Will 'Tough-on-Crime' Derail the California Budget?
Published July 22, 2009 @ 05:43AM PT
Hours after California lawmakers reached a tentative agreement on a budget deal Monday night to begin the process of bailing the struggling state out of debt, Republicans balked at the details behind $1.2 billion in anticipated cuts to the prison budget.
The plan would send some sick elderly prisoners to non-prison hospitals, transfer some non-violent prisoners to house arrest for the last year of their sentence and shorten sentences for non-violent prisoners who earn a GED. A sentencing commission would review the state's policies and recommend adjustments that aren't such a budget drain. These are sensible reforms, and it's a shame that it takes a budget crisis to bring them about. But we'll take progress any way we can get it, and the enemies of sensible prison policy will stop it any way they can - usually by screaming about how 'dangerous' these non-violent prisoners will be when they get on the street.
"Budget negotiations depend on the good faith actions of all parties," Assembly Republican leader Sam Blakeslee of San Luis Obispo said in a statement.
A proposal to release inmates early was "never discussed or agreed to by Republicans," he said. "We made it abundantly clear during negotiations that such policies would endanger the public and were unacceptable."
Leigh Graham wrote yesterday about the deep cuts proposed across the California system, and I share her sadness over for the many Californians who will be harmed by cuts to health insurance, public schools and public housing. It upsets me even more that one of the few lines in the budget that could be improved through some serious cuts - the bloated and overcrowded warehouses of state prisons - is among the hardest to cut.
I've written before about the budget woes forcing states (including Kentucky, Washington, Michigan, Alabama and North Carolina) to reconsider sentencing and prison policy. As I said above, it's a shame that it's the budget - rather than compassion or increased awareness of alternatives to incarceration - that bring us to these crossroads, but money is often at the root of reform.
These cuts and reforms are among the best hopes we have for holistic sentencing improvements in our country, and we may need to wait a few years for the cutbacks to have a statistical impact. Shortening sentences and offering incentives and alternatives to incarceration are smart policy. They don't increase the crime rate, they decrease it by providing people a way out of the system. It would be a grave mistake for California to miss this opportunity.
Share this Post
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
EmailRelated Posts
-
Massachusetts Steps Away from Mandatory Minimums
-
Shipping Prisoners Out of Sight
-
Early Release Is an Easy Target
Comments (20)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Author
-
Matt has worked and volunteered in various capacities in criminal justice reform for several years. When he's not blogging, he works as the Online Communications Manager at the Innocence Project. Views expressed here are Matt's, and don't represent the positions of the Innocence Project.
Featured Criminal Justice Actions
-
-
-
Overturn the Texas Prison Book Ban
196 People
-
Overturn the Texas Prison Book Ban
This is a great post to accompany the one I wrote yesterday. I'm going to post it in comments over at my place!
Posted by Leigh Graham on 07/22/2009 @ 09:36AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
It's sad when a government would choose to keep it's non-violent constituents locked away ( to keep people 'safe' ) rather than lead the way toward decreasing bureaucratic waste, fixing it's long-term budget crisis or treating the people who elected them as responsible adults.
I hope the people of California are listening to what their elected officials are telling them and - more importantly - act appropriately during their next election.
Posted by Fred Frankenberg on 07/22/2009 @ 09:58AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
This is something the "tough-on-___" types get wrong about many things. You can't get out of a trap without a way out of the trap AND without the world outside of the trap being better or at least easier in which to function than the world inside the trap. Doesn't matter if you're talking prisons or welfare or whatever else. This is why "tough-on" stances by themselves don't work and especially not when they tend to get what's "criminal" so wrong it's painful. Someone using pot in their own home is "criminal" but we're going to leave stuff like DV, child abuse, rape, and white collar crimes under investigated, fail to support the victims of the violent crimes on this list, and (for the violent crimes on the list) try to prove the victim guilty even more so than the alleged perpetrator and even set up our system to racially profile, and prosecute more heavily among some groups than others. What kind of "criminal justice" or even generic "justice" system is this?
