Intrepid editor Diane Ellis sent along this bit of comedy from Slate, a site not on my list of favorites.  “Is There an ‘Obama Effect’ on Crime?” asks writer James Verini, perplexed at the continuing decline in crime despite a sour economy.  

Verini writes:

One unlikely explanation that is gaining credence among experts, including some of the biggest names in the field, is a phenomenon tentatively dubbed “the Obama Effect.” Simply put, it holds that the election of the first black president has provided such collective inspiration that it has changed the thinking or behavior of would-be or one-time criminals. The effect is not yet quantifiable, but some very numbers-driven researchers believe it may exist.

Like I said, comedy.

Later in the piece there’s this gem:

But some criminologists believe that those like Roth and Anderson who theorize about an Obama effect are letting their joy at his election affect their research. “We project our feelings,” Franklin Zimring told me. “A lot of us never felt more wonderful in our lives than on election night in 2008. So it’s a projection technique. It’s sort of a Rorschach test for creative social scientists. Is it possible there’s on Obama effect on crime? Yes. Is there a way of testing it on American crime data? Probably not.”

I would view with a heavy skepticism the opinions of anyone who describes the election of a president – any president, but certainly the current one – as inspiring such euphoria.

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

anon_academic
Joined
Aug '10
anon_academic

Another funny thing is how the article takes for granted that, ceteris paribus, a recession should lead to a crime wave. This simply isn't true.

Beasley
Joined
Dec '10
Beasley

Who needs to commit a crime when the Government will do all the thieving for you.

Jimmy Carter
Joined
Jul '10
Jimmy Carter

Well, perhaps because in Obama's America, after the take over of the auto industry, socializing medicine, Freddie and Fannie, the trillion "stimulus".... there's less to steal.

Mel Foil
Joined
Jun '10
etoiledunord

It's probably just harder to get away with crime. I'd attribute that to the ubiquitous security camera. Look at all the holdup videos you see on TV. The videos are everywhere because every little hole-in-the-wall store has a security camera running. And if they don't have one (that's working,) there's sometimes an outdoor camera a block away in every direction, to record the kind of car you left the scene in. And police communicate better across jurisdictions. It's also much faster to process fingerprint and ballistics matches than it ever was before. Police productivity is way up.

Conservative Episcopalian
Joined
Sep '10
Conservative Episcopalian

Sadly, (or not, depending your perspective) I believe this can partly be traced to the Roe V. Wade decision of 1973. Freakonomics economist/statistician Steven Levitt pretty much made the case for this already for the 1990s. His data is pretty compelling and sad really.

He now attributes it possibly to changes in the drug market. 

Edited on Oct 7, 2011 at 2:59pm
Michael Labeit
Joined
May '10
Michael Labeit

I can't think of how any econometrician could even begin to control for the thesaurus of variables influencing criminal activity and prove that the election of Obama is the decisive causal agent behind the decline in criminality.

CJRun
Joined
Dec '10
CJRun

Couldn't possibly be More (legal) Guns, Less Crime.

tabula rasa
Joined
Jun '10
tabula rasa

I think he's had a much greater impact of the development of ulcers and more cases of chronic depression.

Steven Zoraster
Joined
Feb '11
Steven Zoraster

Jack, what to you think is the cause of the decline in crime?  Or is the reported decline not true?

Roberto
Joined
Mar '11
Roberto

This lends credence to my theory that any article containing the phrase "among experts" should immediately be placed in the circular file.

Mark Wilson
Joined
May '10
Mark Wilson

Who put the climate scientists in charge of criminology? 

The "Obama Effect" is nothing more than a plug variable, explained here by Warren Meyer on his excellent Climate Skeptic blog:

Nearly a decade ago, when I first started looking into climate science, I began to suspect the modelers were using what I call a “plug” variable.  I have decades of experience in market and economic modeling, and so I am all too familiar with the temptation to use one variable to “tune” a model, to make it match history more precisely by plugging in whatever number is necessary to make the model arrive at the expected answer. ...

When simulating history, scientists add aerosols to their high-sensitivity models in sufficient quantities to cool them to match historic temperatures.

In other words, the climate scientists "know" their models are right, but the models don't reflect reality.  So they tweak the aerosol levels to what they "must" have been to truthify their models.

Similarly, criminologists "know" recessions cause crime, so they use the ad hoc Obama Effect to rescue their theory from uncooperative facts.

Edited on Oct 7, 2011 at 4:25pm
Raw Prawn
Joined
Mar '11
Raw Prawn

Perhaps the "Obama Effect" is that the election of a Mugger in Chief has made potential victims more careful.  I believe gun sales increased dramatically when the One was elected and have not slowed down.

