Locking up bad guys comforts us in a very primal way. But after almost 30 years of “get tough” policies favoring stronger inmate penalties, we need to recast the debate away from emotion and look at the evidence. We must be smart on crime to see what correctional practices actually work to keep us safe.
As students, you are expected to learn the facts, draw conclusions and make an argument. Shouldn’t the State of California be expected to do the same when making decisions that affect lives and billions of your tax dollars? This year, our ongoing budget crisis was reason enough to think big on corrections reform and Gov. Jerry Brown’s realignment proposal was an opportunity to act.
We entered 2011 with an 18-month, $26.6 billion budget gap — a substantial sum considering last year’s budget was $86.5 billion. With anti-tax extremists preventing the possibility of any revenue solution to help restore California’s financial stability, we were forced to balance the budget only through choosing what to cut, reform and eliminate. Since our correctional system is fourth in line among the state’s largest spending areas, it was a natural target for tough scrutiny.
In 1990, roughly when the members of Cal’s senior class were born, California spent $2.7 billion on corrections and incarcerated nearly 100,000 inmates. We now spend over $9.8 billion and incarcerate about 163,000. For all we spend, we should expect results. But California’s gigantic state corrections system has failed us.
Between 1990 and 2005, California’s prison population increased by 73 percent — nearly three times faster than the general adult population. Our prisons now operate under the supervision of federal courts because they are overcrowded and have failed to provide adequate inmate health care. And, nearly half of released inmates return to prison within a year.
At a time when state budget cuts will cause 70 state parks to close, tuition at our state colleges and universities to possibly double and public libraries to lose half of their funding, it’s difficult to contemplate why corrections — with all of its deficiencies — should not be a significant part of solutions that help balance our state budget.
Realignment offers us the chance to end the cycle of putting more money into a broken system. Now, the state will focus on incarcerating the most dangerous criminals and counties will provide innovative rehabilitation services to non-violent offenders. By redirecting funding and responsibilities through this framework, our criminal justice system can operate at significantly lower cost and achieve better results.
In dollars and cents, California spends $46,000 per year to incarcerate an inmate in prison. It costs half that amount to incarcerate an offender in county jail and significantly less for community-based alternatives. We know this approach can work because tough law and order states like Texas have pursued similar policies, cut costs and improved public safety in the process.
With one in 20 of its adults within its correctional system in 2004, Texas had the world’s highest incarceration rate. When faced with a $2 billion prison expansion bill during a budget crisis in 2005, Texas chose to spend about $300 million to beef up drug treatment programs, mental health centers, probation services and community supervision. The result was a nine percent drop in incarceration and a 12.8 percent drop in crime between 2005 and 2010.
I encourage reform opponents to rethink their views because realignment offers us a chance to replicate the success that Texas and other states have had. All it takes is a decision based on the facts.
The stakes are dire. We can stay the course, have a bloated and ineffective corrections system, and impose the burden of future budget cuts on programs that benefit law-abiding citizens. Or we can protect programs like public education and health care by getting smart on corrections.
We are now one month into a realigned California. As the biggest restructuring of government in a generation, there will certainly be a lot of work to do along the way to ensure that this effort is successful. But if implemented and funded correctly, California can finally get a correctional system that helps this state transform into an even better place.
Assemblymember Bob Blumenfield represents the 40th California State Assembly District.
Comment Policy
Comments should remain on topic, concerning the article or blog post to which they are connected. Brevity is encouraged. Posting under a pseudonym is discouraged, but permitted. The Daily Cal encourages readers to voice their opinions respectfully in regard to the readers, writers and contributors of The Daily Californian. Comments are not pre-moderated, but may be removed if deemed to be in violation of this policy. Click here to read the full comment policy.
Wow, this moron Bob Blumenfield actually thinks the west valley is dumb enough to perpetuate the failed politics of Sacramento by bringing him into our backyard… Bob Blumenfield is chair of the budget and finance committee and sits on the Recreational Parks Committee, yet he and his other elected committee officials missed 54 MILLION DOLLARS in the Parks & Recreation coffers, instead opting to close down numerous parks and fire hundreds of park employees.. Great job!!! HAHAHA… The only thing wrong with this “Shameful situation,” is that we have politicians like you actually being elected. You actually expect to win a city council seat after that??? PATHETIC!
No thanks BOBBY, keep your day job come November because you have no chance being elected to city council. I also hear there is another Jewish candidate from district 3 filing this month. lol, good luck
Unfortunately, realignment addresses the SupremeCourt’s concerns regarding overcrowding and inhumane conditions at our stateprisons by shifting the problem to the county level. This is evident given that32 of our county jails are currently under State or Court ordered populationcaps, and LA County, our nations largest system, has been under the Courtordered watch of the ACLU for decades for the same problems. Only a couple ofweeks after the implementation of AB 109, two counties, including Fresno, havealready declared their jails full due to realignment. Riverside County received27 inmates in the first 2 weeks of realignment, with 1 receiving a sentence of14 years, another 9 years, another 6 years, while 3 more received 5 years each- all to be served in local custody. LA County has received over 700 new inmatessince October 1st due to realignment, and expects to be full by Christmas.Jails are not prisons and were not designed to hold hardened criminals for longperiods of time – this will become evident very quickly. I understand there islimited funding available thru AB 900 for building some new jail space, but itis not enough and take will many years to complete – definitely not by2013/2014 when 40,000 inmates will have been transferred to the counties. Thatleaves us with two possible scenarios: overcrowded, inhumane county jails –exposing AB 109 as a shell game designed to dump the states problems on ourcounties – or we must stop prosecuting people for “nonviolent/serious” crimes like burglary, car theft, involuntarymanslaughter, drug sales, etc. With the jails full, and the threat of consequencesremoved, what do you think will happen to our crime rate? What offender isgoing to comply with probation or parole when the jails are full? Withincarceration not an option, what are the Courts or the Board of PrisonHearings going to do when the offender removes his GPS? More GPS? Sentencingand parole reform, including programs like the early release of women w/children, would be a much better alternative to solving our overcrowding issuesw/o endangering our communities. There is no need to dismantle parole,especially when it requires a voter approved tax increase and a constitutionalamendment to fund the transfer to the counties, which are in no way prepared orable to handle the onslaught coming their way. After only one month, AB 109 is already proving to be fatally flawed and a danger to public safety.
Jail shortages caused the shift of over a third of the county jail population was shifted to prison between 1985 and 1995, causing minor prison overcrowding. Thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court decision, the jail inmate population are being returned to county custody. Realignment will reduce prison costs by almost
$900 million annually. About $750 million will be saved because of lower jail operating costs and $125 million from a reduced parole violation rate. The savings are not theoretical, but will result because the State has no choice but to comply with the Court decision. The savings could have started any time during the past 15 years if the politicians had been willing to take advantage of the money-saving opportunity. Actually, the savings could be doubled by just restricting prison to 80,000 Level III & IV inmates and transferring an additional 48,000 Level I & II inmates to county operated contract facilities. California would still have 10,000 more prison inmates than New York, a comparable size state. It should be considered.
The State will save money at the expense of the counties and public safety. Legislation is already pending that would allow the counties to raise taxes for the purpose of realignment. And as I noted in my prior post, the jails are not equipped to handle the numbers coming their way – in fact, most are ALREADY full. And even if they had the space, they are not designed to hold serious criminals for 5, 10 or 15 years. The results of this flawed experiment is all to predictable to those in the know. But as you note, it does serve one purpose – it saves the state money. Savings should be had in places that do not effect Public Safety, which is our Governments Number 1 priority.