Four years ago, Mayor Wu said shoplifters shouldn't be prosecuted. Now shoplifting is up in Boston. Funny how that works.
A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr.
Enter Email
Sign Up
Why Democrats? Because voters know whose fault it is that they have to ask for locked-up face wash: Progressives preached a soft-on-crime message that's now coming back to haunt them.
Advertisement
It was now-disgraced Suffolk district attorney Rachael Rollins who in 2018 announced she would stop prosecuting shoplifters. That same year, state law raised the threshold for felony larceny from $250 to $1,200.
Running for mayor in 2021, Wu
Advertisement
Progressives signaling leniency on low-level crimes is undoubtedly part of why shoplifting was up in the city, and across the state. Overall, the Retailers Association of Massachusetts
Not only does toothpaste under lock and key create an ominous image, rampant shoplifting can affect the
This problem hasn't been unique to Boston — progressive cities across the country have
Now running for reelection, Wu still isn't willing to acknowledge the part she has played in normalizing policies that wreck quality of life. I asked her in May if she regretted supporting Rollins's reform. She dodged the question, but told me that during her time as mayor 'there has been full accountability for shoplifting' and then said it's 'not the purview of the mayor or the police department to have any role in prosecutorial discretion.'
But boasting of 'full accountability' takes some nerve — that's only happening because District Attorney Kevin Hayden ignored the politicians like Wu who supported Rollins's policy.
And while Wu continues to vocally tout Boston's status as the safest city in America because of its low homicide rates, she's been backpedaling to address its pervasive quality-of-life issues.
In that same interview she highlighted Hayden's 'Safe Shopping Initiative,' which
Advertisement
When it comes to drug crimes, she's also had to tweak her progressive
Better late than never. In his blog post, Auchincloss wrote that 'degradations to public order also matter. Drug use, loitering, panhandling, encampments, vandalism, shoplifting — these compound into lawlessness,' he wrote. 'There's nothing compassionate or progressive about permitting them.'
The last part is key. Much of the criminal justice reform of the past five years has been an effort to decrease racism in policing and prosecuting. But take that mission too far, and you start condoning crime in the name of justice.
And while some low-level offenders come from difficult circumstances that might warrant giving them a second chance, that's a decision that should be made by a discerning judge or prosecutor. When decriminalization becomes a ruling party's policy, then everyone is invited to heap onto the disorder.
This doesn't just decrease the quality of life in progressive cities like Boston — it erodes trust in the Democratic Party to operate at the most basic levels. Auchincloss is one of few Massachusetts Democrats willing to identify this weakness, but others should join him if they want to reverse the
Advertisement
If a party can't even keep a shampoo bottle safe, how's it supposed to effectively govern millions of people?
Carine Hajjar is a Globe Opinion writer. She can be reached at
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Stars, stripes and soundbites: Trump celebrates his 'big, beautiful' win
It couldn't have been more American. Stars, stripes and soundbites at the Iowa State Fairground on the eve of the fourth of July. The stars had aligned for President Trump, celebrating the passage of his signature tax and spending bill. "There can be no better birthday for America than the phenomenal victory we achieved just hours ago when Congress passed the big, beautiful bill to make America great again," he told the crowd at Des Moines. In recent weeks, his administration has earned its stripes, chalking up unexpected successes: an Israel/Iran ceasefire, agreement at NATO and a legislative breakthrough. It was a small margin - 218 votes to 214 - but a huge win for Donald Trump because the wide-ranging legislation effectively bankrolls his second-term agenda. "More gravitas, more power" was how he described the victory before boarding Air Force One. He feels invincible right now, even joking when a bang interrupted his Iowa speech. "Don't worry, it's only fireworks, I hope. Famous last words… You always have to think positive. I didn't like the sound of that either," he laughed. Read more from Sky News: Democrats have branded the bill "the big, ugly betrayal", claiming 11 million lower-income Americans will lose their healthcare to fund Trump's tax cuts and spending priorities. 👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈 Their leader in the House, Hakeem Jeffries, vowed to "press on for democracy" in a record-breaking speech lasting eight hours and 11 minutes. But the Democrats will struggle to press on anywhere until they find a leader and a coherent opposition strategy to rally around. Republican representatives greeted the result with chants of "USA, USA", but their ownership of the bill makes them accountable for its impact. How Donald Trump handles this degree of power will define this presidency.
