Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Outrage After Flint Residents Receive Foreclosure Warnings

In Flint, Michigan, thousands of residents have received letters warning them that they could lose their houses unless they pay outstanding water bills. But the city has just begun to recover from the water crisis and has only recently started replacing the water lines. The letters were sent out in April, just a few weeks after the state stopped paying the majority of residents’ water bills due to the contamination that was discovered in 2014. Many people in the city still don’t trust that their water taps provide clean water, even though the city says that lead levels are now low enough for the water to be safe to drink.

You didn’t read that wrong: 8000 people in Flint are being threatened with foreclosure of their homes for not paying for lead-poisoned water

— Profit-à-Proletariat (@EmmaCaterine) May 3, 2017

The city says the unpaid water and sewage bills amount to more than $5.8 million. Flint spokeswoman Kristin Moore said the letters are routine and that the households will have until next February to pay them. But now residents worry about being able to pay for water that they don’t feel comfortable drinking and some are scared of losing their homes. “Flint families should not have to pay for water that they still cannot drink,” said Democratic Rep. Daniel Kildee.

Imagine losing your home because you didn’t pay for water you couldn’t drink. https://t.co/ezchbwwkFG

— Arthur Delaney (@ArthurDelaneyHP) May 3, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: May 5, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

The city of Flint will finally replace aging water lines for 18,000 homes, after the state of Michigan agreed to pay the cost of the project as part of a legal settlement. A federal judge approved the deal on Tuesday and said that the job will have to be completed by 2020. Around 700 homes have already had their pipes replaced.

The costs will be covered by a combination of state and federal funds. Michigan will pay $87 million, and put $10 million aside for unforeseen costs. Part of the project will also be funded by the $100 million that Flint was granted by Congress at the end of last year, but some of that money will also be used to update Flint’s water treatment plant.

Residents and activists that brought the lawsuit are relieved to finally see some action. “The greatest lesson I’ve learned from Flint’s water crisis is that change only happens when you get up and make your voice heard,” said Melissa Mays, one of the plaintiffs and one of the first people who alerted officials after realizing that something was wrong with the city’s water.

Progress!!! The fight isn’t over yet but this a HUGE win for us #FlintWaterCrisis https://t.co/8PNHMPluDX

— Little Miss Flint (@LittleMissFlint) March 27, 2017

In 2014 it was discovered that tap water in Flint was contaminated, after the city stopped extracting its water from Lake Huron and, in an effort to save money, started taking it from the Flint River. It turned out that the water was so corrosive that it quickly eroded the city’s water pipes, collecting iron, lead, and other metals on its way to residents’ homes. Lead is dangerous and can cause long-term physical and mental damage. A dozen people have died from Legionnaires’ disease in the city.

In December 2016, Michigan’s attorney general announced felony charges against two former Flint emergency managers and two other former city officials, saying, “All too prevalent in this Flint Water Investigation was a priority on balance sheets and finances rather than health and safety of the citizens of Flint.” The politicians’ decision to switch water sources to save $5 million resulted in a loss of over $1.5 billion, according to estimates.

A) it only took 3 years to get the ruling
B) 2020?!?!?! Wtf https://t.co/pPqSHOuhX7

— Tatiana Torres (@princessdeleon) March 27, 2017

As part of the agreement the state must also keep providing residents with free bottled water and conduct inspections to ensure that residents have proper filters installed on their taps–and provide such filters for free. Other aspects of the settlement include new water monitoring requirements and that the state maintains current Medicaid funding levels.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Flint to Replace 18,000 Water Lines, Michigan Agrees to Pay $97 Million appeared first on Law Street.

Your topic of the day: voter fraud. It was a hot debate during the election, and President Donald Trump has falsely claimed “millions of people” voted illegally. Now the Supreme Court has announced it will not hear an appeal from Texas officials right now, who wanted to reinstate a controversial voter ID law. The law has been deemed unconstitutional by a lower court, but could still end up in front of the Supreme Court at a later date.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Trump Was Serious About the Border Wall, Okays Controversial Pipelines

Today, President Donald Trump will begin taking steps toward actually building that wall along the Mexican border. This undertaking would be financed with federal money. But it’s unclear when the project will start, how long the wall would be, and where exactly the money would come from. This was the first campaign promise Trump made, back when he announced he would run for president in 2015. The wall proposal has been cheered by his fans and harshly criticized by his opponents. But the former Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, Gil Kerlikowske, doesn’t see the point of a physical wall. “The border and migration issues are just unbelievably complex,” he said to CNN. “And a simple answer to a complex problem is most assuredly the wrong answer.”

