Liberals strike out at Clinton
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.PRESIDENT Bill Clinton struck political gold last week with his call for fierce new anti- crime measures, writes David Usborne. But his State of the Union endorsement of 'three strikes and you're out' - meaning mandatory life imprisonment for third-time offenders - has left many uneasy.
Prominent legal and police figures have derided the proposal as ineffective and political demagoguery.
The Attorney-General, Janet Reno, has voiced fears about such a blanket response to frequent offenders, and in Congress, some black Democrats have tentatively raised civil rights concerns.
Several versions of the 'three strikes' provision are under consideration but, in essence, anyone found guilty of a committing a violent, federal offence, who has been convicted of two previous crimes, not necessarily violent in nature, would be incarcerated for good.
By embracing such a proposal, Mr Clinton deliberately identified himself with the hard-line conservative school on combating crime.
He is not only following the popular trend - crime is overtaking the economy as the main object of anxiety among Americans - but is also stealing some thunder from the Republicans.
That the response from liberals within the President's own party has been so muted is testament to the strength of public support. Momentum behind the 'three strikes' provision seems unstoppable, and no fewer than 30 states are considering introducing such legislation.
It did not go unnoticed, however, that while both sides of the chamber gave a standing ovation to the proposal, members of the congressional black caucus remained seated. Before his speech, caucus members wrote to the President asking him to 'blend the need for certain and severe punishment for today's most serious offenders with the need for compassion and community-building'.
The black New York Democrat Charles Rangel fears that 'small-time punks, mixed-up kids' could be ensnared. And similar worries have been raised by the American Civil Liberties Union, which is leading opposition to the provision.
Eric Sterling of the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation dismisses the measures as 'a vote-getting, headline-getting policy'. 'This provision, instead of targeting rapists, armed robbers or serial killers, will send to prison for life the punk who has a fight outside a bar after his team loses the Super Bowl, the drug-addict burglar and a host of penny-ante offenders.'
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments