Zero tolerance for ridiculous policies

Published 8:36 pm Thursday, October 17, 2013

It wasn’t so very long ago that conservatives were the lead proponents of “zero tolerance” policies. Such policies seemed — at the time — in keeping with a tough-on-crime approach that was sorely lacking in many American cities.

In fact, it was conservative social scientists James Q. Wilson and George Kelling who laid the ground work for zero tolerance policies, with their doctrine of “broken windows.”

“Consider a building with a few broken windows,” they wrote for the Atlantic Monthly in 1982. “If the windows are not repaired, the tendency is for vandals to break a few more windows. Eventually, they may even break into the building, and if it’s unoccupied, perhaps become squatters or light fires inside. Or consider a sidewalk. Some litter accumulates. Soon, more litter accumulates. Eventually, people even start leaving bags of trash from take-out restaurants.”

The argument is that when small infractions are ignored, big infractions will take place.

And “broken windows” policies have, indeed, helped stem crime and revitalize neighborhoods.

But even good things can be taken too far. And now, conservatives should recognize the limits of zero tolerance policies and rein them in.

The most recent example of excess comes from Boston.

“Two weeks ago, Erin [Cox] received a call from a friend at a party who was too drunk to drive,” CBS Boston reports. “Erin drove to Boxford after work to pick up her friend. Moments after she arrived, the cops arrived too and busted several kids for underage possession of alcohol. A North Andover High School honor student, Erin was cleared by police, who agreed she had not been drinking and was not in possession of alcohol. But Andover High told Erin she was in violation of the district’s zero tolerance policy against alcohol and drug use. In the middle of her senior year, Erin was demoted from captain of the volleyball team and told she would be suspended from playing for five games.”

Clearly, Erin showed more wisdom on that night than the school has. The school district should recognize what message it’s sending.

“If a kid asks for help from a friend, you don’t want that kid to say ‘I’m sorry I can’t help you. I might end up in trouble at school,'” the Cox family’s attorney says.

We’ve seen zero tolerance policies carried to far, particularly in schools. We’ve seen young boys suspended for eating Pop-Tarts into the shape of a gun, sent home for wearing shirts with the National Rifle Association logo, and expelled for taking Tylenol.

Yet one of the strongest arguments against zero tolerance policies is at the core of the conservative approach to government. Such policies limit local control.

“These ‘zero tolerance’ policies are too often applied with zero logic,” notes the Cato Institute’s Jason Bedrick. “They encourage bureaucrats to harshly punish students without considering extenuating circumstances, the student’s intent, or even common sense. It’s long past time that schools abandon ‘zero tolerance’ in favor of a more reasonable and proportional approach.”

And conservatives should lead the way in seeking saner policies.