Donald Trump could announce that the wall has been completed, Mexico paid for it, and it’s invisible.
20% of Americans would believe him.

— Luke Adams (@luketadams) January 25, 2017

Trump also cleared the Keystone and Dakota oil pipeline projects that had been halted by President Barack Obama. This doesn’t really come as a surprise as Trump has reportedly close ties with the gas industry, and even owned stocks in the company constructing the Dakota pipeline. The Dakota pipeline has been the focus of massive protests all fall and winter–it’s likely those protests will continue.

A few hundred people are outside the White House now protesting Trump’s executive actions on #KeystoneXL and #DakotaPipeline pic.twitter.com/TUjUmkecOr

— Kira Lerner (@kira_lerner) January 24, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: January 25, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Scott Pruitt, President-elect Donald Trump’s choice for the head of the Environmental Protection Agency appeared before part of the Senate for his confirmation hearing on Wednesday. Pruitt, a former attorney general of Oklahoma, said he would like to shift some regulatory control from the federal government to the states. He purported that being pro-energy and pro-environment can be mutually exclusive. And while he acknowledged that climate change and human activity are linked, he questioned just how strong that causality is.

As attorney general, Pruitt advocated on behalf of states’ rights in the face of what he saw as federal overreach. In fact, Pruitt sued the EPA 14 times; he also led the 27-state lawsuit against President Barack Obama’s Clean Power Plan. If he is confirmed as the next EPA chief, Pruitt could become involved in some of the lawsuits that he filed. In Wednesday’s hearing, Senate Democrats asked Pruitt if he would recuse himself from those lawsuits. He did not commit to doing so.

Scott Pruitt will not say whether he will agree to upholding California’s high vehicle pollution standards. That is unacceptable.

— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) January 18, 2017

Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) introduced Pruitt: “Yes, as attorney general, Scott fought the EPA, the Fish and Wildlife Service and the outgoing administration on many fronts,” he said, “but all of these suits were brought to protect state and local interests from overzealous and activist agencies.” Outside the hearing room, protesters, some wearing pink hats and surgical masks, others donning oil rig gear, represented the dueling sides of the hearing itself: Democrats who questioned Pruitt’s ties to the energy industry, and Pruitt’s long-held disdain for environmental activists and what he sees as job-killing regulations.

“We must reject as a nation the false paradigm that if you’re pro-energy you’re anti-environment, and if you’re pro-environment you’re anti-energy,” Pruitt said during the hearing. In his opening remarks, Pruitt, who is often called a climate denier, clarified his stance on climate change: “Science tells us that the climate is changing and human activity in some manner impacts that change,” he said. “The human ability to measure with precision the extent of that impact is subject to continuing debate and dialogue, as well they should be.”

If we look at EPA’s major legacy rule – CPP, WOTUS, haze, CSPAR, tailoring rule – the agency is batting 0.00. #confirmpruitt

— Jim Inhofe (@jiminhofe) January 18, 2017

Pruitt’s hearing was on the same day the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration released a report that said 2016 was earth’s hottest year on record, since at least 1880, when record keeping began. Though he made clear that the EPA under his watch would grant more power to state legislatures, Pruitt mentioned the Flint, Michigan water crisis as an instance when the federal agency failed to do enough.

“In Flint, the EPA should have acted faster. With air quality, water quality across state lines, there is a role where EPA is important,” he said. Pruitt added that he does not know the science behind lead poisoning: “I haven’t looked at the scientific research,” he said.

In 2009, the EPA found that carbon emissions endanger humans and warm the planet. That ruling serves as the basis for subsequent emissions regulations, including Obama’s Clean Power Plan. Pruitt, who Democrats worry will scrap a number of regulations, said he would enforce that ruling. “It is there, and it needs to be enforced and respected,” he said. Pruitt is expected to pass a full Senate confirmation, as all 51 Republicans will likely support him; Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) is also expected to support Pruitt.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Scott Pruitt: Trump’s Choice to Lead the EPA Defends His Record of Suing the EPA appeared first on Law Street.

The jokes started out pretty harmless, referencing some of our favorite childhood cartoons.

