Facts and rhetoric are frequently misaligned when it comes to anti-poverty policy. This is especially true in the criminal justice arena, where public perceptions of crime have always been more important to policymakers than what the evidence shows. This translates to policies that are fear-based, rather than evidence-based: longer prison sentences for more offenses, more barriers for returning citizens, and fewer avenues for early release. What would it look like if the Show-Me state lived up to its motto and followed the data? Smarter responses to public safety concerns come from every corner of the criminal legal system, and beyond. Oftentimes, the most impactful solutions are those furthest “upstream,” such as focusing on public education, childcare, and increasing support for low-income families. We must be willing to challenge the dominant narratives about our communities while still centering the real concerns individuals have about crime and public safety. This Weekly Perspective examines the gap between the public’s perception of crime and the reality of crime, as well as looking at what policy solutions are actually backed by evidence.
Crime Trends and Mandatory Minimums
Americans tend to believe crime is up, even when official data shows it is down. Media coverage and political rhetoric play a large part in this misunderstanding, creating a feedback loop when constituents pressure their elected officials to act on these perceived increases in crime. In 23 of 27 Gallup surveys conducted since 1993, at least 60% of U.S. adults have said there is more crime nationally than the previous year, despite the downward trend in crime rates during most of that period (see Crime: Gallup Historical Trends). According to a comprehensive analysis by the Council on Criminal Justice, recently released data shows that the national arrest rate in 2024 was 30% lower than in 2019, yet Missouri lawmakers continue to call for longer prison sentences, supposedly in response to public safety concerns. In the 2026 legislative session, there have been eight bills filed that would specifically expand prison sentences. Governor Kehoe, in his state of the state address, expressed support for some of the most drastic of these bills, namely a trio of Senate bills that would establish minimum percentages to be served across all felony classes (SB 882, SB 894, and SB 1294). On the House side, two bills (HB 2637 and HB 2256) were given an early hearing in the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, January 28. You can sign on to our Call to Action to oppose this legislation. In a time of historic crime lows, we should be exploring ways to minimize our state’s prison population, not add to it.
The data shows that people committing violent crimes in Missouri are already serving a substantial portion of their sentence before returning to the community on parole or conditional release. In fact, in many cases, people are staying in Missouri prisons longer than they were in previous years. People designated as a dangerous felony offender (defined in RSMO 556.061) are already required to serve at least 85% of their prison term, and DOC data from FY ‘23 shows that the average person sentenced for a class A, B, or C violent felony served over 80% of their sentence before being released. The average time spent in prison for these offenses increased from 9.7 years in FY ‘16 to 11.4 years in FY ‘25. The evidence paints a very different picture than those citing a need for longer sentences.
Decades of research show that harsh sentences are not an effective crime deterrent, and a more effective deterrent is the certainty that you will be caught. However, in 2022, 64% of violent crimes reported to police in Missouri were not solved. This mirrors national trends, which show that crime clearance rates are at their lowest levels since 1993, according to FBI data. There are clearly other avenues to pursue to address public safety concerns, rather than doubling down on increasing sentences when the Missouri Department of Corrections is already facing significant staffing shortages and other challenges. When it comes to moving away from mandatory minimums, Missouri has a roadmap to learn from: over 30 states have reformed or repealed their mandatory minimum sentences in the past two decades while maintaining public safety. In 2017, Louisiana repealed many of its mandatory minimums. In the first six months alone, the state saved $12 million. The state’s prison population has dropped to a level not seen since the 1990s, and the state has reinvested savings into crime-reduction and victim support programs.
Evidence-Based Policies
There are many policies across the criminal legal system that are backed by evidence and data. Since the certainty of punishment is a much more effective deterrent than anything else, policies that would improve crime clearance rates can be an effective path forward. Last year, HB 225 was passed and signed into law. This bipartisan bill created a grant program to support investigation and crime analysis, enhance data collection, and establish new reporting requirements to track the state’s rate of unsolved violent crime.
When it comes to sentencing reform, there is clear data that demonstrates that age is one of the most significant predictors of reoffending: arrest rates drop to just more than 2 percent in people aged 50 to 65 years old, and to almost zero percent for those older than 65. Geriatric parole and compassionate release policies are proven strategies to provide early release mechanisms to those who have the lowest risk of recidivism, but need some of the highest levels of care while incarcerated: the cost to incarcerate older individuals is double that of younger individuals, due to increased health care costs.
Some evidence-backed solutions require an investment in populations often neglected in our state. For system-involved young people, cognitive behavioral therapy, mentorship programs, and wraparound coordination of care are all proven strategies to reduce recidivism and promote positive outcomes. Such policies can be difficult to garner political support because of the start-up costs, but policymakers should weigh that against the lifetime cost savings from reduced future incarceration and increased economic activity from young people connected with such programs.
So what does it mean to take an evidence-based approach to criminal legal policy in Missouri? To start with, it means taking a step back from punitive policies such as mandatory minimums that do nothing to make our communities safer, and are instead actually harming Missourians by causing more family separation and financial hardship, and putting greater strains on a DOC that is already in crisis. Making policy decisions backed by actual evidence means looking at what the data shows, not just the news headlines. It will also require lawmakers to be open to trying something different than what our state has typically done, and potentially making up-front financial investments in solutions that will bear cost-savings down the road.
Take Action
Tell Lawmakers to Oppose Mandatory Minimums: Call to Action
Further Reading
Crime in the U.S.: Key questions answered | Pew Research Center
Incarceration and Crime: A Weak Relationship – The Sentencing Project
Five Things About Deterrence | National Institute of Justice
English 
Spanish