Pubdate: Sun, 26 Aug 2001
Source: Tulsa World (OK)
Copyright: 2001 World Publishing Co.
Contact:  http://www.tulsaworld.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/463
Author: Julie DelCour
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/prison.htm (Incarceration)

CUTTING PRISON COSTS

Some Other Ways To Skin A Cat

Former Gov. Henry Bellmon used to say that if a politician stood in 
the middle of the road long enough eventually he'd get hit from both 
sides.

That's exactly the situation many state lawmakers found themselves in 
earlier this year when they eyed reducing corrections spending.

No one wanted to appear soft on crime but most recognized that the 
time is long overdue to cauterize spending, which is bleeding the 
state dry. In 12 years, appropriations to the Department of 
Corrections rose a staggering 203 percent and the prison population 
doubled to 22,000 inmates.

By comparison, K-12 education spending rose by 142 percent and mental 
health expenditures grew by only 34 percent in the same period. While 
prison appropriations were surging and the prison population was bur 
geoning, the state crime rate remained relatively stable, even 
declining recently.

So, the question the Legislature had to ask itself was who was being 
punished more, criminals or taxpayers?

In the end, members approved Senate Bill 397, a measure overhauling 
the state criminal justice system and aimed at providing for a safer 
state that spends its prison dollars more wisely.

As with most things in politics, the bill, authored by Senate 
President Pro Tempore Stratton Taylor, D-Clare more, and House 
Minority leader Fred Morgan, R-Oklahoma City, was a product of 
compromise. Hardly soft on crime, it:

- -- Increased the number of violent crimes that carry mandatory prison 
sentences. This means that more violent offenders will serve no less 
that 85 percent of their sentences and that Oklahoma will be eligible 
for an additional $4 million in federal funds. In effect the bill 
establishes de facto truth in sentencing for certain crimes.

- -- Abolished a controversial early-release law the governor despised 
and wouldn't use.

- -- Lowered the blood alcohol content for drunk driving from .10 to 
.08, a measure not popular with the powerful restaurant and bar lobby 
but which follows a national trend and which entitles the state to $2 
million in additional federal highway funds.

- -- Allows release of ailing inmates whose medical condition renders 
them no longer a threat to public safety. Inmates would be released 
to family members or care facilities instead of the state continuing 
to pick up the tab for treatment.

What the legislation tries to do, among other things, said Sen. Dick 
Wilkerson, D-Atwood, is to focus prison spending on people "we're 
afraid of as opposed to those we're just aggravated with.

"This bill was an attempt to reform the system," Wilkerson, a strong 
voice in the legislation, said. "If I wasn't optimistic about it I 
wouldn't do this. I think we've done good work and there's going to 
be some positive aspects."

Wilkerson, a former Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation agent, 
said Oklahomans need to move away from a mentality of thinking all 
crime is alike and the only solution to crime is locking people up.

"There are people out there who dedicate their lives hurting people. 
We need to take those predators and lock them up. But we should spend 
as little money on the rest of these people as we can," he said.

And that might mean punishing some nonviolent offenders by other 
means than prison.

"What has happened is that we have evolved into trying to solve 
social problems with punishment. What we tend to do is pass laws for 
public therapy, so we can beat our chests and say we're locking up 
all the bad guys. We use the word crime generically. The majority of 
crime is nonviolent but we make decisions with the mental picture of 
the multiple murderer and general bad guy in mind. "Crime isn't the 
same. There are differences between the irresponsible person who 
writes hot checks or steals your lawnmower and someone who hurts your 
child, someone who sticks a gun in your face, someone who would kill 
your mom and dad."

To offset any increase in inmates because of the tougher provisions 
in the bill, lawmakers also took a hard look at what was causing an 
explosion in inmate numbers. The culprit, at least in part, appeared 
to be outmoded criminal statutes, which included one of the lowest 
felony limits -- $50 -- on property crimes in the nation.

Last year, 300 people were sentenced to prison on felony convictions 
for embezzlement or bogus checks. Records show that only 15 percent 
of those crimes involved amounts greater than $500. Despite 
opposition from retailers, lawmakers raised the felony limit for only 
the second time since statehood -- to $500. Under SB 397, offenders 
with cases involving less than that amount now will face county jail 
time and/or fines. They also will have to make restitution and pay 
fees to the victim and district attorney's office.

The change saves taxpayers the $15,000 a year it would cost to house 
an inmate. It also forces small-time property crime offenders to be 
more responsible for their conduct.

New diversion and restitution programs could have a big impact by 
giving DAs more flexibility to help make victims whole while holding 
offenders accountable.

The new law requires each DA to create a program that allows 
diversion of certain property crimes from criminal court and to 
monitor payments instead. Before making a decision on what happens to 
an offender, the prosecutor can consider a variety of factors, 
including the victim's wishes, the offender's prior record and the 
nature of the crime. Prosecution can be deferred for up to two years, 
depending on an offender's willingness to comply with rules

"If someone steals your chainsaw, would you rather see him locked up 
or would you rather have him out earning money so he can pay you for 
the equivalent of three chainsaws? At the same time he's paying you 
back he would have to feed his kids, pay his bills. The kids wouldn't 
be on welfare because's dad's in the pen.

"A lot of times these habitual offenders are nuisances more than 
anything," Wilkerson said. But if a hot-check writer racked up three 
felony convictions he faced a mandatory 20- year sentence. "Then we 
were stuck with them," Wilkerson said.

It makes a difference when DAs are able to sit down with the offender 
and say: "I've talked to the victim and this is what I want you to 
do. I want you to pay back three times what you owe the victim and to 
pay the fees. I want you to hold a job. I want you to pay your child 
support. If you have any violations, I'm going to move to revoke your 
suspended or deferred sentence."

SB 397 isn't perfect and may not go far enough in curbing prison 
costs. But at least it's a step toward getting to the bottom of 
out-of-control prison spending, which shot up from $200 million to 
$398 million in three years year. These reforms might just lead us to 
ask ourselves less often the question of who's punishing whom.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Josh