#MoreTrustedThanHillary Spongebob’s magic conch pic.twitter.com/Vmn714Gpav

— Preston (@PrestonFlowers) July 6, 2016

Alexandra Simone

Alex Simone is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street and a student at The George Washington University, studying Political Science. She is passionate about law and government, but also enjoys the finer things in life like watching crime dramas and enjoying a nice DC brunch. Contact Alex at ASimone@LawStreetmedia.com

The post #MoreTrustedThanHillary Trend Takes Twitter by Storm appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to the RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through the top five controversial and crazy stories in the world of law and policy each day. So who is ranting and who is raving today? Check it out below:

US Government Issues Guidance on Transgender Access to Public School Bathrooms

Because we all need a little hand-holding on how not to be jerks, the Obama administration is releasing guidelines on how to deal with transgender bathroom use. The letter tells public schools how to make sure none of their students are discriminated against. Any state or school that does not abide by the administration’s “interpretation of the law” could face major consequences, like loss of federal aid, as seen in the current battle with North Carolina.

The federal policy on use of bathrooms by transgender students triggered a swift reaction https://t.co/NV7ldBZS0I pic.twitter.com/8hJLjecQd4

— The New York Times (@nytimes) May 13, 2016

Flint Lets It Rain for the Month of Pay To Clear Out Pipes

The State of Michigan is encouraging Flint residents to use up all the water their hearts desire this month because it will be footing the bill. As with most things that are free, the scenario will play out as a win-win–Flint residents get 100 percent free water and the city’s pipes will be flushed out after remaining sedentary for months. And who knows, maybe Flint will get to clear its name as well? 

President Obama drinks filtered city water in Flint, Michigan, to show it’s safe https://t.co/s3RKh6Savu pic.twitter.com/1avslXmJgR

— The Boston Globe (@BostonGlobe) May 4, 2016

Twitter Suspends Azealia Banks’ Account After Her Rampage on Zayn Malik

The 23-year-old rapper has seen better days. We all fondly remember the inappropriate but fun “212,” right? But today Banks seems to have lost her damn mind. Her recent kerfuffle with singer Zayn Malik comes as no surprise as she’s been involved in several Twitter feuds, like a bizarre one with Sarah Palin. Azealia Banks’ hate finally caught the attention of Twitter admins for ‘abusive tweets and behavior” and she has since been suspended.

The World’s Oldest Person Died Today

At 116 years old, Susannah Mushatt Jones passed away. Born in 1899, the Alabama native had seen a whole century pass and then some. The internet is in awe of what this woman must have seen and endured in her great lifetime. Another centenarian,  Emma Morano-Martinuzzi is now the world’s oldest person, also 116 years old. So what IS the secret to a long life?

A Story of three smugglers and their $3M drug stash

This week three women touched down in O’Hare International Airport from a trip Japan. No one would ever guess they were carrying a buttload of opium and heroin worth over $3 million dollars in street prices. These cute little old ladies almost got away with it too, if it weren’t for those darned customs agents. They are each being held on $50,000 bond.

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: May 13, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

By now everyone has heard about the current water crisis in Flint, Michigan. The city’s drinking water has been contaminated with lead, making it harmful and potentially life-threatening to drink, and almost everyone is pointing fingers in an attempt to find someone to blame for this catastrophic event. All across the country, people have taken to social media to protest what they feel has been a complete failure on the part of Flint’s government. But it’s kind of hard to tell whether or not the situation is actually getting any better.

#FLINT: “a staggering level of ineptitude, if not criminal negligence.”

— Bette Midler (@BetteMidler) January 23, 2016

It’s a shame that one of the recent hostages is a Flint resident, and he had better water when he was captive than when he got home #TeamDl

— DL Hughley (@RealDLHughley) January 23, 2016

Photos of a local poster began circling the internet after being taken down by the State of Michigan due to backlash from the community. The poster–which featured two adorable babies bathing, along with messages confirming it was okay to wash your children in Flint water just as long as they didn’t accidentally drink it–is a shining example of just why everyone is so riled up. The situation is horrifying and negatively affecting some of the most helpless residents in Flint. Even the Girl Scouts of America have voiced their concerns, proving that this water crisis is an issue affecting everyone.

