What Does Federal Oversight Do to Policing and Public Safety? Evidence from Seattle.
Abstract
Policing reform advocates have proposed increased oversight to improve quality and reduce officer misconduct. Opponents, however, fear that greater scrutiny of officers will increase crime and harm public safety. I examine a 2011 federal investigation into the Seattle Police Department, focusing on policing responses and the impact on serious crime. In response to heightened scrutiny from the investigation, officers significantly reduced stops, particularly traffic and suspicious activity stops. Stop reductions were larger in minority neighborhoods and among officers with higher pre-period arrest rates. After the investigation, stops rebounded but remained below pre-period levels in minority neighborhoods. Comparing neighborhoods that experienced larger versus smaller stop reductions, I find no detectable differences in serious crime, though the estimates are imprecise. I also find no significant differences in serious crime rates when comparing Seattle to jurisdictions without a federal investigation. These estimates can rule out large, but not modest, crime increases. My results suggest that increased oversight can reduce costly policing, particularly in minority neighborhoods, without significantly increasing serious crime. 