"Fast and Furious" was an obvious pander to Obama's, and Holder's, constituency. 

Cas Balicki
Joined
Jun '10
Cas Balicki

Posted without comment:

Objections are raised when like is used as a subordinate conjunction meaning as ('Are you going to treat me like you treated him?'), as if ('It looks like he's in trouble again'), (in) the way (that) ('Put your hands on your hips like she does'), or such as ('She was wearing a hat like you used to see on matrons at lunch'). In each of these examples, like should be replaced by the italicized emboldened phrase preceding the parentheses.

Quotation from my style guide.

Edited on Oct 7, 2011 at 8:15pm
Sisyphus
Joined
Jul '10
Sisyphus

A decline has been on the books since well before the Obama Administration for the same reason that the entitlements are crashing and bankrupt. Fewer young people. Not many geriatric types are out there committing property crimes or crimes of violence.

Which does not mean the reduction is being seen everywhere. Invasion has skewed the demographics the other way in some areas.

Wylee Coyote
Joined
Jul '10
Wylee Coyote

This reminds me:  shortly before the 2008 election, I was waiting in the processing line at the County Jail with a prisoner.  One of the other prisoners looked around in disgust and said to another, "All this [expletive] gonna change when Obama becomes President."

He was partially right - between then and now, the County Jail built and opened a new processing area.

Still, I wonder how he feels now.

Tommy De Seno

Ever the contrarian, I don't dismiss the possibility.

Don't we as conservatives often hold the position that people as examples can inspire?   Is that not why we maintain good examples for our children and hope that they will admire certain individuals over others?

Did Reagan not inspire?  Did that inspiration not affect the thinking and judgment of those he inspired?

I have no doubt that to those who can't see past his skin color, President Obama can be an inspirational figure for them.  

I'll go further:  I hope the "Obama Effect" on crime is true.  If the election of Obama caused some to abandon crime, while I find that wouldn't outweigh the considerable damage the President is doing to the country, I certainly have no reason to object to the silver lining on that cloud.

Do any of you hope it is not true?

Edited on Oct 8, 2011 at 7:56am
Wylee Coyote
Joined
Jul '10
Wylee Coyote

Tommy De Seno:

Do any of you hope it is not true? · Oct 8 at 7:20am

It's more like hoping it isn't accepted as true when it is in fact not true.

There's a difference between inspiring people, and inspiring people to the point that it has significant impact on national crime rates.

Also, let the irony be noted, that if any conservative made this argument, it would immediately be denounced as racist.

Tommy De Seno

Wylee Coyote

Tommy De Seno:

Do any of you hope it is not true? · Oct 8 at 7:20am

It's more like hoping it isn't accepted as true when it is in fact not true.

There's a difference between inspiring people, and inspiring people to the point that it has significant impact on national crime rates.

Also, let the irony be noted, that if any conservative made this argument, it would immediately be denounced as racist. · Oct 8 at 8:22am

I see your point on the lack of proof of an Obama effect.

Can you expand your argument that it is disproven? 

Wylee Coyote
Joined
Jul '10
Wylee Coyote

Tommy De Seno  I see your point on the lack of proof of an Obama effect.

Can you expand your argument that it is disproven?  · Oct 8 at 8:55am

Well, no, because I don't mean to make that argument.  Looking back at my post, what I should have written was, "It's more like hoping it isn't accepted as true if it is in fact not true."  I didn't mean to dismiss it as disproved.

Basically, I can't prove it isn't true, but it seems highly fanciful, and for that reason it shouldn't be accepted as truth without some serious evidence, of which there currently appears to be none.

Jack Dunphy

Cas Balicki: Posted without comment:

Objections are raised when like is used as a subordinate conjunction meaning as ('Are you going to treat me like you treated him?'), as if ('It looks like he's in trouble again'), (in) the way (that) ('Put your hands on your hips like she does'), or such as ('She was wearing a hat like you used to see on matrons at lunch'). In each of these examples, like should be replaced by the italicized emboldened phrase preceding the parentheses.

Quotation from my style guide. · Oct 7 at 8:13pm

Edited on Oct 07 at 08:15 pm

Posted without comment:

pedant, n

2. A person who overstates book-learning or technical knowledge, or displays it unduly or unreasonably; one who has mere learning untempered by practical judgement and knowledge of affairs; one who lays excessive stress upon trifling details of knowledge or upon strict adherence to formal rules; sometimes, one who is possessed by a theory and insists on applying it in all cases without discrimination, a doctrinaire.

Quotation from the OED.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In