ASH: Sentencing reform, not more prisons, is smart on crime.

He's not the abolitionist that I am, but I truly love this man (I hope no one holds that against him). His piece here speaks for itself.

----------------from the Arizona Republic------------------

by Representative Cecil Ash

Sept. 23, 2011

While headlines in 13 other states read, "State reduces prison capacity," the headline in Arizona will soon say, "State awarding bids to private prisons for 5,000 new beds."

As a conservative Republican, I support the privatization of many government services: in schools, where the consumers of the product are its purchasers; in construction, where the project is open to public scrutiny; in maintenance, where performance can be observed or measured. In each of these cases, the provider's goal of a profit is subject to the forces of the competitive marketplace.

With private prisons, however, the consumers of the product (the inmates) have no say in its quality. The free market is not in play. They cannot take their business and go elsewhere.

The goal of the private prison - profit - is antithetical to the goals of the state: incarceration, rehabilitation and the reduction of recidivism. In fact, the less rehabilitation, the more recidivism, the greater numbers to be incarcerated, the better for the private-prison industry's bottom line.

Inherent in the argument to use private prisons is the claim that they operate more cost-effectively than state-run institutions. Studies have not shown this to be true.

Nor does the state's experience last summer in Kingman, when three dangerous prisoners escaped, suggest that they are more secure.

The exact amount of the expenditure for these 5,000 new beds is unknown. But it will be in the millions of dollars.

There is another alternative: Re-examine the provisions of our criminal code. Here are some options:

- Grant medical parole to prisoners whose physical condition prevents them from being a threat to public safety. For example, Arizona houses a female inmate who has become blind in prison. Is there really any reason to continue her incarceration?

- Restore incentives for prisoners to earn earlier release. Currently, all prisoners must serve 85 percent of their sentence, leaving the last 15 percent to be served under community supervision. Is there any reason that inmates who have a good disciplinary record and who have taken all the rehab programs available and otherwise abided by the rules should not be released at 60 percent of their sentence and be under community supervision for the last 40 percent of their sentence?

- Give judges discretion to deviate from mandated sentences where appropriate. In Payson last month, the criminal code required the judge to give a 73-year-old man a 90-year sentence for a non-violent first offense. The judge felt probation was more appropriate.

- Provide for more rehab and treatment programs for substance abusers, even where people may have failed the first time. (How many people quit smoking on their first attempt?)

- Allow DUI defendants who agree to refrain from alcohol and wear a GPS bracelet that indicates alcohol consumption to remain on home arrest rather than serve time in prison. Appropriate exceptions could apply where there has been serious injury or where the person has violated the probation by consuming alcohol.

The implementation of any or all of the above options could save the state millions of dollars, negating the need for 5,000 new prison beds.

I would then use these savings to restore funding to the developmentally disabled population and to perform long-delayed maintenance on existing prison facilities.

There may be problems with any one or all of the above recommendations. But Texas recently avoided spending $750 million on more beds by restructuring its criminal-justice system and simultaneously saw its crime rate drop. This is happening in a number of other states. Arizona should do the same.

Cecil Ash, a Mesa Republican, represents District 18 in the Legislature.

The Cosequences of Eradictating Hope.

I agree with much of this -was also wondering whatever happened to Webb's committee. But I'd focus more on the criminal code and sentencing than prison, because these folks shouldn't be i prison in the first place...

---------------------------------------

What Happened to Prison Reform?

criminaljustice.change.org

by Michael Santos

Published March 09, 2010 @ 08:09AM PT

I've become discouraged about the prospect for meaningful prison reform. In March of 2008, Senator Jim Webb introduced a Senate bill to form a commission that would study our criminal justice system from top to bottom. Slamming America's prison system as a national disgrace, the Virginia senator urged reform. But after extensive media coverage when Senator Webb announced his bill, we haven't heard much about it. Despite bi-partisan support in the Senate, the House of Representatives has yet to introduce a companion bill. Now we've begun a new congressional election year and, judging by the Republican legislature to health care reform, it doesn't look like legislation for prison reform will make it through this Congress.

How long will Congress ignore the need for meaningful prison reform? Our prison system confines more than 2.2 million people, costing taxpayers $60 billion every year to operate. What do Americans receive in return for this massive public expenditure? When we consider recidivism rates of 70%, it's clear that rather than making communities safer, prisons breed continuing cycles of failure. That's why we need to reform the prison system from one that extracts vengeance to one that operates with a more intelligent design.

The biggest problem with our federal prison system is that it extinguishes hope. Each federal institution ought to hang the sign Danté wrote about at the entrance to his home: Abandon hope, all ye who enter here.

Arizona: Most Draconian State in America.

Below is an idea of something Arizona legislators with courage will do once back in session: This package of bills in NJ is absolutely stunning. Democrats or Republicans should be competing to be the ones to come up with something like this for Arizona - a package that came out of extensive community dialogue, and appears to be research-based.

Whatever politicians or parties are behind criminal justice reforms in the next session doesn't matter so much - good conservatives would want our money invested in responsible, productive ways, anyway, and should support such reforms.


