With a major case in the news, now is an excellent time for America, especially California, to take up criminal sentencing reform.
President Bush yesterday commuted the prison sentence of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Vice President Cheney’s former chief of staff. Last month, Libby was sentenced to 2-1/2 years in prison, two years on probation, and a fine of $250,000 for being convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice.
Bush’s pardon leaves intact the fine and the two years of probation. Libby will have to spend his sentence under supervised probation. And as Bush said in his official statement, “My decision to commute his prison sentence leaves in place a harsh punishment for Mr. Libby,” including the ruin of his reputation and career.
It’s pretty obvious that Libby is not a violent person. The commutation of his sentence saves taxpayers money and reduces prison overcrowding. Yet Libby will continue to be punished in other ways.
Libby’s case provides an example of how similar reform could be advanced for other nonviolent felons.
Of course, violent criminals should be kept locked up to serve their full sentences and probation. But if convicted criminals clearly are nonviolent. And if they can be monitored, as needed, to make sure they’re not committing crimes. Then they and society at large would benefit from alternatives to being locked up in the slammer.
As of this year in California, of 171,000 inmates of state prisons, 86,000 are in for nonviolent crimes – just over half. And of those, 36,000 are in for drug crimes.
Yet California has space in its prisons for just 100,000 inmates. Just last week, reported the San Diego Union-Tribune, “Two federal court judges suggested Wednesday they were prepared to take steps that could lead to the early release of thousands of inmates to relieve prison overcrowding.”
If even a quarter of the nonviolent prisoners were released – under proper supervision – the prison crisis could be greatly alleviated. And rather than judges acting unilaterally, the California Legislature and Governor Schwarzenegger should take preemptive action.
Some suggestions for reform in California and elsewhere:
- Issue more pardons. Presidents and governors should more freely, yet prudently, exercise their powers of pardon. When Gray Davis was governor, he pardoned not a single person because, as he once said, no one would “out-cop” him, meaning be more draconian on law-and-order issues. Arnold Schwarzenegger has been more reasonable and has issued pardons.
By contrast, Republican George Deukmejian, a former prosecutor and tough law-and-order governor, issued 328 pardons from 1983-1991. And Republican Ronald Reagan, who came into office on a law-and-order platform, issued 575 pardons from 1967-1975. Under Reagan, California’s population was about half what it is today and its prison inmates numbered about a quarter of today’s.
- Fund and expand Proposition 36. In 2000, 61 percent of California voters favored this initiative. It required that nonviolent drug offenders be put on probation if they enrolled in treatment programs, and stuck with the programs. Recent studies show that, although about half of those on the program started using drugs again during their first 30 months on parole, half succeeded during that time and didn’t start using.
Usually I oppose expanding government programs. The exception is when the expansion of one program clearly, with evidence, reduces another program. Research by UCLA and the state Legislative Analyst shows that every $1 spent on Prop. 36 saves the state budget $2.50.
So it makes sense for the Legislature and the governor to ensure the fiscal 2007-08 budget, which still is being worked on even though the fiscal year began July 1, includes full funding for Prop. 36. Not only that, but Prop. 36 should be expanded to include more inmates. Success should be rewarded.
- Reform sentencing. California should enact Assembly Bill 160, which would establish the California Sentencing Commission to reform often contradictory and unwieldy sentencing laws passed piecemeal over the decades. AB 160 already passed the Assembly and is scheduled for a hearing on July 10 in the Senate Public Safety Committee.
According to the bill’s language, the commission, among other things, “shall consider the use of indeterminate sentencing and alternatives to prison for nonserious, nonviolent offenders.”
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who proposed such a commission last December, pointed out in a statement that 20 other states already have sentencing commissions and “thousands of low-level offenders are serving lengthy mandatory sentences, with little opportunity for rehabilitation because overcrowded conditions impede meaningful rehabilitation programming.” A commission could work to fix that problem.
- Ankle bracelets. People laughed when Paris Hilton was sent home from prison, briefly, wearing an ankle bracelet that monitored her whereabouts. When in 2005 Martha Stewart also was sent home wearing an ankle bracelet, people joked that it was her latest fashion accessory.
But all joking aside, these ankle bracelets are a way to confine people in their homes, not prison. Their whereabouts can be checked by the Global Positioning System. And even the American Civil Liberties Union says the bracelets are OK.
Ankle bracelets can make sure parolees only go from home to work and stay out of trouble. Most seriously, registered sex offenders can be monitored to make sure they stay away from kids. Last November, California voters passed Proposition 83, which mandated ankle bracelets for many sex offenders.
Ankle bracelets also are being used to monitor alcohol use. I don’t like it that nonviolent teenagers caught imbibing are being required to wear these bracelets. Parents, not courts, should determine the kids’ punishment. But the bracelets are useful, non-prison way for monitoring those convicted of drunk driving to make sure they don’t get behind a wheel blitzed out of their minds and possibly kill somebody.
All these ankle bracelet programs can be expanded to keep nonviolent offenders out of prison. And keep the taxpayers from having to pay to incarcerate them.
Care to read comments, or make your own about today’s Daily Commentary?
Just click here to go to the FR Weblog, where this Commentary has its own blog post, and where you can read and make comments.