Better data is needed to address hate crimes

Minnesotans have likely heard stories about local hate incidents: Swastikas or the N-word scrawled on a college building. An East African woman hit in the face with a beer mug for speaking her native language at a local restaurant. A black doll with a noose around its neck hanging in a high school hallway.

The incident-by-incident reporting is out there — but complete, accurate data about hate and bias crimes in Minnesota is lacking.

A recent Star Tribune news analysis of FBI data for the past 10 years revealed that, depending on the year, one-fourth to three-fourths of Minnesota's 441 law-enforcement agencies don't file annual hate-crime reports with the Bureau of Criminal Activity (BCA). That's despite the fact that local agencies are required to submit the reports under state statute. Between 2006 and 2015, about 30 to 50 local agencies reported an average of 130 bias incidents each year. But the analysis found that the number of agencies that participated ranged from a high of 321 in 2007 to just 87 two years later.

Data collected by the BCA is reported to the FBI. According to the news story, the federal agency says that state data are just one of many tools they use, and that data gaps don't stop them from fighting bias crimes. Still, as local anti-bias advocates point out, accurate numbers that reflect the real impact of the problem help make the case for more of those efforts.

The FBI's figures — ranging from 5,000 to 7,000 offenses reported nationally each year — are believed to be only a small portion of the total number. In contrast, the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), counted an average of nearly 260,000 hate crimes each year in an annual survey between 2004 and 2012.

Earlier this year, FBI Director James Comey called on all agencies to do a more aggressive job tracking hate crimes, as he initiated more training sessions to help officers recognize these crimes and learn more about investigating them. Clear guidelines are critical for cops so they know what to report and to whom. Police, community groups and victim advocacy groups can also expand joint efforts to increase community awareness and understanding.

A decade ago, this Editorial Board sounded the same alarm about spotty bias crime reporting. We noted then (and it still holds) that compiling crime data is not simply collecting numbers; it has real effect on public policy. Failure to report, and the resulting inaccurate picture of the problem, can translate into fewer resources directed at prevention and prosecution.