FROM TOUGH-ON-CRIME TO SMART-ON-CRIME: THE RACIAL IMPACT OF POLICING FELONY DRUG OFFENSES IN THE 21ST CENTURY by WALTER LEE CAMPBELL II A Dissertation submitted to the Graduate School-Newark Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Program in Criminal Justice Written under the direction of Dr. Elizabeth Griffiths and approved by Newark, New Jersey May, 2019 Copyright page: ©[2019] Walter Lee Campbell II ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION From Tough-on-Crime to Smart-on-Crime: Policing Felony Drug Offenses in the 21st Century By WALTER LEE CAMPBELL II Dissertation Director: Dr. Elizabeth Griffiths From the 1970s through the early 2000s, the policing of drug crime in America was marked by a “tough on crime” approach. This ethos influenced the ways in which police managed public safety, resulting in the adoption of police paramilitary units (PPUs) and the overuse and misuse of order-maintenance stops and warrants for drug offenses. Yet these units and practices are known to be associated with racialized patterns of policing. Over the past decade, a number of police agencies have transitioned towards a “smart on crime” ethos that rejects the “tough” approach in favor of evidence-based strategies often touted as race-neutral. This ideological shift in policing was especially pronounced in Atlanta, where a PPU was disbanded and replaced with data-driven units after several high-profile incidents of police abuse came to light. One of the consequences of the move to “smart” drug policing, then, should be a conspicuous decline in racial disparities. In this dissertation, I examine whether and how the move from “tough” to “smart” policing styles influences the role of race in the enforcement of felony drug crimes. Using data from the Context of Drug Enforcement project, I explore racialized patterns of policing in both the “tough” (2005) and “smart” (2012) eras; use multilevel models to understand the relationship between specialized units (PPUs and data-driven units) and certain tactics (warrants and order maintenance stops) with race in each era; and estimate fixed effects models to assess how the change in ethos, in specialized units, and in tactics affected racial disparities in drug policing across eras. The findings reveal a complicated story, with Atlanta Police Department’s shift in ethos contributing to changes in some but not all aspects of racialized drug arrest patterns and, even then, only marginally. This is partially a consequence of the minor and nuanced role played by these units and tactics in generating racial disparities in arrests in the first place. While the shift to a “smart on crime” ethos can generate a substantial redirection away from the policing of drug crime more broadly, it may do little to alleviate significant racial disparities in drug arrests. ii Acknowledgments This dissertation would not have been possible (or, certainly, not nearly as good) without the dedicated assistance of my advisor, Dr. Elizabeth Griffiths, at every step. Thank you! And thank you for all your help throughout my time as PhD student, for making me a better researcher and a better writer. I would also like to thank my committee members—Drs. Johnna Christian, Joel Miller, and Joshua Hinkle—all of whom provide invaluable feedback at all stages, and who read the final product on very short notice. Thank you to my colleagues at Abt Associates for their support through the final stages of this process. And a special thank you to Dr. Holly Swan and Meg Chapman for helping me navigate the hurdles of working full time while finishing my dissertation. Thank you to my dad, Ian, for supporting me, and for providing me with an example of what hard work is. Thank you to my sisters—Emily, Stephanie, and Marguerite—and to my mom, Nancy, for your support and for helping shape who I am today. Most importantly, thank you to my wife, Erin. I, quite literally, could not have done any of this without you. iii Table of Contents I. Abstract_____________________________________________________ii II. Acknowledgments_____________________________________________iii III. Table of Contents______________________________________________iv IV. List of Tables_________________________________________________viii V. List of Illustrations_____________________________________________xi VI. Introduction 1 VII. Chapter 1. Drugs, Race, and the Era of “Tough on Crime” Policing 5 i. Mass Incarceration, The War on Drugs, and Race 5 ii. “Tough on Crime” Policing 10 VIII. Chapter 2. PPU, Tactics, and Racial Disparities 25 i. Police Paramilitary Units (PPUs) 25 ii. Order-Maintenance Stops 31 iii. Serving Warrants 37 IX. Chapter 3. A Change in Policing 44 i. The “Smart on Crime” Shift in Policing 44 ii. Policing in Atlanta 49 iii. Will the Change Result in Change? 