Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: House votes to ban guv’s billboards
Next Post: Budget intrigue
Posted in:
* As some commenters have noted here before, it’s a wonder that more people haven’t really tried to directly tie the recent surge in Chicago violence to Gov. Blagojevich’s veto last year of funding for the CeaseFire program. No doubt, there are problems with that program (philosophical as well as budgetary), but it has been a media darling and continues to get good press…
Friday, Northwestern University released a 229-page report concluding that gun violence dropped 17 percent to 24 percent in six of seven neighborhoods where CeaseFire mediators were in place.
The three-year study, commissioned by the U.S. Department of Justice, offered the most striking proof yet that CeaseFire’s trained peacemakers—”violence interrupters,” who are often former gang members themselves—really do save a significant number of lives
After Blagojevich cut funding to CeaseFire in August, 96 of the program’s 130 conflict mediators lost their jobs, according to founder and director Dr. Gary Slutkin, a University of Illinois at Chicago epidemiologist. CeaseFire’s analysis of police data suggests this has resulted in 170 additional shootings since September.
* CBS 2 did a story yesterday on the program as well…
A spokesperson for the governor’s office says CeaseFire could be funded through a bill that the governor is pushing.
* So, maybe he’s backing off from his veto? But, what’s that bill they’re talking about? It couldn’t be this one, could it?
The ineffectual governor of Illinois, Rod Blagojevich, announced on May 6th a $150m scheme for which there is no $150m.
* That Economist story makes no mention of CeaseFire, but does have some details of another anti violence initiative called Project Safe Neighbourhoods…
Chicago’s PSN includes tough gun policing, federal prosecutions and—most important, or so researchers found—meetings with former felons to deter them from returning to crime. Over PSN’s first two years, the districts it targeted saw a 37% drop in quarterly homicide rates. The challenge now is to help PSN expand. Chicago’s leaders must use many tools to fight violence. One is right under their noses.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, May 16, 08 @ 2:30 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: House votes to ban guv’s billboards
Next Post: Budget intrigue
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Violence against young people and programs to deal with it is an issue that should not be used to increase your approval ratings. This Guv should get over his messianic complex and work with people who are knowledgeable with interventions that are proven to work and then secure adequate funding to carry them out. That’s what a responsible public servant would do, but were talkin’ about Blago here.
Comment by Loop Lady Friday, May 16, 08 @ 7:23 am
you are correct when you say that CeaseFire is
a media darling. PSN is led by the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
have to read the Skogan report to see if he
references the increase in police in those
neighborhoods where CeaseFire operated. and
if he shows the cost per contact in CeaseFire.
the cost was very high in the past.
Comment by Amy Friday, May 16, 08 @ 8:40 am
I will echo what people said last week.
Ceasefire’s problem is its funding stream, not the program itself.
You can’t structure a long-term program based on legislative initiatives, earmarks and add-ons.
What it does is make your funding fluctuate beyond what you can handle (see audit), and you expand quicker than you would normally.
And more importantly, your funding can disappear as erratically as it came.
Comment by problem Friday, May 16, 08 @ 8:55 am
Also, more importantly -
Ceasefire may result in some reduction in violence, but could there be a greater reduction from some other effort that costs the same?
12 million is a ton of money that can do a lot of things.
Comment by problem Friday, May 16, 08 @ 8:57 am
Coordination.
There are many variables within gang shootings that could be controlled by authorities. We focus on guns, understandably, but these criminals are members of our society and we educate them, house them, feed them, dress them, gives them streets to drive on, give them licences, but we do not use this in our favor.
Without parental control, there is no control, except conscience. We need to exert our control by coordinating our efforts to pressure these citizens into successful modes of behavior.
Burying them or locking them up means we lose. While this should not prevent us from protecting ourselves when they should be locked up, we need to recognize the futility of this state of existence for both citizen and state.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, May 16, 08 @ 9:20 am
I’ve followed CeaseFire in Rogers Park very closely since they came to town. I find the Circle Prayer Program to be reactive, not proactive.
Comment by The 'Broken Heart' of Rogers Park Friday, May 16, 08 @ 9:21 am
In Apr. & May, I’ve heard many people say that Illinois needs more gun control laws. Gun laws aren’t the answer. In Chicago, no one, except police officers and aldermen are allowed to own handguns. Chicago has a higher murder rate (number of murders per 100,000 people) than New York, Los Angeles, Dallas, Houston, Denver, Phoenix, and Miami. New York City has more than twice as many people as Chicago, but, during four of the last six years, Chicago had more murders. The criminals go to other towns, buy guns, and bring them to Chicago, knowing that the law-abiding people can’t defend themselves.
According to the Index of Leading Social Indicators, by William Bennett, in 1960, about 10% of American babies were born out of wedlock. In 1991, the percentages were 65%, for Blacks; 30%, for Hispanics; and 25%, for Whites. When only one parent raises a child, it’s harder to teach the kid good morals, especially since many single mothers work two or three jobs, to make ends meet. When parents aren’t with their kids, many of their teenagers become criminals. Government can’t do much to change this. Each American should be more responsible and not conceive children until they’re married. Single fathers should show that care more about their kids by paying child support and spending more time with their kids.