Furthermore, for a former criminal, even someone who really was one in the most honest sense to be able to reform, society has to be willing to give him or her another chance - which means things like being willing to give them housing and employment. Things very hard to obtain with a criminal record, especially if it goes beyond misdemeanor or includes certain types of offenses at all. Which totally overlooks that, YES, some do learn their lessons and repent or reform whichever you'd like to call it.
And as I said to Leigh on the other blog - it's not like California hasn't seen this mess (any of it) coming. It's been brewing at least 25 or so years. Might as well deal with it now that it's bit them squarely in the rear - well, as long as they bother to deal with it rationally and appropriately.
Posted by Danetta Amschler on 07/22/2009 @ 10:53AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Does anyone else find it interesting that the most loving, giving, caring, compassionate people on the face of the planet when it come to helping those who are suffering elsewhere can be so heartless when dealing with our own?
Posted by Thomas Kinney on 07/22/2009 @ 07:14PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
You've noticed that too? As far as I can figure, it's nothing but blatant hypocrisy - and for the most part it seems that it's by choice. Choices like chosen ignorance - like that people here "choose to be poor" or they "choose to live lives of crime" (as if some of what we punish as "crime" really should be considered "criminal" or that OTOH some of what's not treated as criminal really is all that innocent). Anything to justify massive efforts to help people in countries most people have never heard of before some typically celebrity sponsored charity event while actively working to ignore what's going on between their home and work - if not literally on the doorsteps of their homes and workplaces.
Posted by Danetta Amschler on 07/22/2009 @ 08:57PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
The reason why so many are helping other countries is simply that doing something is USA, will be more costly due to the burocracy and economics involved. One will spend more money in setting up for non-profit, keeping up with paperwork, taxes and all other requirements rather than buying the most needed supplies. It is also easier to control monnies outside since you have less channels to go through.
There are also the "taboo" issues that celebs will not touch because of repercutions on their livehood; blacklisting, pressure etc.
Let's keep in mind that on a dollar donation to a US organization, only 25 to 35 cents will truly go to the cause itself. By the way... Non-Profit has evolved into big business!
Posted by Michele Queyroy on 08/10/2009 @ 10:27AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
"Follow the money" of the mass industrial prison complex growth and the profiteers in all this. It's time for Michael Moore to do a documentary on "Prison Profiteers". It's not about people and humanity, it's all about $$$'s for those who profit by all this destruction.
Posted by camille tilley on 07/23/2009 @ 09:04AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I like your thinking and agree on all counts but I am afraid Mr. Moore will never touch this one. Too much risk that the money trail will lead to his political buddies.
Posted by Thomas Kinney on 07/23/2009 @ 06:19PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Its amazing to me that someone else actually understands the economics of "political" decisions that affect the laws our Congressmen and Senators enact. These PACS and "carpetbaggers" that run and invest in the companies that support that "Prison Industrial Complex" invest Millions to get these laws that enslave the masses. It is entirely based upon profits for their retirement packages.... And...you are correct Thomas...can't let the money trail lead back to your buddies.
Posted by mark schmanke on 07/25/2009 @ 03:58AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Our prisons are overcrowded, single cells are occupied with two inmates. The food is getting worse due to the prison cuts. Unfortunately my husband is in a Calif prison and is wrongfully convicted, so these changes won't effect him, but honestly to have issues releasing sick elderly prisoners to non prison hospitals, shorten sentences for non violent offenders. Its shameful that we care more about animal rights than the rights of human beings! Teri Vanderberg
Posted by teri vanderberg on 07/23/2009 @ 11:39AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
My father is in a california prison. He stays in a room with another man, meant to house only one person. And sometimes they only get two meals a day because of "cutbacks." Release men from prison, please. I spend many a weekend eating lunch surrounded by these so called "dangerous" men. Many men are in for non-violent crimes, if you let them out they are not going to start killing people. If shortening sentencing means that my dad gets to eat three meals a day again and not be forced into a tiny cell with one other person, then prison cutbacks seem like an okay thing. Prison cutbacks (if they manifest themselves in the form of releasing inmates early instead of overcrowding the prison) are a better solution than cutting welfare and increasing tutition.
