IBJNews

State lawmakers face tough choices over prison costs

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Indiana lawmakers could face a tough political choice next year between spending millions more on overcrowded prisons or reducing prison sentences and being seen as soft on crime.

A report due in December from the Pew Center on the States and the Council of State Governments Justice Center is expected to contain recommendations for overhauling the state's criminal sentencing system to reduce the pressure on prisons.

But that will require political will from lawmakers who have developed a habit of passing laws that create new felonies or lengthen sentences to get tough on crime.

Rep. Peggy Welch, D-Bloomington, a member of the State Budget Committee and the budget-writing House Ways and Means Committee, told a Monday hearing that prisons are "going to be a big issue in the 2011 session," The Courier-Journal of Louisville reported.

"I challenge all of us to have the courage to do what needs to be done," Welch said.

The State Budget Committee held hearings on the department's proposed $667.4 million budget for fiscal 2012, which begins in July. That's 1.3 percent more than the department spent this year, but less than it asked for in the previous budget cycle, due to spending cuts ordered by Gov. Mitch Daniels.

Increasing costs are due entirely to Indiana's growing prison population, said Department of Correction Commissioner Edwin Buss.

Every 100 inmates cost the department roughly $1 million annually. And more people are being sent to prison because penalties have grown harsher during the past two decades. The department now houses roughly 29,000 adult inmates.

In the last 20 years, legislators have amended the criminal code 107 times to either add new crimes or lengthen the prison sentences of existing crimes, The Journal Gazette of Fort Wayne reported.

Department officials said they have managed to hold down costs in part by reorganizing prisons to make better use of space and by using vendors to provide meals, education and other services. The state hasn't authorized a new prison in about 10 years. And the agency has simply made do with less.

"If there was a closet, we took off the door and put bunks in it," Buss said.

But Buss said prison costs will continue to go up unless legislators overhaul the state's sentencing laws.

Rep. Eric Turner, R-Marion, said he and other lawmakers had reacted emotionally to crime by voting for bills that lengthen sentences or create new crimes. He said the Legislature needs to reconsider such laws.

"We need to figure out how we can come back and fix it in one big swoop," Turner said. "It's going to be very difficult."

Daniels spokeswoman Jane Jankowski said Tuesday that the governor had made the sentencing laws one of his legislative priorities for 2011 and was looking forward to the Pew report's recommendations. Pew has helped other states deal with similar problems, she said.

She said Daniels wants to make sure dangerous criminals stay behind bars while the state finds more cost-effective ways of managing those who aren't dangerous.

Department of Correction officials said the state could save money by shifting minimum security offenders into community corrections, which can include work release, home monitoring and other programs. The Department spends about $32 per day to house a minimum security offender, said deputy commissioner Randy Koester, while the average cost of community corrections is about $20 per day.

But State Budget Director Adam Horst said simply putting more low-level offenders into community corrections programs won't solve the department's problems. That will require broader solutions, said Horst, who is on the steering committee for the Pew study.

The sentencing study is evaluating probation and parole supervision practices, community corrections and transition programs, the use of issue-specific courts including drug and family courts, and sentencing guidelines and requirements.

Changes could include decreasing prison time for certain crimes; moving more offenders to community corrections and revamping the state's earned credit rules, according to The Journal Gazette.

"This is not easy," said Rep. Jeff Espich, R-Uniondale. "This is going to take a lot of guts."

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Cut Costs by Cutting Benefits
    Cut the prison budget by getting rid of the amenities that those of us paying taxes to support the prisoners have to pay for after we pay taxes--cable TV, workout facilities, college education, vocational training and the list goes on. Prisoners are there as punishment so make it punishment and the reduction in recidivism (released criminals who repeat a crime and get sent back) will help with the overcrowding.
  • GOP answer
    I think the GOP will give the death penalty more, without review or appeal. They could make it if you are convicted twice for anything it is the death penalty. Perhaps the sentences could be carried out within 30 days and they will boast how much money they save. Too bad if evidence comes up later that prooves someone did not do the crime. Thats live with the GOP
  • BUILD MORE
    I have no problem with building more prisons. Dont let them out early. A sentence is a sentence. If anything CUT THE PRISON INMATE REHAB $$$$. They are there to serve time, not learn how to be electricians and plumbers. Sorry.
  • Here's An Idea
    Three words: Sheriff Joe Arpaio
    Just Google him...

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. liek the rest of America

  2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

  3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

  4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

  5. whoa!

ADVERTISEMENT