measure 11 in the period 1995 through 2002. Even after a significant increase in incarceration, Oregon still ranks only 30th among states in incarceration rate.

The full response can be viewed using Adobe Acrobat Reader.

Related Information:

Text of Measure 11

Does Measure 11 Deter Juveniles From Committing Crimes?

Presentation on Measure 11 and Oregon Criminal Justice

Home | Search