When the Mayor Speaks . . . Mayoral Crime Control Rhetoric in the Top U.S. Cities

• Author: Nancy E. Marion,Willard M. Oliver
• Published date: 01 July 2013
• Date: 01 July 2013
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0887403412446993
• Subject Matter: Articles

Criminal Justice Policy Review

24(4) 473 –491

© 2012 SAGE Publications

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0887403412446993

cjp.sagepub.com

446993CJP24410.1177/0887403412446993Mar

ion and OliverCriminal Justice Policy Review

1University of Akron, Akron, OH, USA

2Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX, USA

Corresponding Author:

Nancy E. Marion, University of Akron, Department of Political Science, 302 Buchtel Common, Akron,

OH 44325-1904, USA.

Email: nmarion@uakron.edu

When the Mayor Speaks

. . . Mayoral Crime Control

Rhetoric in the Top U.S.

Cities: Symbolic or

Tangible?

Nancy E. Marion1 and Willard M. Oliver2

Abstract

Past research on presidential and gubernatorial rhetoric related to crime shows that

both presidents and governors use symbolic statements in their crime rhetoric. To

date, no research has analyzed how mayors employ political language related to crime.

As mayors are politically closer to the people and have a greater impact on local crime

policy, it is important to understand the nature of how mayors use symbolic language

about crime. The current study draws on hypotheses derived from research related

to presidents and governors and applies them to the top 50 city executives. A content

analysis of 6 years (2005-2010) of mayors’ State of the City speeches was conducted

to assess how mayors employ the issue of crime in their political communication.

Overall, the results suggest that mayors employ crime rhetoric in a different manner

from other executives when speaking to their constituents about crime.

Keywords

criminal justice policy, crime control policy, symbolic politics

I’m the one who gets called up about a problem. I’m the one who gets called up

about the street lighting and the abandoned car. I’m the one who gets blamed if

the police don’t arrive. I’m the one they blame if a city truck is broken down.

Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley

Article

474 Criminal Justice Policy Review 24(4)

Introduction

Crime is an issue that receives sizeable attention from executives at all levels, includ-

ing presidents, governors, and mayors. These executives often mention crime issues

in their speeches as they respond to citizen concerns about the safety of their com-

munities. Many times, executive rhetoric about crime is tangible and describes spe-

cific anticrime policies or ideas designed to address a particular concern. These

tangible policies will be implemented, typically through some program, aimed at

creating change. Other times, speeches on crime by executives contain largely sym-

bolic language. This is a communication that is designed to satisfy the public’s need

for action or to reassure them that something is being done about the problem,

although not providing any specific program that will result in substantive changes to

existing policy (Edelman, 1964, 1971, 1988; Elder & Cobb, 1983; Oliver, 2002, 2003;

Stolz, 1983). By using symbolic language, the speaker is appearing to address a prob-

lem when in fact they are not.

Previous studies show that executives often rely on symbolic language rather than

tangible language when discussing crime and violence (Marion, 1994b, 1997; Marion

& Farmer, 2003; Marion, Smith, & Oliver, 2009; Oliver, 2002, 2003). Some of these

studies focus on presidents, and find that although different presidents speak about

different crime related issues over time, or have different policy approaches to solving

a particular problem, they each have a significant amount of symbolic rhetoric included

in their public communications (Marion, 1994a, 1994b, 1997; Marion & Farmer,

2003; Oliver, 2002, 2003). Other work focuses on gubernatorial rhetoric on crime, and

shows that governors also rely on symbolic rhetoric to portray their concern about

crime to voters (Marion, Smith, & Oliver, 2009).

Another executive official that must address crime issues are mayors. These elected

officials are considered to be closer to the people, and therefore often the ones that citi-

zens turn to when a problem arises, as exampled by the epigraph quoting Chicago

Mayor Richard Dailey. Often, presidents and governors are “out of reach” for most

citizens, but a mayor appears to be more approachable to the average person

(Scheingold, 1991). In that regard, mayors are thought to give voice to underrepre-

sented interests among voters (Schragger, 2006). This makes their responses to crime

and violence even more meaningful to voters (Waller, 2008). To date, there has been

no research on the use of symbolic language by mayors with regard to crime issues.

The current study seeks to fill the void in the literature and analyze the use of symbolic

language by the mayors of the largest cities across the United States to determine the

patterns and trends of rhetoric on crime control. The study applies the findings on

presidential and gubernatorial language to mayoral speeches to ascertain if similar pat-

terns hold true. In sum, this study attempts to determine whether mayors use symbolic

rhetoric in ways similar to presidents and governors, or if they rely on different meth-

ods to communicate to their constituents.