The government in Flint has been working to raise money and support for its city, even reaching out to President Obama in an attempt to have the Flint crisis declared a federal disaster so they can receive federal funding to try to remedy the situation. The President denied federal disaster status, but did give the city emergency funds of $5 million dollars. Unfortunately for Flint, that money boils down to almost nothing in the grand scheme of things, so Governor Rick Snyder has appealed his case to President Obama, hoping to have the status of the Flint emergency reconsidered. Some have estimated the city is going to need as much as $1 billion dollars in the upcoming year after looking at just how deep this lead-filled water problem goes.

The good news is people are stepping up to help the residents of Flint. Celebrities are reaching out and using their star power to donate money and water to the cause.

Pearl Jam donate $300,000 to city of Flint, Michigan amid water crisis: https://t.co/uNddI1WDsC pic.twitter.com/tWGeReyaAQ

— Consequence of Sound (@coslive) January 23, 2016

Big Sean Is Donating $10,000 To The Kids Of Flint — And You Can Help, Too https://t.co/gtMRv3wTDN

— MTV (@MTV) January 23, 2016

Jimmy Fallon donates $10,000 to Flint charity during city’s ongoing water crisis https://t.co/brHFjUKAJBpic.twitter.com/Jpe1Y57IbL

— TIME.com (@TIME) January 25, 2016

A firefighter in Chicago, who was horrified to hear about the water conditions in Flint, decided to start asking for water bottle donations, and has collected over 130 cases of water; he plans to drive them to Flint at the end of the week. Residents of Western Michigan have banded together to gather water testing kits, water filters, bottled water, and money to donate to the city in addition to sending over 200 volunteers to help hand out supplies to local Flint citizens with no access to clean drinking water. Even people outside of the Midwest have been helping out by starting dozens of GoFundMe pages to raise money for the city–and the results have been staggering.

It really is heartwarming to see how many people nation-wide are helping Flint without any reservations, which will be instrumental in sustaining the people of Flint until this crippling problem is resolved. Hopefully, with some hard work, financial support, and a new plan for handling the water supply, Flint residents will soon have the clean water they deserve. Until then, it’s time to keep the altruistic spirit of volunteerism alive and help out our friends in need.

Alexandra Simone

Alex Simone is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street and a student at The George Washington University, studying Political Science. She is passionate about law and government, but also enjoys the finer things in life like watching crime dramas and enjoying a nice DC brunch. Contact Alex at ASimone@LawStreetmedia.com

The post How Has the Nation Responded to Flint’s Cries for Help? appeared first on Law Street.

Would you drink this water?

Here’s what Flint, Michigan’s poison lead water looks like. pic.twitter.com/s2g2ml8UL4

— (´・ω・｀) (@_icze4r) January 15, 2016

Many citizens of Flint, Michigan are refusing to–and for good reason. The water supplied by the city of Flint to many residents has been contaminated with poisonous amounts of lead and other toxins for over two years. The safe level for lead content in drinking water, according to the CDC, is absolutely none. That’s why the EPA’s goal for public drinking water is zero parts per billion (ppb), and why 15 ppb is listed as their action level (the concentration at which water authorities are federally required to lower contamination).

So with these regulations from the Safe Drinking Water Act, why are some families reporting 25, 100, and even 200 ppb of lead detected in the tap water from their homes? The answer is shrouded in the intricacies of municipal water supply agreements and water main construction, which are enough to make anyone’s eyes glaze over. So let’s break down just how this ‘man-made disaster‘ began: with a corner-cutting move designed to save money.

It Began With a Plan

Flint, Michigan had been getting its tap water from Detroit for over 50 years. But in 2013, the Karegnondi Water Authority (KWA) began constructing a new pipeline to connect water from Lake Huron to Genessee County, which contains the Flint metropolitan area. This new project would provide water to Genessee and neighboring counties no longer rely on water piped in from Detroit.

A project like this is great news for towns like Flint, which could reduce their public water costs by procuring it locally while also creating jobs to construct and maintain the new system. So construction began on the KWA, and at this point in the story, no public officials or agencies have done anything wrong. That changes.

A Temporary Switch

You see, when this happened, Flint planned to switch to the new KWA pipelines when they finished construction in three years. But in the meantime, they still needed water, and rather than continuing to buy the Detroit water–a pre-treated and sanitary supply from Lake Huron–they switched sources to the Flint River. This switch was estimated to save about $5 million over less than two years.

