Opinion editor's note: Editorials represent the opinions of the Star Tribune Editorial Board, which operates independently from the newsroom.
•••
Violent crime is uppermost in many Minnesotans' minds these days, and lawmakers are keenly aware of the need to address that in the closing weeks of the legislative session. Once again the Republican-led Senate and DFL-controlled House have produced dramatically different approaches, and once again, the answer is to take the best of both and move forward.
The Senate bill, passed earlier this week on a bipartisan vote, includes tougher penalties for violent crime, creation of a special "carjacking" crime, bonuses to recruit and retain police officers, and greater accountability on sentencing and prosecutorial decisions.
The House aims the bulk of its spending at community groups and hiring more police officers. It creates grants for juvenile crime prevention and at-risk youths, along with mental health and conflict resolution centers. It would ban solitary confinement of juveniles. House Speaker Melissa Hortman told an editorial writer that the House approach is more holistic and data-driven.
Public Safety Commissioner John Harrington, a former St. Paul police chief, testified in a hearing that "most people prefer not to have their house broken into, or have their car taken, or have themselves assaulted rather than have police catch the bad guy later on. They would rather just not have anything happen at the front end." That is, of course, what every law-abiding citizen wants. But the conditions that will achieve that goal often require a mix of approaches that include prevention, intervention and deterrence.
It is not unreasonable, given the surge of violent crime at hand, to impose greater penalties and in particular, to institute a specific carjacking crime. Carjacking has become especially alarming for its frequency and violence. Clearly this demands immediate attention yet doesn't preclude efforts to address root causes.
Efforts such as those in the House bill to empower communities with local grants for alternatives to traditional policing can be worthwhile if they also are closely monitored for effectiveness. Such grants should lay out in advance the metrics by which they will be considered successful and be prepared to offer proof of that success.