56 iv. Summary 67 X. Chapter 4. Methodology 69 i. General Data and Measurement Topics 71 i. Overall Analytic Strategy 71 iv ii. Data Source 73 iii. Geography 80 iv. Missing Data 81 v. Sample Selection 88 vi. Assessing Race and Racial Disparities 92 ii. Racial Patterns of Arrest in Each Era 97 i. Measuring Race in the CODE Data 98 ii. Racial Patterns of Drug Arrests across Atlanta 99 iii. Racial Patterns of Drug Arrests within Atlanta Neighborhoods 101 iii. “Tough on Crime” Analyses 109 i. Research Question 1 109 ii. Research Question 2 116 iv. “Smart on Crime” Analyses 118 i. Research Question 1 119 ii. Research Question 2 120 v. Era Comparison Analyses 121 i. Research Question 1 122 ii. Research Question 2 125 vi. Conclusion 127 XI. Chapter 5. “Tough on Crime” Policing in Atlanta 129 i. Race and Red Dog 131 ii. Race and Arrest Types 154 v iii. Discussion 173 XII. Chapter 6. “Smart on Crime” Policing in Atlanta 181 i. Race and Data-Driven Policing 183 ii. Race and Arrest Types 198 iii. Discussion 216 XIII. Chapter 7. Policing in Atlanta across Eras 222 i. Bivariate Changes 224 ii. The Effect of Era 230 iii. The Effects of Units and Tactics 235 iv. Discussion 238 XIV. Conclusion: Policing Felony Drug Offenses in Atlanta under Two Models 246 i. Racial Patterns of Arrests in and across Eras 249 ii. The Role of Specialized Units 251 iii. The Role of Warrants 255 iv. The Role of Order Maintenance Stops 257 v. Explaining Changes in Drug Policing in Atlanta 261 vi. Policy Implications 267 vii. Limitations 269 XV. References 273 XVI. Appendix A: Police Stop Codes 288 XVII. Appendix B: Police Stop Coding Guidelines 290 vi XVIII. Appendix C: Missing Data Tables 294 XIX. Appendix D: List of Hypotheses 296 vii List of Tables Table 1. Race of Arrestees and Race of Atlanta Residents______________________101 Table 2. Census Tract Arrestee and Residential Racial Composition ______________105 Table 1. Arrestee-Case Level Variables by Red Dog, 2005_____________________133 Table 2. Neighborhood Level Variables by Red Dog, 2005_____________________134 Table 3. Random Intercept Logit Models for the Effect of Individual Race on the Involvement of Red Dog, 2005__________________________ 137 Table 4. Random Intercept Logit Models for the Effect of Individual Race on the Involvement of Red Dog with Charge Type Interactions, 2005_______________ 142 Table 4. Random Intercept Logit Models for the Effect of Individual Race and Racial Composition on the Involvement of Red Dog, 2005___________________________150 Table 5. Zone-Specific Random Intercept Logit Models for the Effect of Individual Race and Racial Composition on the Use of Red Dog, 2005________________________ 154 Table 6. Tactics that Lead to Arrest, 2005___________________________ 155 Table 7. Random Intercept Logit Models for the Effect of Individual Race on Police Stop Tactics - Traffic and Pedestrian Stops, 2005_______________________ 158 Table 8. Random Intercept Logit Models for the Effect of Individual Race on Police Stop Tactics - Pedestrian Stops Only, 2005___________________________ 159 Table 9. Random Intercept Logit Models for the Effect of Individual Race and Racial Composition on Police Stop Tactics - Traffic and Pedestrian Stops, 2005__________168 Table 10. Random Intercept Logit Models for the Effect of Individual Race and Racial Composition on Police Stop Tactics - Pedestrian Stops Only, 2005_______________170 Table 11. Zone-Specific Random Intercept Multinomial Logit Models for the Effect of Individual Race on Police Stop Tactics - Traffic and Pedestrian Stops ____________173 Table 12. Zone-Specific Random Intercept Multinomial Logit Models for the Effect of Individual Race on Police Stop Tactics - Pedestrian Stops Only__________________174 Table 1. Arrestee-Case Level Variables by Data-Driven Policing, 2012____________185 viii Table 2. Neighborhood Level Variables by Data-Driven Policing, 2012____________186 Table 3. Random Intercept Logit Models for the Effect of Individual Race on the Use of Data-Driven Units, 2012___________________________ 190 Table 4. Random Intercept Logit Models for the Effect of Individual Race and Racial Composition on the Use of Data-Driven Units, 2012__________________________196 Table 5. Zone-Specific Random Intercept Logit Models for the Effect of Individual Race and Racial Composition on the Use of Data-Driven Units, 2012_________________ 198 Table 6. Tactics that Lead to Arrest, 2012___________________________ 199 Table 7. Random Intercept Logit Models for the Effect of Individual Race on Police Stop Tactics - Traffic and Pedestrian Stops, 2012________________________ 202 Table 8. Random Intercept Logit Models for the