The trouble was that the water sourced from the Flint River was 19 times more corrosive than the Lake Huron supply. Even after being treated and deemed acceptable, the water eroded the city’s pipes and water lines and accumulated iron, lead, and other metals from the material of the pipes.

By the time the water arrives at neighborhoods, businesses, and schools, the once-drinkable water is tinged brown from the iron, and carrying harmful levels of toxic chemicals. The most dangerous of which is lead.

Flint, Michigan, is suffering a major water crisis. Here’s how you can help. https://t.co/Z01vWiG8JLpic.twitter.com/ecJyIhEtkF

— CNN (@CNN) January 14, 2016

Permanent Health Effects

The presence of lead in drinking water is known to cause kidney problems and related issues in adults, but infants and children are subjected to the worst effects. Lead interferes with development such that children exposed to lead exhibit delays in mental and physical development are often severely impaired by the contaminant’s effects. In September 2015, according to a study performed by the Hurley Medical Center, the proportion of infants and children with above-average levels of lead in their blood nearly doubled since Flint switched its water source.

Given the extent of the problem, residents in Flint have very few options to stay safe. Many homeowners took to boiling large batches of water before bathing their children or giving them water to drink. While that process can help remove some impurities, it actually makes the issue of lead contamination worse. The city issued a ‘Boil Advisory‘ detailing how boiling water just increases the concentration of lead in the tap water.

The only choice left for thousands of residents is to purchase bottled water. The FDA regulates that a bottle of water can have no more than 5 ppb of lead, so bottled water is a safer option for concerned homeowners. For many, this cost is in addition to their water bill, which still may need to use for bathing, and washing dishes. Considering that Flint is often recognized for its poverty (in addition to being among the most dangerous cities in the United States), this burden is especially debilitating.

A Failed Response

After denying that the water in Flint presented a danger to its citizens for nearly two years while residents continuously complained about their water quality, Flint officials finally recognized the contamination problem. When trying to contain a public health epidemic such as this one, it’s important to know the scale of the problem. That seems like a pretty simple task– figure out which homes receive water from pipes made of lead, as those pipes are now corroded and cannot safely transmit water– but as with all things bureaucratic, it wasn’t nearly that simple.

The city government’s data on which houses are serviced by lead water lines was written down on 45,000 index cards stored in a filing cabinet in the city’s public utility building. In October of 2015, transferring this information into a digital spreadsheet was, according to Department of Public Works Director Howard Croft, “on our to-do list,” but only a quarter of the cards had been processed at that time.

Remember that $5 million number? That was the amount Flint expected to save with their water-source switch. The ultimate cost of that “money-saving” maneuver has been estimated at over $1.5 billion dollars by some, as officials evaluate the cost of completely renovating the Flint waterlines with lead-free pipes. That figure also doesn’t take into account any compensation for families and children affected by the contaminated water. The Governor of Michigan, Rick Snyder has now officially appealed to President Obama for a declaration of disaster and federal aid.

Whether Snyder and the state of Michigan receive the declaration and money they are hoping for, the damage to the people of Flint has already been done. Even as the water source is relocated, the lead pipes servicing Flint will still be compromised. A careless decision by local officials snowballed into a public health crisis of unprecedented scale in the area, and the youngest residents of Flint will pay the highest price.

Sean Simon

Sean Simon is an Editorial News Senior Fellow at Law Street, and a senior at The George Washington University, studying Communications and Psychology. In his spare time, he loves exploring D.C. restaurants, solving crossword puzzles, and watching sad foreign films. Contact Sean at SSimon@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post A Call for Help in Flint’s Toxic Water Emergency appeared first on Law Street.

If you’ve been following Law Street’s Crime in America 2015 city crime rankings you might have one big question: where are Flint and Chicago? Flint, Michigan was the #1 Most Dangerous City with a population under 200,000 last year, and preliminary data from the FBI indicated that it would remain so this time around, and reporting on Chicago’s violent crime pervades American media. So where are Flint and Chicago on these lists?

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE TOP 10 MOST DANGEROUS CITIES WITH POPULATIONS OVER 200,000.

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE TOP 10 MOST DANGEROUS CITIES WITH POPULATIONS UNDER 200,000.

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE TOP 10 SAFEST CITIES WITH POPULATIONS OVER 200,000.

