Law-and-order theme emphasized despite encouraging statistics

SACRAMENTO -- Though California's crime rate is at its lowest point in 30
years, crime and punishment takes a back seat only to education when the
four major candidates for governor identify their priorities for the state.

In television ads and in stump speeches, the candidates decry the state of
crime and respond with a potpourri of sound-bite-size solutions.

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Al Checchi calls for 10,000 new police
officers and expanding the death penalty to include serial rapists and
repeat child molesters.

Attorney General Dan Lungren, the Republican Party's likely nominee, says
the drop in crime proves ``three strikes, you're out'' and use-a-gun,
go-to-prison laws work and wants even tougher measures in his quest to drive
crime rates to a 40-year low.

Rep. Jane Harman, a Democrat, touts her support of banning cheap handguns
and copycat assault weapons.

And Democratic Lt. Gov. Gray Davis thinks more violent juveniles should be
tried as adults and locked up past age 25, the current limit.

``The law-and-order issue worked well for Bill Clinton. It worked well for
Pete Wilson,'' said Hoover Institution fellow and former San Jose Police
Chief Joe McNamara. ``You're seeing a lot of Democrats saying, `Me, too.' ''

The downside, say McNamara and other criminal policy experts, is that
serious public policy discussions about how to keep crime rates down and pay
for ballooning state corrections budgets rarely get aired. ``We're in a kind
of McCarthy era where any kind of reasoned comment (on how to achieve
balance) is political suicide,'' he said.

Key clash: gun control

Unlike 1994, when Gov. Wilson and Democratic gubernatorial nominee Kathleen
Brown sparred over criminal justice issues, most of the candidates this year
are on the same page. All, for example, support the death penalty and the
``three strikes'' law. The most significant difference is over gun control.
Lungren prefers tougher sentencing for gun use instead of outright bans
favored by the Democrats.

The candidates' focus on crime may not reflect the reality of the crime
rate, but it does mirror public concerns. California had the seventh-highest
crime ranking in 1990, according to the U.S. Department of Justice. It
registered 20th in 1996, accounting for the ninth-largest drop in crimes
committed per 100,000 residents in the nation over the six years.

Yet an April survey by the Public Policy Institute of California found 66
percent of Californians consider crime to be a ``big problem,'' and 46
percent believe the crime rate is rising. When asked how secure they feel in
their own neighborhoods at night, the majority of Californians responded
``somewhat safe.''

``Either Californians haven't seen the studies or don't believe them,'' said
poll director Mark Baldassare.

Media coverage blamed

Others blame the media's fascination with crime stories. A three-year study
culminating in 1996 found that while crime nationwide decreased 20 percent,
the coverage of murder on television network news increased by 721 percent.

For years, politicians and analysts have interpreted criminal statistics in
ways that match their ideologies about crime and punishment. The governor's
race is no exception.

Lungren attributes the state's impressive crime drop to tough sentencing
laws. He now wants to add home burglary to the list of crimes, with an
automatic 10-year sentence enhancement if a gun is used.

``You can't say there is a dichotomy between punishment and prevention,''
says Lungren. ``You have to do both. But when the tough votes come and you
say you're going to put your money where your mouth is, you'd better do it,
because it saves lives.''

Former Northwest Airlines co-chairman Checchi says he is not impressed by
the falling statistics because he knows people don't feel safe. He is
calling for prosecution of all domestic-violence offenders.

``We are a nation of rights, but we must become, once again, a nation of
responsibilities,'' says Checchi. ``We must accept the part that we each
play in creating and guarding the sense of community and security essential
to a functioning civil society.''

Harman, the congresswoman from Torrance, puts an emphasis on prevention and
anti-gang injunctions. ``We can't build enough prisons to house the whole
next generation, and so the challenge is to deter kids from a life of
crime,'' she says.

Davis, the lieutenant governor, backs both tougher sentencing and more
astute spending of state funds. ``If you're asking me are there ways the
next governor can both discharge our obligation to keep people safe and be
more economical in our task of incarcerating people, I think the answer is
yes,'' says Davis.

Toughest ban in nation

One of the hottest election-year issues is gun control. In what is shaping
up as the year's biggest state Capitol showdown over firearms, Democratic
leaders and Wilson are negotiating what could become the most restrictive
ban on assault weapons in the nation. Last year Wilson vetoed a ban on
``Saturday night specials,'' and he is seeking to narrow the proposed
expansion of the assault-weapon ban.

It's not surprising that three of the four candidates for governor support
firearms bans. Gun-control backers say elected officials are finally feeling
pressure from their suburban and urban constituents to tackle gun control
statewide.

Polls have found as many as two-thirds of voters support banning the sale
and manufacture of cheaply made handguns, known as Saturday night specials,
and equal or greater support for banning copycat assault weapons.

``Pro-gun-control forces have prevailed in convincing people that the
problems of guns and violence ought to be considered from a public health
perspective and consumer protection perspective,'' said Jon Vernick,
associate director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research.

Experts attribute the substantial drop in the rate of gun violence to gun
controls, more law-enforcement attention and tougher sentencing.

Both sides angered

Lungren, like many Republicans, questions the effectiveness of gun controls
and prefers tougher sentencing. He has managed to anger both supporters and
opponents of the weapons bans. Handgun Control Inc., a gun-control lobby
group, sued Lungren in 1992 for what it considered lax enforcement of the
existing assault weapons ban.

Then, in a high-profile Santa Clara County case over the definition of an
assault weapon, he switched legal sides, eventually opting to go with a
broader definition. That angered gun owners' groups.

Lungren, who has said state weapons bans may need tinkering but not
expanding, would restrict ammunition-clip and magazine sizes, rely on
federal weapons law and use the attorney general's office to continue
background checks and illegal-weapons crackdowns.

The Democrats go much further. Davis is inching toward requiring handgun
buyers to show they are trained in gun use.

``We require that you demonstrate proficiency before you can drive an
automobile, and I would favor some form of demonstrated proficiency before
people can buy handguns,'' Davis said recently. Asked if he would require a
license for handgun ownership, he replied, ``If people want to advance ideas
to me that improve the training and skill level of the people using the
guns, I will look at them with a very open mind.''

Checchi supports mandatory trigger locks and requiring licenses for those
who buy or sell more than 10 handguns a year. Harman would define an assault
weapon as any gun capable of handling more than 10 rounds, which would
outlaw many commonly sold weapons.

How to pay for it all?

While gun bans, tougher sentencing and juvenile crime prevention are in
vogue, the salient fiscal issue on how to pay for the growing cost of
California prison operations is getting little attention.

In a 1997 analysis, the legislative analyst projected the state corrections
budgets would grow an average of 8.7 percent a year over the next decade,
compared with 5.5 percent for the entire general fund budget. In February,
the analyst projected it would cost $3.2 billion to construct 80,000 new
beds to accommodate prison population growth over the next 10 years, based
on current sentencing laws.

``Is this a budget problem? The answer is true,'' said Dan Carson, a
corrections specialist with the analyst's office.

``Either the state has to get additional revenue or other expenditures will
have to go away.''

Franklin Zimring, director of the Earl Warren Legal Institute at the
University of California-Berkeley, criticizes the candidates' proposals on
crime for being largely ``symbolic'' in importance.

``Our corrections budget chugs over $4 billion a year, and nobody is against
it,'' Zimring points out. ``They just want to use it efficiently.''

Checked-by: "Rolf Ernst"