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
US House Passes Tax Bill, Sending It to Trump
CC-Transcript 00:00Eventually we got this. The president had said there was going to be no more negotiations. This was going to be done by the July 4th holiday. It is July 3rd in the afternoon, and at least passage of the bill is now complete. What's next? The next thing is the president plans to sign the legislation tomorrow. And you can bet that there's now going to be a giant message war between Democrats and Republicans over whether this is good for America or bad for America. We already had 8 hours and 35 minutes of Hakeem Jeffries speaking about how this was disgusting, just to use one of the phrases. But he essentially railed against this bill the entire time. What are the most contentious aspects of this bill? So the Democratic case is that this is essentially a Robin Hood in reverse religious legislation that it takes from the poor and gives to the rich. And indeed, a lot of the direct benefits from this book go to wealthy people and companies. And a lot of the safety net cuts will wind up hurting relatively low income Americans. The Republican view is, hey, there's $4.5 trillion in tax cuts here to goose the economy, get growth going, and that growth will ultimately we're down to the benefit of Americans. And in fact, we had Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant on Bloomberg TV just a few minutes ago, just before this bill was passed. And he mentioned that when the CBO was scoring the bill, it didn't even take into account any revenue from tariffs that could ultimately be up to $2 trillion, which would also help to offset some of the costs. I'm curious, how did the president win over holdouts? Because there came a time when there were no more negotiations and still the members of the House Freedom Caucus did seem to fall into line. So there were very strong disagreements on parts of this legislation, some from conservatives and some from moderate. But generally most of the Republicans were very much in favor of the tax cuts and the increases in defense spending and immigration enforcement that are the core of the bill. The disagreements were the fiscal conservatives often felt like, hey, this is going to add more than $3 trillion to the deficit. That's a lot of money. We want to see more spending cuts on the moderate side from Republicans. People who are vulnerable to challenges in swing districts were saying, hey, we're going to cut $1,000,000,000,000 from Medicaid. This is going to wind up hurting people and costing us in the election. So you had one camp saying we want to cut more spending and the other camp saying, hey, you're cutting too much. But at the end of the day, they wanted these tax cuts. President Trump has huge sway over the Republican Party. This is the one piece of legislation he wants. He cranked up the pressure and they more or less agree with the main pillars of it. Should we expect executive orders or anything like that? Was anything promised in the background that might appear over the next two weeks, two months? So there were these discussions with the fiscal conservatives in which they received reassurances about executive action. Now, they haven't detailed exactly what those promises are, so we don't know exactly. But for instance, one of them was talking about the president's going to take a very hard line on clean energy permitting and things to make sure that there aren't too many clean energy projects that became eligible for clean energy tax credits before they expire in about a year or so, particularly for wind and solar installations. There were also received assurances. So they say that the Medicaid stuff will be stringently enforced and consequently reduce Medicaid spending as much as possible. But we haven't heard that from the president and we haven't gotten, you know, very clear examples of that. And then, you know, it depends on what he actually does. Well, exactly, Mike. And to that point is this now peak Trump. Will his supporters, the MAGA supporters, see any benefits or any portions of them see any benefit from this bill immediately? And if not, what does it mean for the midterms? Well, there were a lot of the things that appeal to populists were front loaded in the beginning of the bill. So, for instance, elderly Americans will get a bigger standard deduction on their income taxes. Workers who get tips or overtime pay will get it for the next four years. A portion of that pay exempted from taxes for a lot of Americans with families. There'll be an increase in the maximum child tax credit. So there are some tangible things that help. The sort of rank and file Trump voters, and they will come early. The spending cuts will be backloaded more.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Hakeem Jeffries breaks record for longest House floor speech while opposing GOP tax bill
The Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries broke the record for the longest House floor speech ever on Thursday after he spoke for more than eight hours to delay a vote on Donald Trump's signature tax-and-spending bill. Early on Thursday, after a marathon night of arm-twisting, cajoling and pressure by tweet, House Republicans said they were finally ready to vote on Trump's $4.5tn tax-and-spending package – a colossal piece of legislation the president wants passed by Friday, the Independence Day holiday. Final debate on the 887-page bill began in the pre-dawn hours of Thursday morning, and Jeffries began his speech shortly before 5am, railing against the legislation he and Democrats have warned will slash social safety-net programs that millions of American families and children rely on. Related: What's in Trump's major tax bill? Extended cuts, deportations and more Jeffries used his so-called 'magic minute' – a tradition that allows House leaders to speak for as long as they want after a floor debate has concluded. In 2021, the then House Republican leader, Kevin McCarthy, spoke for a record-setting eight hours and 32 minutes, in protest of Joe Biden's signature domestic policy legislation, which ultimately passed when he ceded the floor. Jeffries started speaking shortly before 5am and passed McCarthy's record at 1.26pm. His speech concluded shortly after. Democrats are united against what they have renamed the 'big ugly' bill. Jeffries spent more than eight hours sharing stories of Americans across the country who will be hurt by the bill, which he says takes a 'chainsaw' to Medicare, Medicaid, nutritional assistance for hungry children and vulnerable Americans. The Democratic leader had stacks of binders next to his podium, and he read the stories of people who will lose health insurance, food assistance and other crucial benefits. Jeffries called the bill a 'crime scene', and an 'abomination' that will benefit billionaires. 'People will die. Tens of thousands, perhaps year after year after year, as a result of the Republican assault on the healthcare of the American people,' Jeffries said. Republicans continue to defend Trump's signature bill. On Wednesday night, the House speaker, Mike Johnson, was optimistic and said lawmakers had a 'long, productive day' discussing the issues. He also praised Trump for making phone calls to the holdouts through the early hours of Thursday morning. Trump spent much of Wednesday holding meetings and phone calls with skeptical Republican lawmakers. As the rule stalled, he threatened the holdout lawmakers, writing on Truth Social: 'What are the Republicans waiting for??? What are you trying to prove??? MAGA IS NOT HAPPY, AND IT'S COSTING YOU VOTES!!!' Democrats are increasingly using aggressive tactics such as marathon speeches to oppose Trump's agenda. In April, Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey spoke on the Senate floor for 25 hours, earning him praise from other Democrats and voters. Later that month, Jeffries and Booker held a 12-hour sit-in on the US Capitol steps to protest Republicans' funding plans. Billed as an 'Urgent Conversation With the American People', the livestreamed discussion included other Democratic lawmakers, such as Senator Raphael Warnock, who spoke as the sit-in passed the 10-hour mark.
