Beginning a new year at Lehigh comes with a unique set of challenges, from buying books to organizing classes and from arranging housing, to getting involved in clubs. Amid all this complete chaos, we also need to find time for our classes, sports, homework, studying, and of course, socializing.  In this season of mayhem, political involvement is probably not a high priority for the average student, myself included.  So when I was asked to write a story on local Lehigh County candidate Scott Ott, I put aside these reservations and went to see him speak on campus.  I was immediately impressed by the message he was spreading.

Nobody would doubt that there are major political debates taking place, and that political lines are now changing in movements that have never before occurred in our generation’s lifetime. Of course, many of us feel that in the grand scheme of national politics, we each as an individual serve very little importance. Not a single one of us could stand up to Obama, Clinton, Pelosi, Bush, or any national candidate and tell them that we strongly disagree with their actions, nor could we express our approval to them directly. They are too distant from us.  It is simply impossible, or so we are made to think.

Scott Ott is amongst the newest breed of politicians to emerge, known as “common sense” candidates, who believe that government is too distant from the people and should be made more local. Their promise is simple: bring increased accountability and responsibility to the government, one step at a time.

Scott Ott is currently running for the position of Lehigh County Executive against long-time incumbent Don Cunningham. Scott’s plan is to increase the fiscal responsibility of the county government by taking control of the budget, and in doing so, help decrease our growing national debt.

Lehigh County is currently $20 million dollars in debt and the budget for the upcoming year, as currently posted, will have fully exhausted all its reserve funds. By cutting down on unnecessary and inefficient spending, Ott hopes to prevent a major 2011 tax hike.

This amount of money, according to Ott, is within the control of the local people, as compared to the futility of attacking a federal deficit currently on the order of trillions of dollars. Ott plans to accomplish these cuts by approaching department heads within the county to find methods of achieving across-the-board savings and increasing efficiency. This will include holding all departments more accountable for remaining true to their budget than in the past – an idea that is unheard of and unprecedented in many parts of the government.

Additionally, Ott plans to cut unnecessary programs, such as economic development offices and tree planting programs, at least until the economy improves and revenue can cover their expense. While these actions may initially seem reckless, only three years ago, Lehigh County spent $60 million less than the current budget and was no worse off for it.

These millions of dollars are not all from Lehigh County; in fact, only one quarter of Lehigh County’s revenue is directly collected through taxes, the rest is “pass-through money” which is collected by various counties, given to the state, and then distributed by the state back to the counties along with mandates on how it must be spent. In many instances, provided funds are not sufficient to cover the expenses of mandated programs. On this major issue, Ott says, “I am going to stand up to the governor in those situations and say ‘We are not going to spend this extra money.’”

I challenged Ott to explain the importance of these issues for Lehigh University students, who live in the county adjacent to Lehigh county.  He confidently responded that success in Lehigh County will spur the election of similar, “common sense candidates” in neighboring counties – eventually influencing state and federal politics as well.

If local governments started balancing their budgets and preventing tax increases, neighboring regions would be foolish not to adopt similar practices. And this responsibility would have no choice but spread to the state and beyond, because citizens of this great nation would not accept anything otherwise. Ott believes that we can take control of our federal government, we can stand up to major political forces, and we can do this by taking control of government on a local, tangible level.

Consider this: If the federal government is debating a major issue, this will not likely have an immediate daily impact on your life. Even if you feel very strongly on this issue or are directly affected by it, most likely you will never get the chance to stand, testify, and debate before Congress. If, on the other hand, your town decides to build a road through your backyard, you’re not going to miss that next town council meeting to voice your opinion.  Ott wants to see more opportunities for people to stand up and enforce accountability in government.

There can be a change in politics – a move away from a system of elected officials who act irresponsibly and against the will of the people, towards a new breed of politicians through the election of principled people in local races. And the role of young adults, college students especially, is vital in making this change. If we become involved, then the outcomes may be surprising. According to Ott, “It’s not that we’re apathetic, it’s just that we think we can’t win.

Even for those outside of Lehigh County, including most Lehigh Students, there are major issues lying in wait. One such issue is a sales tax increase. Currently, the Pennsylvania sales tax is set at 6%.  However, pending legislation in Harrisburg, each county could gain the option to increase that tax by one percentage point to a 7% sales tax. This amounts to a 16.66% tax increase; and is rumored to be a matter of particular interest for the mayor of Bethlehem.

For those of us who feel too busy to get involved, Ott has some advice.  “Twenty to thirty years from now, you will never remember what you got in that science course. You will never remember your grade in English Literature or what the paper was about that seems so important right now. You’ll never remember this stuff; it will all become literally meaningless to you. Once you get that diploma, all of that just kind of fades into insignificance. What you will remember is the real stuff that you did, the way you got involved in a cause that was bigger than yourself.”  We should all should take this advice and get involved in important causes, stand firm for what we believe in, and make a change for the better in our lives, our school, our local government, and our great federal republic.

