Willard M. Oliver

Political Party Platforms Symbolic Politics and Criminal Justice Policy

The theory of symbolic politics is used to examine the elements of criminal justice policy in political party platforms. It is hypothesized that political parties use their party platforms to make symbolic, rather than substantive, statements. Data were collected from the digital archives of both the American Presidency Project and the American Reference Library consisting of all political party platforms from 1868 to 2004. A content analysis of these party platforms, as they related to crime and justice issues, offers partial support for the claim that presidents and political parties use these party platforms primarily for evoking symbols.

Stress in small town and rural law enforcement: Testing the assumptions

Sandy and Devine (1978) theorized that small-town and rural police officers experienced Stressors different from their urban counterparts. They delineated four rural stress dimensions: security, social factors, working conditions, and inactivity. Despite the number of hypotheses annunciated by these authors from their exposure to small-town and rural police, they have never been tested. This study is an attempt to rectify this deficiency in the literature by testing their theory/hypotheses with data derived from a survey questionnaire of West Virginia law enforcement officers. The findings of this study lend support for many of the original hypotheses and all four of the dimensions.

Policing for Homeland Security Policy & Research

Since the terrorist attack of September 11, 2001, Federal, State and local governments have increasingly moved toward establishing Homeland Security as an institutional response to not only the threat of future terrorist attacks, but as a means of preparing and responding to natural disasters. Every plan at every level has stated that a critical element to any Homeland Security program is the local police and sheriffs departments. What specifically the police are to do under the concepts of Homeland Security has been unclear and poorly communicated and departments across the country have responded very differently from one another. To date, research in the area of Policing and Homeland Security has been lacking. This article addresses that deficiency, introduces the collection of research articles contained within this special issue of Criminal Justice Policy Review, and establishes an agenda for future research.

“Budgets, Institutions, and Change: Criminal Justice Policy in America” Revisited

Calderia and Cowart published an article that theorized that presidents are responsive in their budgetary responsibilities to increases in official crime rates. The scope of their study was the years 1935 to 1975, and their findings supported their theory that presidents were engaged in substantive policy making. The current study replicates and updates the original research to determine if presidents continue this pattern of increasing budgets to fight increases in reported crime, as originally theorized. The authors theorize that in more recent years, criminal justice policy became more symbolic and is often a gesture used by presidents to gain political and popular support. This study finds that in the time frame after the original study, the same patterns do not hold true, and budgetary allocations are no longer responsive to the rise and fall in official crime rates, thus demonstrating support for the theory of symbolics.

The Power to Persuade: Presidential Influence Over Congress on Crime Control Policy

The theory of presidential influence over Congress is used to predict the impact of presidential activity on congressional activity related to crime control policy. It is hypothesized that, the more attention presidents give to the issue of crime, the more attention Congress will give to the topic through congressional committee hearings. Utilizing a time series regression analysis of data collected from the Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States and the Center for American Politics and Public Policys database on congressional hearings from 1946 to 1994, and controlling for other variables such as crime, media, and divided or undivided government, it was found that presidential activity on crime, with a one-year lag, influences congressional committee hearings on crime.

Presidential Politics and the Problem of Drugs in America: Assessing the Relationship Between the President, Media, and Public Opinion

This study explores the relationship between the president, public opinion, and the media in regard to drug abuse policy in America from 1969 through 2004. The theory of presidential influence over public opinion is used to test the hypothesis that presidents influence public opinion of drug abuse. Using vector auto regression time-series analysis, the study finds that while presidents do not appear to influence the public directly, they influence the media which influences public opinion. These findings are different from previous findings regarding crime control policy, but are similar to past findings for drug policy. Reasons for these findings are discussed and future research proposed.

Depolicing: Rhetoric or Reality?:

While the topic of depolicing is often discussed in political rhetoric, media reporting, and reports on police behavior, there exists little empirical analysis of the phenomenon at the police officer (individual) level. To further our understanding of the phenomenon of depolicing, the present study draws on a convenience sample of 25 police officers from across the United States to provide an inductive understanding of the nature, scope, and causes of depolicing. Among the findings is a strong belief that depolicing is a real and growing phenomenon, that it is more widespread than most agencies are willing to admit, and that its causes are highly varied, but include civil litigation, new laws and policies, and accusations of racial profiling. The article discusses the implications of depolicing and the need for future research.

When the President Speaks… An Analysis of Presidential Influence Over Public Opinion Concerning the War on Drugs

The theory of presidential influence over public opinion is used to predict the impact of presidential rhetoric on the public’s concern regarding drug use as “the most important problem (MIP) facing the nation.” It is hypothesized that the more attention presidents give to the policy area of drugs in their state of the union (SOTU) addresses, the more concerned the public becomes with drug use. Using a time-series regression analysis of data collected from a content analysis of presidents’SOTU speeches regressed on the Gallup Poll’s MIP series from 1946 to 2010, the findings suggest that presidential mentions of drugs in the SOTU addresses influence public concern for illicit drugs in America.

Following the Leader? Presidential Influence Over Congress in the Passage of Federal Crime Control Policy

This study explores the relationship between the president, Congress, and the passage of federal crime control legislation in the United States from 1946 to 1996. The theory of presidential influence over Congress is used to predict the impact of presidential activity on congressional passage of public laws related to crime. It is hypothesized that the more attention presidents give to the issue of crime, the more attention Congress will give to the topic, thus helping to ensure the papssage of crime legislation. Using a multivariate time-series analysis of data collected from the Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States and the United States Statutes at Large, the study finds some support for the hypothesis, alongside presidential popularity, the official crime rate, and the political cycle.

Gubernatorial Crime Control Rhetoric A Study in Symbolic Politics

Past research on presidential rhetoric about crime shows that presidents use crime rhetoric in a specific manner. When talking about crime, they are most likely to use symbolic statements that are designed to make people feel satisfied about government action. To date, no research has analyzed how governors employ political language related to crime. The current study draws on hypotheses derived from research related to the federal executive and applies them to the 50 state executives. A content analysis of 7 years (2002-2008) of governors’ State of the State speeches was conducted to assess how governors employ the issue of crime in their political communication. Overall, the results show that governors rarely follow the same patterns as presidents when speaking to their constituents about crime.