The Washington Post has a long and rather glowing
examination of Virginia Senator Jim Webb's effort to reform U.S. drug policy and the criminal justice system:
"I am, at bottom, a writer," he says, invoking his default response. "I start with a theme, rather than a plot." Webb wants to shape a plotline that, with each turn of the page, draws America closer to reinventing its criminal justice system. Questioning why the United States locks up so many of its youths, why its prisons swell with disease and atrocities while fundamental social problems persist in its streets, has earned Webb lavish praise as a politician unafraid to be smeared as soft on crime. And when a law-and-order type as rock-ribbed as Webb expresses willingness to consider legalizing or decriminalizing drugs, excitement follows. Â
Indeed it does. The whole article is worth reading, as it really captures the energy that's beginning to build behind Webb's efforts. There's nothing surprising about this to anyone who's been paying attention to the drug policy debate that has been escalating for years and erupting in recent months.
Still, even
The Washington Post itself has been slow to grasp the potency of Webb's call for reform. Last December,
The Post published a similarly
lengthy account of Jim Webb's quest to reform criminal justice policies, but that article portrayed him as a crazy idealist stepping into political hot water:
"It is a gamble for Webb, a fiery and cerebral Democrat from a staunchly law-and-order state."
"â¦as the country struggles with two wars overseas and an ailing economy, overflowing prisons are the last thing on many lawmakers' minds."
"â¦Webb has never been one to rely on polls or political indicators to guide his way."
"Some say Webb's go-it-alone approach could come back to haunt him."
And yet
The Post is now reporting that Webb's efforts are gaining support, including "encouraging signals" from Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy and even President Obama.
The Post's earlier suggestion that Webb's efforts could alienate him were based on the same "soft-on-crime" political theory that we've been hearing for two decades now. The second they got wind of Webb's criminal justice reform proposal, they interviewed a bunch of people about what a maverick he is and how his ideas are so unique. The whole thing reeked of the implication that only a strange politician would care about improving our criminal justice system.
To be fair, yes, Jim Webb is a bit of a maverick and clearly his plan is unique. I don't fault
The Post for making Webb's personality part of the story. But it didn't make sense to frame criminal justice reform as a fringe idea and it's not at all surprising that
The Post is now forced to concede Webb's political savvy. Obama spoke on the campaign trail about "shifting the model" in the war on drugs, and while that was hardly the defining issue of his candidacy, it was utterly uncontroversial throughout the campaign. It's a simple fact that criminal justice reform, including discussion of reexamining drug laws, is a perfectly legitimate and mainstream political topic that any politician can approach without inviting any consequential backlash.
One of the most immediate and intrinsically valuable aspects of Webb's effort is precisely that it serves as a mechanism for illustrating the importance of this discussion. I don't doubt that it will become controversial (if our drug policy truly faces due scrutiny as Webb intends), but by the time that happens, he will have firmly established the principle that debating criminal justice policies is a relevant and necessary exercise at this moment in American politics. If we can reach a point at which the media coverage is focused on the issue, rather than the personality quirks of Jim Webb himself, that's when we'll know his efforts are paying off.