When many people gather to live together in close proximity, it is inevitable that there will be crime. Such holds true for the Lehigh Valley, where the most urban areas have a pressing problem with a rise in gang activity and the violent crime that is coupled with it. Crime is not only a serious concern for the safety of people like us already living in the Lehigh Valley, but it is a potential problem as it lowers the quality of life and reduces the attractiveness of the area to families, workers, and prospective students of the nearby universities. Distinguishing the Lehigh Valley as an area increasingly prone to crime is the fact that it lies within two driving hours of the major metropolitan areas of Philadelphia and New York City. While the externalities from these cities’ crime activity are responsible for a significant portion of the crime in the valley, they are not the cause of all of it.

The most consistent and comprehensive source for crime data required for an accurate assessment is obtained through the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The FBI sorts crime data into eight indices, which are the acts “considered most likely to be reported to police and, as a result, are used nationally as a basis for comparison of criminal activity. The offenses are murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny/theft, motor-vehicle theft and arson,” (Pennsylvania State Police). These principal crimes are then divided into two subcategories: violent crimes and property crimes. Violent crimes include the offenses of murder, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault, while property crimes are the offenses of burglary, larceny-theft, and motor vehicle theft. The counts of crime are normalized for comparison across cities by computing their rate per 100,000 residents. These categories will be the basis for a majority of the crime assessment in this article, but it is important to take into account that the data may be less than the actual number of crimes, as not all crimes committed are reported to police.

The general state of crime in the Lehigh Valley can be assessed by looking at the three major cities in the area: Allentown, Bethlehem and Easton. Allentown and Bethlehem have increasing or steady levels of violent crime in recent years, while Easton has seen a drop. Furthermore, while Bethlehem and Easton have maintained violent and property crime rates below the state and national average, Allentown has not.

In fact, the number of murders in Allentown has more than quadrupled from 5 in 1980 to 21 in 2007. Forcible rapes, robberies and aggravated assault have all increased as well, prompting the total number of violent crimes in Allentown to jump from 321 in 1980 to 870 in 2007. This is a troubling 171% increase in only 27 years, approximately a 6.3% increase per year. If this trend continues, it is projected that there will be 1074 violent crimes committed in Allentown in 2010.

Unfortunately, this trend has been echoed by the city of Bethlehem. While the number of reported rapes has remained relatively constant since 1999, murders, robberies and assaults have increased. As shown in the table, the total of violent crimes has not increased steadily, but has increased from 227 in 1999 to 270 in 2007. Data for the year 2006 and 2008 has not yet been made available by the FBI.

Year     Murder     Rape     Robbery     Assault     Total Violent Crime

1999     3     21     84     119     227

2000     3     13     93     113     222

2001     4     14     76     155     249

2002     2     31     98     114     245

2003     1     20     94     75     190

2004     1     24     83     115     223

2005     2     17     114     135     268

2006     N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A     N/A

2007     6     24     100     140     270

(Violent Crime in the City of Bethlehem)

Property crimes should also be considered when evaluating the current crime situation in the Lehigh Valley. Following the trend of violent crimes, the total number of reports of property crimes has increased in Allentown in recent years, from 4,946 in 1999 to 5,379 in 2007. This is largely due to an increase in the number of burglaries and larceny-thefts cases; the reported number of burglaries in Allentown has increased 20% since 1999, while the number of larceny-theft cases has increased 7%.

Contrary to Allentown, Bethlehem and Easton have seen a decrease in the total number of Property Crimes since 1999. Cases of burglary, motor vehicle theft, and arson in Bethlehem have all fallen since 1999, at 10%, 3%, and 46%, respectively. In Easton, however, only cases of burglary and larceny-theft have decreased in recent years. While these crimes have seen 46% and 12% drops, motor vehicle thefts and arson cases have risen 47% and 30% since 1999.

With homeland security receiving an increasing amount of press in recent years, it is understandable that there has been less attention focused on local crime. For example, on Governor Rendell’s website, even though he is the head of The Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency, there is nothing listed under his agenda pertaining to making Pennsylvania a safer place to live or working to decreasing crime rates. This does not do justice to the fact that many long-term residents of Pennsylvania and the Lehigh Valley are concerned that crime is taking over their towns. In a quality-of-life poll conducted by The Morning Call, more than 54% of respondents said that they believe life in Lehigh Valley is getting worse, up from 48% in 2007 (Drobnyk). This is significant because crime has a direct influence on residents’ judgment of the quality of life in the area. Furthermore, only 25% of residents in the Lehigh and Northampton counties surveyed in 2008 said that they think life in the Lehigh Valley is getting better. This is the lowest percentage since The Morning Call began its annual quality-of-life poll in 2003. Even though 81% of people gave local law enforcement a rating of excellent or good, nearly 33% of residents polled by The Morning Call said they are very concerned with becoming a victim of crime. This figure has been rising steadily over the past five years, as less than 20% of residents said the same in 2003 (Drobnyk). If the Lehigh Valley wants to continue attracting families and workers into its community and economy, then it needs to tackle the issue of crime to remain an attractive place to live.