First let’s look at Flint. It’s not because it isn’t still really dangerous–it very much is. It comes down to its population, though, and if the city had just 59 more residents it would have easily maintained its #1 Most Dangerous City ranking over Little Rock, Arkansas. According to the FBI, Flint’s population decreased by 1,691 last year, putting the city just 59 residents shy of the 100,000-person threshold that Law Street uses to rank the most dangerous mid-sized cities.

Flint has a violent crime rate of 1,908 per 100,000 people, which far exceeds Little Rock’s violent crime rate of 1,407. Flint’s murder rate clocks in at 48 per 100,000, while Little Rock is only at 18 per 100,000. Flint’s population statistics speak for themselves as well: the median household income is just $26,339, and almost 40 percent of the population lives below the poverty line.

If Flint had those 59 additional people it would definitely be the #1 Most Dangerous City in America–but that does not mean things aren’t getting better there. They absolutely are; this year’s crime statistics saw a dramatic decrease in violent crime in the city. Last year, Flint had a violent crime rate of 2,729 per 100,000 people, which means that its overall rate has dropped 30 percent. The murder rate dropped by quite a bit too, from about 62 per 100,000 people to 48 per 100,000 people. So while Flint is still incredibly dangerous, things are getting better there, just slowly.

Now to Chicago–another notable exception from the list of Most Dangerous Cities. The answer here is fairly simple. Chicago isn’t included in the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report from which our data is curated. According to the FBI, Chicago under-reports its crime data, so the numbers are simply missing from the FBI report, making it impossible to rank the Windy City in a uniform way with its like-size counterparts.

While Law Street’s statistics are definitive and it’s interesting to look at what cities make the list, it’s also very interesting to see which cities are missing. Flint and Chicago are two notable examples for two very different reasons.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Flint and Chicago Are Still Dangerous Despite Absence From Rankings appeared first on Law Street.

America is a nation of lists. We rate and rank colleges and universities, hospitals, school systems, governmental entities, college football teams, movies, songs (with a bullet), and just about anything else that matters to us, from the frivolous to the most serious.

And crime is one rating that really matters to all of us.

Law Street’s Crime in America utilizes the FBI’s comprehensive collection of crime statistics from 286 American cities to provide a valuable perspective on personal safety in the United States. The FBI releases these statistics annually, and in doing so it performs a significant public service. We at Law Street are engaged in a journalistic service of our own by analyzing and further disseminating the FBI’s results.

If the past is a guide, our Crime in America rankings will be met with criticism by cities with high crime rates and welcomed by those deemed safest. Scholars who rely on the FBI data as the starting point for their own analyses will nonetheless register their objections. Even the FBI hasn’t been spared this criticism, to the point where the agency now even publishes its own disclaimer.  We, too, repeat the FBI’s disclaimer.

Criminologists have received millions of dollars from the federal government in recent years to tell the FBI how it could do a better job of crime data gathering and dissemination – you can read one such report for yourself and see whether it is worth the $4.5 million that the Justice Department paid for it. Looking at that report, one thing that stands out is that the researchers could not easily come to terms with how to make the FBI’s reporting better or more meaningful. And that is not surprising, because crime is as much about perception as it is about reality. A city with some very safe streets may still rank among the most dangerous overall. And although rankings alone cannot tell the whole story, there is still a certain validity to them from a purely qualitative level. Where do you feel safer: strolling the streets of Flint, or Irvine?

In the end, the rankings are what they are – imperfect measures, but illuminating nevertheless. And although some cities may argue against them in order to protect tourism dollars – a few years ago, St. Louis business interests spent $500,000 on a PR campaign against the crime rankings – those same cities also use the rankings to their advantage, to argue for more resources with which to fight such high levels of crime. In fact, that is exactly what is happening in St. Louis. Once ranked Most Dangerous, it was the only city in the Top 10 this year where violent crime significantly dropped.

Acknowledging the limitations of the FBI data doesn’t mean the agency’s reporting is without great value. In fact, the crime data gathered by the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program is used by states and localities to target crime-fighting resources, and by the federal government to direct billions of dollars in federal taxpayer dollars to local police forces who urgently need the funding.  Without the FBI’s crime data, such federal programs could not exist; crime-fighting accountability would be weakened; and the public would be denied its right to know. That is why we rank.

Click here to read more Crime in America coverage.

John A. Jenkins

John A. Jenkins is Founder & CEO of Law Street Media. Contact John at jjenkins@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Why We Rank: The Public’s Right to Know appeared first on Law Street.