Bill Overview
Title: Combating Violent and Dangerous Crime Act
Description: This bill revises various statutes with respect to violent crimes and establishes new criminal offenses. For example, the bill (1) increases the statutory maximum penalty for carjacking, and (2) establishes enhanced criminal penalties for certain federal drug offenses involving the manufacture or distribution of candy-flavored controlled substances or similar products for minors.
Sponsors: Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in or affected by violent crime and drug-related offenses
Estimated Size: 2000000
- The bill targets individuals involved in violent crimes by increasing penalties, which may deter individuals from committing such crimes or result in harsher sentencing for those who do.
- Specifically, individuals involved in carjacking will face higher penalties, affecting carjackers and potentially the broader criminal community by deterring such acts.
- The bill addresses federal drug offenses, especially those involving dangerous products intended for minors, thereby impacting those who manufacture or distribute these substances.
- The enhanced penalties for drug offenses aim to protect minors from drug exposure, especially from substances disguised as candy, which could affect young individuals susceptible to drug-related harm.
- Law enforcement and judicial systems may experience changes in workload or processes due to new and revised statutes, influencing prosecutors, attorneys, and court systems.
Reasoning
- The bill primarily affects individuals directly involved in violent crimes and drug offenses, but it could also indirectly impact law-abiding citizens through potential changes in public safety and the justice system.
- A portion of the target population includes lower socioeconomic groups in urban areas where violent crimes like carjacking are more prevalent. This demographic will need to be represented in the simulation.
- The focus on candy-flavored drugs suggests a notable concern over the impact on youth, particularly those in environments where drug exposure is more likely.
- Budgetary constraints will likely limit how comprehensive enforcement can be, affecting the overall reach and effectiveness of the policy.
- A balanced representation includes unaffected persons to reflect those who observe no direct impact from the policy changes.
- Law enforcement and those within the criminal justice system, such as prosecutors and defense attorneys, will see operational changes, though their personal wellbeing might not change drastically.
Simulated Interviews
Unemployed (Chicago, IL)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about getting caught up in harsher penalties, even if I'm not directly involved in violent crime.
- More police presence might make me feel safer, but also nervous.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Public School Teacher (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm supportive of anything that reduces the risk of students getting involved with drugs.
- I hope the penalties work as a deterrent.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Small Business Owner (Houston, TX)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think harsher penalties could make the streets safer, which is good for my business.
- Not sure if it'll affect my own life directly though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Defense Attorney (New York, NY)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Tougher laws might make my job harder, as clients could face more severe consequences.
- I'm concerned about the potential for increased incarceration rates.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
College Student (Baltimore, MD)
Age: 20 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Harsher penalties might deter some, but I'm not sure it addresses root causes of crime.
- I hope it makes my neighborhood safer though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Farmer (Rural Alabama)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I doubt this will affect us out here, but I'm all for keeping drugs away from kids.
- I worry more about economic issues than crime.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Retired Police Officer (Miami, FL)
Age: 62 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm supportive of strong measures against violent crime.
- This could improve my neighborhood's safety, which has seen better days.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Social Worker (Memphis, TN)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Tougher laws might protect some kids, but we need more education and community support.
- I support preventive measures over punitive ones.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Tech Consultant (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Crime isn't a big concern for me personally, but I worry about the broader societal impact.
- I'm skeptical about the effectiveness of just increasing penalties.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Software Developer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 34 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this deters youth from getting involved in crime, but I'm afraid it might push some into worse situations.
- Prevention should be key, not just punishment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Year 2: $52000000 (Low: $42000000, High: $62000000)
Year 3: $54000000 (Low: $44000000, High: $64000000)
Year 5: $58000000 (Low: $47000000, High: $68000000)
Year 10: $65000000 (Low: $52000000, High: $78000000)
Year 100: $120000000 (Low: $96000000, High: $140000000)
Key Considerations
- The effectiveness of deterrence from increased penalties is uncertain and may vary culturally and regionally.
- Operational effectiveness and resource allocation for law enforcement are crucial to achieving the bill's intended impacts.
- The incremental burden on the prison system requires assessment in the context of existing capacities and reform efforts.