Posted by teri vanderberg on 07/23/2009 @ 06:56PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
The post above is a double post, please ignore, I accidentally posted while logged into my mothers account. Thanks, and please read:
My father is in a california prison. He stays in a room with another man, meant to house only one person. And sometimes they only get two meals a day because of "cutbacks." Release men from prison, please. I spend many a weekend eating lunch surrounded by these so called "dangerous" men. Many men are in for non-violent crimes, if you let them out they are not going to start killing people. If shortening sentencing means that my dad gets to eat three meals a day again and not be forced into a tiny cell with one other person, then prison cutbacks seem like an okay thing. Prison cutbacks (if they manifest themselves in the form of releasing inmates early instead of overcrowding the prison) are a better solution than cutting welfare and increasing tutition. - Madison
Posted by Madison Vanderberg on 07/23/2009 @ 08:09PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
How many innocent people are going to have to serve a miserable life behind bars? It is appalling to me that a number of murderers in my state of WA get less than 10 years of incarceration, but my uncle wrongly convicted gets life. He is living in a cell meant to be for one person, meals have been cut, staffing cut which allows less time to see the outside world. Isn't this treating them like animals? PLEASE release some of the non-violent people from the overcrowded CA prisons. AND better yet.... Hear the cases of the wrongfully convicted people, so they can return to their families and be productive citizens helping, not hindering our economy.
Posted by jennifer ward on 07/23/2009 @ 08:42PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
This brings up yet another good point, how can anyone call themselves "tough on crime" when our "justice system" is so blatantly UNJUST?!? We have people known to have committed crimes (ok, per the laws, since they haven't been convicted it's just suspected or accused - but in many of these cases it's the sort of thing where "everybody knows it's true") yet they won't even take the case to trial and in many of these cases you can't even find someone to arrest them (you're lucky to find a cop to bother to take a full report or give you an "incident number"). We have others who have been convicted but it's similarly an "everybody knows" thing that the wrong person is in prison - and they can't even buy a retrial. What kind of system is this? How can you be "tough on crime" when we don't even have a system that's accurately identifying the criminals? And to do this you have to identify ALL criminals - all of them of all races, ethnicities and classes. It's not enough to just go after (or establish priorities for and stronger sentencing for) the version of the crime more common in "poor" and/or "ethnic" neighborhoods - like how sentences for rock cocaine are stronger than for powder cocaine. We also need to start making the crimes that are common among "white collar criminals" a priority - since this impact a wide swath of society - and to start REALLY enforcing the laws about crimes like rape, domestic violence, and child abuse (instead of finding reasons not to arrest, not to go to trial, trying the victim instead of the accused, etc.).
Until things like these are fixed, we really do need to be much more compassionate to those in prison, especially non violent offenders. For all we know, we may have the innocent in prison and the guilty wandering our sidewalks.
Posted by Danetta Amschler on 07/23/2009 @ 09:52PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Danetta, We do have thousands of innocent people in prison. A conservative estimate is 10%. We have 1 in 31 or more million Adults in Corrections, probation or parole in the U.S. that does not include certain groups. That would make hundreds of thousands of innocent people and their families with their lives destroyed as well as their families in jeopardy and their futures left uncertain. America as #1 Jailer is the world is a shameful statistic in the "land of the free".
Posted by camille tilley on 07/25/2009 @ 07:17AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Correction: 1 in 31 Adults in the U.S. in Corrections, probation or parole. An industry controlled by those who profit from all this. Public awareness and action is needed to overhaul this crisis in America that has contributed to it's financial collapse and can no longer be sustained. There is no end in sight as long as special interests, corporations and elected officials interested in winning a "vote" with "tough on crime" are allowed to prevail. The public has been deceived and America's families and future are at risk.