Comment by PhilCollins Friday, May 16, 08 @ 10:31 am
I’ve always worried that the legislative support for CeaseFire is more about the fact that it spreads a LOT of money around on “the street” - and what exactly does that buy the legislator in the affected area….
Comment by Anon 4:08pm Friday, May 16, 08 @ 11:08 am
Phil - When parents aren’t with their kids, many of their teenagers become criminals. Government can’t do much to change this.
While it is true that parental attention is likely to reduce the chance that kids become criminals it is worth noting that the government not only CAN do things to change the patterns of violence but are also partially RESPONSIBLE for it happening in the first place.
It’s interesting that you aren’t concerned with why a single parent has to work 2-3 jobs to make ends meet (surely you understand the government can pass minimum wage increases, help people afford healthcare and child care and even have paid family leave). We also like to forget that racial discrimination allowed white people, especially after World War II, an advantage in obtaining mortgage loans and therefore a chance to live in the (safe quiet) suburbs, acquire equity and pay for their kids to go to fancy summer camps and ivy league schools. Not only did the government not stop this kind of lending – it facilitated it.
So if we understand the problem to be: why do non-white kids not value their lives enough to stop killing each other maybe we should wake up and realize that perhaps the answer is: because institutions around them tell them they AREN’T worth anything…by the lots that remain empty, by the lack of grocery stores, by the lack of jobs in these communities, etc.
And if you’re set on halting teen pregnancy then by all means, lobby your representatives to support and expand access to birth control and planned parenthood services.
Blaming the Gov would fit nicely into the media commonsense about his efforts but again we should really be asking – why are we dependent on a small community organization to fight ALL of Chicago’s youth violence? Where is the government on this?
Where is private investment in these communities?
Comment by Genesis Friday, May 16, 08 @ 11:32 am
CeaseFire likes to go on and on about how they are the solution - the only solution - to end violence in communities, and that they are entitled to state money, without going through a grant application process. But there are many other programs - less expensive programs - than the model CeaseFire uses. It’s good the Economist notes Project Safe Neighborhoods… they deserve equal opportunity to compete for the grant funding that CeaseFire wants.
Comment by FlackerBacker Friday, May 16, 08 @ 12:04 pm
The Gov threw the baby out with the bathwater when he was engaged in his fire sale budget slashing to halt 6 mil in spending to an identified grp and not available as discretionar funds to be awarded by the Gov for players to b named later.
Now he wants to buy a new baby and bath water priced higher then Evain per ounce to deal with the problem of our lack of a baby and bath water. This new solution provides a cost of 151 Mil in discretionary spending to be doled out to those the Gov chooses. So we saved 6 mil but want tp spend 151 mil for a net loss to the State of 145 mil due to the cutting of the buget.
Comment by Ghost Friday, May 16, 08 @ 12:43 pm
I was amused that the Economist was well-enough informed about local parochial politics to characterize our Governor as ineffectual, as well as their description of his May 6 press conferences as a “$150 million scheme for which there is no $150 million.”
One wonders what the imp[act of this story in an internationally respected publication, read by elites, with a lead about a “cruel and bloody month,” will have on the Olympics decision.
Comment by Captain America Friday, May 16, 08 @ 1:08 pm
CeaseFire’s need to secure funding from somewhere other than the government has been a topic of debate in the blogosphere for at least the past 6 months. Please see the exchange on The Nonprofiteer, “Cease fire, commence fundraising”: nonprofiteer.wordpress.com/2007/11/29/dear-nonprofiteer-cease-fire-commence-fundraising/
Comment by Nonprofiteer Friday, May 16, 08 @ 1:12 pm
violence decreased just as much in areas without ceasefire. Violence has increased only slightly but the coverage in the media has made it seem like theres been a huge increase we are still well below average for violent crime over the last 10-20 years. Ceasfire likes to proclaim what a great program they are but audits keep showing no one knows what happened to the money they recieved. handing out cash to drug dealers and gangbangers isnt the answer. Oh thats right ceasefire says their former drugdealers and gangbangers. Thats like giving former enron managers some cash to help fix the economy.
Comment by fed up Friday, May 16, 08 @ 3:19 pm
FedUp and other critics,
You can snipe all you want, but the fact remains that this was an enormously comprehensive study that adjusted for other factors. This was a remarkable finding and the USDOJ said so. So while Rich may call them a “media darling”, maybe they’re just a good program.
Comment by Chicago Cynic Friday, May 16, 08 @ 7:30 pm
Chicago Cynic, you can pay for a study to say whatever you want it to say. There are many other factors that play into the drop in violence, including unemployment rates, poverty rates, CPD initiatives, etc. Ceasefire wants to claim all the credit, but their are many factors outside their control.
Comment by FlackrBackr Saturday, May 17, 08 @ 1:34 pm