Furthermore, it is widely acknowledged that, like Philadelphia, Lehigh Valley cities have struggled with crime in recent years. Despite Allentown, Bethlehem, and Easton having lower crime rates in every front in 2007, Allentown tied its record high in homicides in 2007 with 21, and Easton and Bethlehem have seen an increase in gang activity. This rise in Easton and Bethlehem is definitely a concern, because gangs have the ability to easily migrate from city to city depending on how much pressure they are receiving from the law enforcement agents there. Thus, as Bethlehem Police Lt. Robert Righi, who serves as head of his department’s criminal investigations unit, reports, “[gang activity has] become more of a regional issue rather than a local issue,” (Falsone). Consequently, it is crucial that all of the Lehigh Valley support efforts against the infiltration of such activity into the region, and be open to changes in policing strategies, especially as the dynamic of the valley changes.

For upperclassmen at Lehigh, you may remember that in 2006 the announcement of the construction of a new Casino in Bethlehem was met by mixed feelings. While some argued that it would stimulate the lagging local economy, others saw it as a catalyst for increased gang activities and violent crimes. While there is justification for both sides of the argument, it is irrefutable that, historically, casinos have had connections with organized crime. One study analyzed crime data collected from all 3,165 U.S. counties from 1977 to 1996 by looking at local crime rates before and after casinos opened. The study found that crime began to rise after the first year, slowly at first and then at an increasing rate. Crime continued to rise until it had easily surpassed what it would have been if the casino had never opened. “By the fifth year of operation, robberies were up 136%; aggravated assaults, 91%; auto theft, 78%; burglary, 50%; larceny, 38%; and rape, 21%. Controlling for other factors, 8.6% of property crimes and 12.6% of violent crimes were attributed to casinos,” (Morrin). Furthermore, the conductor of the study found that “crime rates didn’t rise in neighboring counties while they soared in casino counties – [which is] evidence that casinos create crime locally and don’t merely attract it from somewhere else,” (Morrin). Despite these published findings, the casino is scheduled to open by 2009. In an attempt to assuage a rise in crime, Bethlehem should increase the number of officers on patrol in the area around the casino, if not assign one officer to be stationed there permanently. The town should also make sure that the casino employs legitimate security personnel to assist in the local police department’s efforts to mitigate crime, and encourage a continuous exchange of information.

“On the [national] political front, crime has fallen way behind issues such as Iraq, health care and gas prices, not to mention the meltdown of our financial system,” (Jones). The United States’ economy has now entered a recession, and in times of negative economic growth people are more likely to be unemployed, become desperate, and resort to criminal activity. Elected officials, police and community members need to take an active role in protecting their Lehigh Valley communities, such as South Bethlehem, and provide a safe environment for all residents. The Lehigh Valley is a unit, and “Allentown’s problem today could be Easton’s problem tomorrow” (Falsone). It is thus imperative that the Lehigh Valley as a whole takes the initiative and continues to not tolerate crime.

Works Cited

¬Callaway, Brian. “Lehigh County may help pay for more police: Executive Cunningham wants to give $1 million to localities to fight crime.” McClatchy-Tribune Business News. Washington: 12 February 2008.

Drobnyk, John. “Optimism tanking: Valley residents have deep concerns about crime, the economy.” McClatchy-Tribune Business News. Washington: 16 May, 2008.

Falsone, Nick. “The battleground: Gangs rooted in NYC; shared intelligence key to fighting back.” The Express Times. 2 June 2003.

Federal Bureau of Investigation. “Uniform Crime Reports.”

Jones, Ashby. “Crime Hasn’t Dropped as Much as Our Interest in Talking About It.” The Wall

Street Journal. 2 October 2008.

Office of the Governor. “Governor Rendell’s Agenda.”

Morrin, Richard. “Casinos and Crime: The Luck Runs Out.” The Washington Post. 11 May 2006.

NBC 10. “Residents Say ‘Best Place to Live’ Title No Longer Applies.” 19 August 2008.

Pennsylvania State Police. “Crime Index Offenses Drop 2.2% In 2007: Overall Number of Crimes Reported in Pennsylvania Also Decrease.” Harrisburg: 9 October 2008.

The academic world is inundated with discrimination, oppression, and hate crimes. Nary does a day go by when these atrocities are not discussed, decried, or otherwise defamed. However, one kind of abuse is rarely mentioned: religious. Sometimes the persecution of Muslims is disparaged, but these critiques are usually more politically than religiously motivated.

(more…)