Given the right legislative and executive support, there's so much possibility here for Director Ryan and his people to do something with the Arizona Department of Corrections that actually works to lower recidivism rates, improve protections for prisoner rights, provide meaningful community-based treatment (not just "supervision"), and stop the gross economic exploitation of impoverished prisoners/parolees and families. If he's successful, he might even be able to revise his blueprints for the future by downsizing anticipated prison bed needs...


-------------

NJ Prison Bills Advance, To Improve Rehabilitation Efforts

Corrections Reporter.com

November 24th, 2009

A sweeping bill package sponsored by six Assembly Democratic legislators to improve rehabilitation in New Jersey prisons and to save taxpayer dollars by cutting recidivism and giving released inmates an improved chance of success was advanced Monday by an Assembly panel. News from PolitickerNJ.

The package is sponsored by Assembly Majority Leader Bonnie Watson Coleman and Assembly members Albert Coutinho, Elease Evans, Mila M. Jasey, L. Grace Spencer and Cleopatra G. Tucker. It stems from a series of hearings on Watson Coleman hosted throughout New Jersey to hear from citizens and experts on how to cut into recidivism and save public money.

The bills were released by the Assembly Law and Public Safety Committee.

“The pervasive cycle of arrest, release and re-arrest is failed system that wastes lives and costs taxpayers dearly,” said Watson Coleman (D-Mercer). “Quite simply, it’s a disgraceful and destructive cycle that must come to an end for the good of all New Jersey taxpayers and those directly affected by our failed system. We’ve seen too much money unsuccessfully spent on programs that don’t work. These reforms are a long overdue step toward progress.”

“These reforms range from improving education and job training to enhancing family support to eliminating antiquated roadblocks to success for those released from prison,” said Coutinho (D-Essex). “These common sense steps will give people an opportunity to earn their second chance and ensure we spend public money wisely.”

“None of these bills would make it easier to serve sentences,” said Spencer (D-Essex). “What they would do is make serving that time more sensible and help ensure that after their time is served, prisoners re-enter society ready to be productive citizens. That will save lives and taxpayer dollars.”

“The simple fact is that of the thousands people released from New Jersey prisons each year, 65 percent of the adults and 37 percent of the juveniles will return within two years,” said Tucker (D-Essex). “That is unacceptable, and these bills aim to not only to improve lives and neighborhoods, but to save money.”

“Spending money time and time again on prisoners who come and go from our prison systems is, quite simply, a waste,” said Evans (D-Passaic). “We need to do better, not only for the wellbeing of the people whose lives are being lost in our prisons, but for taxpayers who need to know their money is spent smartly.”

“We simply cannot afford to continue the present system of spending money repeatedly on repeat offenders,” said Jasey (D-Essex). “The time has come to change our approach so that we can give people and our society a better chance at a better future.”

The “Women and Families Strengthening Act” (A-4197), which would:

• End the prohibition in state law against released prisoners from receiving cash assistance benefits provided under Work First New Jersey.
• Require the state to contract with the lowest bidder for inmate telephone services, prohibit the contractor from imposing surcharges on inmate calls and bar the state from accepting revenue in excess of the cost of operating inmate telephone services.
• Establish a commission to examine strategies for strengthening bonds between jailed parents and their children.
• Require an assistant corrections commissioner establish and monitor policies affecting incarcerated mothers and their children.
• Prohibit the state from housing female inmates in the same facility as male inmates, if it results in conditions more restrictive than the male inmates.
• Require the state to make every effort to assign an inmate to a facility close to where the inmate’s family resides.

A bill (A-4199) designed to address incarceration concerns, which would:

• Allow prisoners in a state or county jail to keep $25 of their monthly income earned for labor performed at the facility, up from $15.
• Require the state to semiannually submit all inmate complaints to the Department of the Public Advocate.
• Require the state to develop an in-service training program for corrections officers that must include mental health sensitivity.

A bill (A-4201) designed to address release concerns, which would:

• Establish a faith-based programs coordinator with the state Department of Corrections to compile and disseminate information about faith-based groups and programs, especially those that provide assistance and services to inmates re-entering society.
• Establish Mental Health Courts to facilitate voluntary treatment of defendants who have mental health illnesses.
• Create a Prisoner Re-entry Commission and require the collection of data on recidivism and a fiscal estimate or the potential cost of any legislation that increases prison sentences.
• Give prisoners a 90-day grace period on outstanding fines and other monetary penalties.
• A bill (A-4202) designed to address education and job training, which would:
• Require the state to create a mandatory workforce skills training and a mandatory education program in each state correctional facility.
• Require inmates to attain a high school equivalency certificate or high school diploma.
• Allow inmates and parolees to enter into agreements with institutions for education, training or other activities that, if successfully completed, could reduce parole terms.
• Establish a mandatory six-month period of post-release supervision for all state inmates.
• Allow a person who has been released from prison to obtain a court order that allows them to visit prisons, if they can show that such visits are likely to motivate and help rehabilitate other inmates.

“This is important unfinished business from the many hearings we held throughout New Jersey, during which we heard from thousands of people about how our system has failed people and cost us money,” Watson Coleman said. “A broad coalition of community organizations, faith leaders, law enforcement officials and ordinary citizens have lined up behind these ideas and will work to build support for these well-informed and carefully crafted bills that reflect a desire to improve lives and save money.”