As we drift headlong into the 2010 Governor’s race, there are some very big issues facing the state. One of these, is the prison crisis. The legislature and the Governor were only able to come up with cuts that would reduce the population by somewhere in the 25,000 range, while the federal courts are looking more in the 44,000 range.
The Bee took a look at how the candidates are talking about this issue, and let’s just say that some of the positions are semi-reasonable, and others simply aren’t. Now, for those of you who were wondering about the Michael Jackson “Black or White” Video, well, I give you Steve Poizner’s black or white take on the world:
Whitman and Poizner, on the other hand, have tried to out-tough each other, railing against legislation passed last month by the state Senate that would have let some inmates out earlier and appointed a commission to rework state sentencing laws. The ultimate version of the bill passed this month did not include the sentencing commission or a provision to release more than 6,000 inmates to home detention.
“You have to be a really bad person to get into state prison,” Poizner said. “So I’m opposed to releasing people who are dangerous, absolutely opposed. That’s no way to balance the budget.”
Whitman went even further, saying she opposed rewriting any prison and parole guidelines that would shorten prison terms for any inmate.(Sac Bee 9/23/09 emphasis mine)
Poizner simply takes the reactionary view, that is, that if you are in prison, you are a bad, bad, person. Of course, this ignores the crazy, messed up world of parole violations that lead to people going to prison to serve out a term because they missed a meeting with their parole officer or some other technicality. So, yes, you have to break the law to end up in prison, but painting all prisoners with such a wide brush serves neither the prison system, the prisoners, nor the state very well.
And then you look at eMeg‘s statement, and that seems all the more bizarre when you put it together with her statement from yesterday saying that she wants to can 40,000 state workers. As the governor’s staff has pointed out, you can’t fire that many workers without firing a bunch of prison guards. And if you plan on increasing the prison population as eMeg seems to be saying here, well forget about cutting state employee roles, you’ll end up hiring another 10,000 prison guards. And that doesn’t even consider the overtime pay that the guards get in spades.
Jerry Brown, who mentioned that he would consider the position, and SF Mayor Gavin Newsom have stated fairly similar positions. Both want to reduce recidivism (good!) but haven’t stated whether they would support a sentencing commission or any serious reform (bad!).
On the other hand, Republican Tom Campbell has actually been quite the reasonable guy on this front. He supported the Senate bill (Good!) and has put out specific, pragmatic policies on this and some other issues, many of which are pretty vanilla milquetoast. Nonetheless, a candidate that is willing to talk about the issue from a logical viewpoint, rather than an emotional reactionary viewpoint, deserves some credit.
Campbell, on the other hand, is bucking the prevailing wisdom in his party. He backed both the Senate version and the final bill although both shorten prison terms of some inmates.
“We have an opportunity to direct a more effective prison system,” Campbell said. “I’d rather approach this pragmatically, through outsourcing of prisoners, developing a triage of parole violators and focusing on more violent offenders in prisons.”
Now, Arnold supported the Senate bill too, and that hardly makes him a great Governor, does it? But, unless our elected leaders are willing to deal with thhis issue out of a place of pragmatic, problem-solving leadership, rather than out of fear of an electoral backlash, we shouldn’t expect too much progress.
Who is Poizner kidding? Does he have any idea about whom he is speaking?
This state needs to stop sending so many people to prison in the first place. There was a piece in the New Yorker within the last couple of weeks about a man in Texas who was executed for an arson murder. It is now widely agreed that he was factually innocent. Just because we don’t speak with Texas accents does not mean that doesn’t happen here.
Our prosecutors all assume, without question, that the police presenting a case have not made any mistakes and are not lying. The Public Defenders and most private attorneys adopt the same assumptions and try to get the accused to plead out as quickly as possible. Indeed, most defense counsel suffer from Stockholm Syndrome according to a psychologist who has observed the system in action. Our judges are all afraid that someone will accuse them of being “soft” on crime and, therefore, bend over backwards to please the prosecution.
This past Monday, a fellow named Lister had the murder case against him dismissed after he had spent 26 years in prison. It is fairly clear that he did not commit the crime and that the evidence against him was manufactured by the police.
