Measure 11 Information Center
In 1994, Oregon voters passed the ballot initiative Measure 11. Measure 11 imposes mandatory minimum sentences on 21 offenses. In addition, it requires juveniles charged with these crimes to be automatically treated as adults. By requiring mandatory minimums, Measure 11 has made Oregon overly dependent on incarceration as a solution to crime and public safety. Such an approach has proven to be wasteful, unfair and counterproductive.
Despite claims from its supporters that Measure 11 is responsible for a decrease in crime in Oregon, an increase in incarceration is not the main cause for such a decrease. Crime rates are decreasing throughout the nation. There are a variety of factors involved in this reduction. Other states have achieved similar or greater decreases in crime rate without resorting to increased incarceration. In fact, research has shown that states with higher than average incarceration rates experienced smaller declines in crime than states with lower than average incarceration rates.
There are alternatives to the one size fits all approach of Measure 11. In New York, a system was implemented based on evidence-based practices that reduced crime rates and decreased incidents of recidivism. Such programs have also been found to be more cost effective than Measure 11. Since the passage of Measure 11, Oregon's prison system has almost doubled. The state now spends more on its prison system than on higher education.
In addition, Measure 11 gives prosecutors too much discretion in determining sentences. These decisions are often made behind closed doors and without proper consideration of the individual circumstances of each case. Measure 11, therefore, effectively undermines the system of checks and balances required for a fair and effective criminal justice system.
Crime and public safety are complex issues that demand the implementation of a comprehensive and multifaceted approach. Measure 11 is not such an approach. Rather than get "tough on crime", it is time for Oregon to get smart on crime.
ISSUE NEWS
15 Years of Measure 11 No Cause for Celebration
Oregonian: Oregon Supreme Court Limits Measure 11 Sentences
The Register-Guard: Mandatory Sentences Tossed
Measure 11 Sentences Found Excessive by Oregon's Supreme Court
Measure 11 Driving Oregon's Prison Growth
PSJ PUBLICATIONS
Misguided Measures: The Outcomes and Impacts of Measure 11
The Mythical Relationship between Incarceration and Crime Rates
Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, Who's the Fairest of them All?
The Rand Report is Finally Available
An Interview with Emily Simon on Mandatory Minimums
REPORTS AND RESOURCES
Measure 11 Analysis (Oregon Criminal Justice Commission) This report seeks to avoid the heated debate surrounding Measure 11 and instead to accurately and comprehensively answer the question: What happens to individuals convicted of Measure 11? An earlier draft was released to much controversy, resulting in some changes to the final version.
Oregon Measure 11 Sentencing Reform: Implementation System Impact (Rand): "Without exception, prosecutors interviewed for the study acknowledged that the measure should not be applied in every eligible case, and that the measure, as written, provides overly long mandatory minimum sentences for many of the cases falling under its purview".
Crime Trends and Incarceration Rates in Oregon (Justice Strategies): "...a comparison of crime pattern and incarceration rates in Oregon with patterns in other key states shows that remarkable reduction in crime rates have occurred elsewhere without recourse to a huge and costly expansion of prison capacity".
Measure 11 Overview (Oregon Department of Corrections)
