Title: Frontlash
Description: In the span of three decades, the U.S. has multiplied its prison population by a factor of six. The aim of my dissertation is to understand the political processes behind the transformation in American criminal justice. In analyzing this question from multiple vantage points--policy history, public opinion, media, and policy feedback--I offer a revisionist explanation for why crime policies became more punitive, showing how reaction to the success of the Civil Rights Movement became embedded in a separate policy process. The punitive policy intervention was not merely an exercise in crime fighting; it both responded to and moved the agenda on racial equality. In particular, I present the concept of frontlash --the process by which formerly defeated groups may become dominant in light of the development of a new issue campaign. In the case of crime policy, opponents of civil rights shifted the "locus of attack" by injecting crime onto the agenda. Strategic entrepreneurs reframed racial discord as criminal and argued that crime legislation would be a panacea to racial unrest. This strategy both imbued crime with race and depoliticized racial struggle, a formula which foreclosed earlier alternatives to address the 'root causes.'

Using a multi-method approach, incorporating qualitative historical analysis, quantitative analysis of public opinion, and content analysis of the media, I find that punitive crime policies and public preferences are rooted in a racialized definition of the problem, tracing the origins to conservative issue entrepreneurs, who turned the crime issue into political currency to make an end-run around civil rights. The elite campaign had consequences for media coverage and public opinion, such that the general crime problem became concentric with the black problem, and this symbiotic association persisted after activity subsided from legislative agenda. Part two shows how the policy changes in this critical juncture nourished institutions and a durable constituency. What the literature usually treats as independent trajectories--liberalizing civil rights and more punitive criminal justice--were part of the same political stream that would alter significantly the federal government's role in crime policy, American political development, and race in post-civil rights America.