Bonham’s (2012) Seven Criteria It is critically important that you learn how

Bonham’s (2012) Seven Criteria

It is critically important that you learn how to describe Bonham’s (2012) seven criteria of a good policy and how to apply them to a specific policy. To help you in that endeavor I have created an essay below using a policy loosely based on one which was implemented in Florida in the mid-1980s. The research mentioned in the essay is fictitious, but it is based on anecdotal evidence which I observed at the time. The purpose of this essay is simply to help you better understand the seven criteria so that you can apply them correctly. Since the studies do not exist, I do not make any attempt to cite them in APA style or even to identify them. I only refer to them as “research.”

Fictional Scenario

On January 1, 2013, Sally’s Law went into effect which mandated that anyone convicted of Driving Under the Influence (DUI) must serve a minimum of three weekends in the local county jail in addition to whatever other punishment or fine was administered. The Florida State Legislature passed this law to reduce the number of DUI-related accidents and deaths in the state.

Bonham’s (2012) Seven Criteria

I will now use Bonham’s (2012) to evaluate whether this law is a good policy.

The first criterion is effectiveness. If a policy meets the criterion of effectiveness, then it is achieving the results it was implemented to achieve. Research data showed that in 2013 there was a 20% decrease in the number of DUI-related accidents and fatalities compared to 2012. The number of DUI-related accidents and deaths remained at the 2013 level in 2014. Based on these data, I determined that Sally’s Law appeared to meet the criterion of effectiveness.

Externalities refers to intended or unintended consequences which resulted from the policy. Another term which refers to these consequences are side effects. The research indicated that Sally’s Law had a number of side effects which greatly complicated the legal process. First, since those arrested for DUI were subject to receiving jail time, many more defendants decided to fight their charges in court and began hiring lawyers and demanding jury trials. Second, these demands led to a large backlog in the court, which prosecutors tried to alleviate by dropping the weaker cases or allowing defendants to plead to a lesser charge, such as careless driving. Third, the public defender’s office became overwhelmed because the courts now had to provide all indigent defendants an attorney since they were facing possible jail time. Those who could afford them now hired expensive attorneys to fight their cases in court. These developments led to a drop in DUI conviction rates from 90% in 2012 to 50% in 2013 and 2014. For those who were able to afford a private attorney, the conviction rate dropped to 25%.

Studies also indicated that due to the increased difficulty in obtaining convictions, police officers were required to collect much more evidence, write more lengthy reports, and spend much more time in court. Due to the increase in the number of hours required to make a DUI arrest and the embarrassment of losing cases in court, many police officers chose to stop making DUI arrests.

Research also indicated that another externality was the overcrowding of the jails on weekends. With so many people showing up on Friday evening to spend the weekend in jail, other inmates had to be released without bail to make room for them. Also, police officers quickly discovered that if they arrested someone on a weekend, they could not put them in jail unless it was a violent felony, because there was no space for them.

In summary, Sally’s Law’s side effects included a dramatic increase in the number of people taking their cases to court, an increase in the workload for prosecutors, public defenders and police officers, a decrease in the conviction rate for DUIs, and a drop in the number of arrests for DUIs. These are serious negative side effects, so I concluded that the research indicated that this policy failed to meet the criterion of externalities.

If a policy meets the criterion of Theory, then is consistent with the theory on which it is based and that the theory is valid. Like most criminal justice policies, this policy was based on deterrence theory. The belief was that if people knew they would receive jail time for their first conviction, then they would be deterred from driving while under the influence and the number of related accidents and deaths would decline. Deterrence theory states that a swift, sure, and sufficiently painful punishment will discourage certain behaviors. On the surface Sally’s Law appears to be consistent with the theory because the policy uses punishment (pain) to discourage a particular behavior (DUI); however, due to the low conviction rates and backlogged courts caused by this policy, the punishment was neither swift nor sure. Therefore, a more careful review of the policy indicates that Sally’s Law does not appear to meet this criterion either. The problem is that when put into practice the policy is not consistent with the theory.

If a policy meets the criterion of efficiency, then it is cost-effective or the policy is achieving the desired results with lowest possible costs. Are there less expensive ways to achieve the same results? Are the costs of the policy something that society can afford? The research indicated that they policy was very expensive because it cost a great deal of time and money to take so many people to court who previously would have simply pled guilty. The public defender’s office and the prosecutor’s office had to hire more staff to handle the increased caseload. The jail’s expenses increased dramatically because of all the extra inmates on the weekends. The overtime pay spent on both the police officers and correctional officers increased. Due to these dramatic increases in costs the policy appears to fail to meet the criterion of efficiency.

If a policy meets the criterion of compliance, then the policy complies with the law and is constitutional. The legal research on Sally’s Law suggests that the policy is not unconstitutional. It was legally passed by the legislature and put into effect by the criminal justice system. At this point in the research, this policy appears to meet the criterion of compliance.

If a policy meets the criterion of equity, then it is fair to everyone and does not produce discriminatory results. Although the law is written to apply to everyone and not just one group of people, the research indicates that the application of Sally’s Law had some problems meeting this criterion. A major discrepancy between the conviction rates for those defendants who must use a public defender and those who can afford a private attorney indicated that the policy appeared to fail to meet this criterion. Additional research suggested that when police officer perceived that someone was poor and may not be able to hire a private attorney, they were more likely to charge them with a DUI. The research also showed that the racial disparity in arrests and convictions increased significantly since 2012. These research results suggested that Sally’s Law failed to meet the criterion of equity.

The final criterion of a good policy is the Intervention Effect. The policy meets this criterion if its impact can be measured. The question is not whether the impact is effective, but only if the impact can be measured. Since researchers can measure the number of DUI accidents and fatalities in Florida before and after the implementation of this policy to see if that number changes, it can be measured. The only challenge to this conclusion is that all research has a certain level of uncertainty because you cannot control for all the other possible explanations. For example, did the decrease result from some other occurrence at that time, such as a campaign to stop drunk driving, a spike in gas prices which led to fewer cars on the road, or better safety equipment and accident-avoidance technology on cars? Despite these problems, I concluded that the impact of Sally’s Law is measurable because research studies could be done to try to account for these other variables.

Conclusion

The final question is whether Sally’s Law is a good policy. Although it may be effective, compliant with the law and measurable, the law fails to meet the other criteria. Based on the research, I do not believe that Sally’s law is a good policy, because it is too costly, has too many negative side effects, and exacerbates racial disparities which already exist in our criminal justice system.

NOTE: I did not say that the research “proved” anything. Proof is much too strong a word when dealing with social research. We can say that the research indicates, suggests, or demonstrates something; however, it takes many studies and years of research to be able to suggest that social research is proving anything. It is a very high bar to reach and is rarely ever done. So, when you are writing your papers, do not use say your research “proves” anything.