California has the worst justice system of the major states. Our Supreme Court upholds virtually all death verdicts. The appellate courts bend over backwards to invalidate laws designed to protect the accused.
Somewhere around 3% to 5% of defendants are actually innocent. Probably around one-third are charged with greater crimes than the crime actually committed. The entire system leans on these folks, most of whom are not well-educated and not particularly sophisitcated, to plead out. Rather than focus on the back end, we should focus on the front end.
The ruined lives of the criminal justice system cost us a fortune.
so it’s wait and see.
The issues and how to handle them are at a place the general public doesn't seem to want look.
What are the reasons that so many, coming out of prison, fail to make it and end up back inside? The one place no one seems to want to look is at the support systems and programs or the lack of them that make it possible for parolees to readjust to living in a world where they make their own choices.
First, it seems to me that after sitting in local courts and listening to probation/”joint suspended” conditions of probation, over and over, one of the conditions is always that the probationer find a job and be gainfully employed. I believe that conditions of parole are even more stringent. Right now, supposing the federal government mandates that the 40,000 are released, where will those 40,000 find jobs, especially considering that many (2/3?, 3/4?) will have educational deficiencies. Depending on type of offenses, there will be many jobs they cannot even apply for. They will be competing with other already unemployed and looking for work Californians in a very tight market. So, then what? What are their real chances of success?
Second, there is the issue of where they will live. Not all (half maybe) may not, for whatever reasons be able to come out and live with family or even former friends (especially if the former friend also has a record) so we can look at 20 plus thousand more people who are homeless. What will they do? It is against the law, some way or another, to be “homeless” “vagrant” and so on. I mean, imagine what it would be like if just 25% of the half of those released were to arrive at Loaves and Fishes and the Salvation Army Shelter here in Sacramento! Resources already stretched thin might reach a saturation point.
Training, well, what training? How many would be able to manage retraining and the discipline of school even if they were part of the number that could return to family or friends? What jobs would they train for when there are no jobs?
Then there are the emotional issues, and relearning to effectively handle life in situations where everything is a decision, so where are the support groups for readjustment?
I wonder how many recidivists are 'guilty' of doing something, anything unconsciously consciously to go back just because of despair and stress, because there was/is no way to break the cycle: no support, no education, no job, no hope, and inside it is easier, and odd as it may sound, there is a certain security to knowing what the rules are, who and what the routine is and what the day to day will be, and having it all out of their uncertain hands? According to http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2009/06/why_do_we_toler.html there is a 70% recidivism rate. We Californians need to look at real ways to change that.
UC Berkeley Law Professor Jonathan Simon, in this article says, among other things:
California has a nice “prison industry” going, to the tune of $15 billion a year and until there is some system that actually works toward honest rehabilitation along with punishment for doing what are mostly dumb things, nothing is going to change. Most crimes, murder, sexual assaults, mayhem being the exceptions, really are about doing dumb things and making really dumb choices.
Prison Cost
CALIFORNIA PRISONS
Education Cost http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/Articles/article.asp?title=California%20comparison
Per-Pupil Expenditures
Perhaps the most salient measure of a state’s effort is how much it spends per pupil. California remains below the national average in per-pupil expenditures, ranking 29th in 2005–06, according to the National Education Association (NEA) Rankings & Estimates 2006–07. At $8,486, California was at 93% of the national average and ranked in the middle of the five most populous states.
Prison guards make more than teachers.
Average beginning teacher salary: $35,506
Guard Salaries
On average, twice that: http://www.sacbee.com/editorials/story/1305330.html
There is something skewed about this, this system that seems bent on maintaining job security for the prison industry rather than doing something to rehabilitate after punishment. There is something very wrong with a system willing to spend $35,000 a year to imprison people, and $8,500 to educate K-12 students.
I have searched, and cannot find any dollar amount per prisoner for the cost of re-entry programs, and much seems to be laid on the doorstep of the faith-based programs. However I did find this: http://nicic.org/Downloads/PDF/Library/period318.pdf
There has to be something better than having the system we have now, and some way to effectively turn lives around. What we have now isn't working, and a current 70% recidivism rate is in effect a life sentence for nearly everything.