Posted by camille tilley on 07/25/2009 @ 07:21AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
That number doesn't in the least surprise me. Over my life so far, I've been the victim of child abuse (including sexual abuse) - ran into an official county policy that said that the abuser's JOB (that's right, his JOB), was proof he was "an upstanding member of society and investigations shouldn't occur without outwardly visible proof that could be easily seen by anyone" (meaning you didn't need the victim to remove any clothing). So that didn't even get investigated. I got raped at college, only to have the campus police decide not to turn it over to the DA because if they decided for themselves that it didn't have enough evidence to go forward they could quash it as a statistic and not have to admit a rape had occurred on campus. I got stalked by the same guy - couldn't even get anyone to so much as care until moving off campus and across a city line - and then rather than making it a criminal matter and turning it over to the courts, they just visited him in his home and let him know what the locals thought of "such behaviors". I've been abused by my spouse - APS won't return phone calls (for myself or social workers) and all I can get the police to do are incident reports (basically, this means he's not getting any charges, won't go to court - but it MIGHT come in handy in divorce court or protection order proceedings). If they can be this sloppy and selective on who GOES to trial, I can easily imagine how horrible they are once you get to trial. They've got to be making "examples" out of whomever makes it to trial just to cover the justice system's butt.
Our justice system is painfully and patently UNJUST. If it were JUST situations like I described wouldn't be happening any more than having thousands of innocents in prison or millions in jail because the AMA and a bunch of corporate types decided they wanted marijuana made illegal long ago mostly to suit their own private goals.
Posted by Danetta Amschler on 07/25/2009 @ 10:10AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Thousands of innocent people are sitting in jails and prisons across America. Join us to bring awareness to the wrongfully convicted and to change legislation that has brought our nation to collapse.
www.FreedomMarchUSA.org
Help free our daughter, Courtney Bisbee, Maricopa County, AZ, sign her Petition. www.justice4courtney.com
Thank you,
Camille Tilley
camtil@aol.com
Posted by camille tilley on 07/25/2009 @ 09:24AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Please sign new Petition for Gloria Killian, Pasadena, CA. After spending 17 1/2 years in prison for a crime she did not commit, in 2008, Christopher Cleland, the District Attorney who prosecuted her, was tried by the State Bar of California and found guilty of unethical conduct in her case.
http://www.change.org/actions/view/gloria_killian_for_the_national_prison_reform_committee
Gloria Killian for the National Prison Reform Committee
To: the President of the United States, Members of the U.S. Senate and Members of the U.S. House of Representatives, see more...
Started by: ACTION COMMITTEE FOR WOMEN IN PRISONLead the way and begin the dialog -- being heard yesterday in the Senate subcommittee -- FAMM Julie Stewart
Eliminate Mandatory Minimum Sentencing, which has turned America into #1 Jailer in the world and threatened our own people within -- no longer "the land of the free" as 1 in 31 Adults are in Corrections, probation or parole. This does not count many other groups. Write your Congressmen/women. Write Sen. Jim Webb and participate on his Criminal Justice Commission -- citizens are needed, and those exonerated who have spent decades as innocent people trapped in America's jails and prisons - Hell-holes that rival Abu Ghraib in it's treatment of human beings.
We are nominating Gloria Killian, wrongfully convicted, wrongfully imprisoned for 17 1/2 years for a crime she did NOT commit, and exonerated for Sen. Jim Webb's Criminal Justice Reform Commission to overhaul a broken criminal justice and prison system. Only she has more real life experience as a result of the failed policies that no one on the commission has or anyone else nominates. The alarming rate of growth of women and girls being incarcerated is an issue since the history of prisons is they were built for men, not women who have special gender specific needs and issues. It's time to recognize this. The future of this nation depends on honestly facing this crisis.Gloria Killian: Biography
Gloria Killian was released from prison on 8/8/02 after serving more than 16 years on a sentence of 32 years to life for a crime that she did not commit. Throughout her trial and incarceration she always maintained her innocence. In March 2002 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals determined that her conviction was based solely on perjured testimony and overturned her conviction. In 2008, Christopher Cleland, the District Attorney who prosecuted her, was tried by the State Bar of California and found guilty of unethical conduct in her case.
Posted by thomas tilley on 07/25/2009 @ 06:28PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
an update from CA is here: http://criminaljustice.change.org/blog/view/fighting_tough_on_crime_in_california
Posted by Matt Kelley on 07/28/2009 @ 05:07AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.