It’s one of the few examples where government couldspend less money and actually benefit more people and increase public safety.
By reserving prison for violent criminals who needto be separated from society, far cheaper programs of drug and alcoholtreatment, job training and education can turn low-level offenders intoproductive citizens and reduce crime.
Unfortunately, many in Wisconsin do not appear ready to take suchan intelligent approach.
An extremely modest attempt at an early releaseprogram for nonviolent offenders by the Wisconsin Department of Correctionsalready is under attack by the media and Milwaukee-area public officials.
Is it because any major crimes have been committedby anyone who received early release? Not at all.
Inflammatory media coverage does not require anyactual, major problems with an early release program. It’s enough just to playon the public’s fear of crime and suggest the possibility that problems couldone day occur.
That’s the only way to explain a front-page Milwaukee Journal Sentinel storyheadlined: “State Gave Repeat Offenders Early Prison Releases.”
The article led with one of the first 30 offendersfrom Milwaukeewho was released early. The man got out about a month early. Wow. Nearly fourweeks before his sentence was up, a minor offender was walking our streets.
Within about a month, however, the man was back inprison for violating the terms of his probation. The Journal Sentinel didn’t even know what the violation was. Whateverit was, it wasn’t enough to bring any new charges.
The only other alleged violation the Journal Sentinel could find was bysomeone who got out about two months early. In his case, there was really noviolation at all.
The man was arrested and put in jail because hisGPS-linked ankle bracelet indicated he’d returned home after his curfew. Thenext day, however, the man was released again after Milwaukee police confirmed he’d returned homelate because he’d been working overtime.
To Help or to Hurt?
The newspaper’s overblown reporting of a single,minor violation and a completely unwarranted re-incarceration does serve oneuseful purpose: It illustrates the serious problem of trigger-happy probationofficers sending people back to prison for totally insignificant offenses.
There was a time when the job of a probation agentwas to help those who’d been incarcerated succeed on the outside. Probationagents helped connect those who were released to jobs, drug and alcoholtreatment and community support groups that could help prevent former offendersfrom returning to a life of crime.
These days, many people may be surprised to learnthat more than half of the people who go to prison every year in Wisconsin haven’tcommitted crimes. They’ve committed technical violations of the terms of theirprobation, parole or extended supervision.
Pamela Oliver, a professor of sociology atUW-Madison, has documented how the job of the parole agent evolved during the1990s from social work to assist parolees into just another form of lock-’em-uppolicing.
In 1990, Oliver notes, only about 30% of thoseentering prison were solely probation and parole violators. About 50% hadcommitted new crimes and 20% had a combination of new crimes and ruleviolations.
By 1999, Oliver says, those figures were reversed.Only 35% were being sentenced for new crimes. Another 15% were a combination ofnew crimes and parole violations and fully 50% of those entering prison weresolely probation or parole violators.
Someone can violate parole simply by being in thewrong place at the wrong time. Staying out past curfew is a good example. Do wereally want to imprison adults for something we have trouble getting teenagersto obey?
Associating with former felons is a parole violationthat is very difficult to avoid in many poor neighborhoods. Drug and alcoholuse are also common parole violations. Drug and alcohol treatment would be alot cheaper and more effective than prison.
People leaving prison receive pages of single-spacedrequirements that would be very difficult for anyone to follow to the letter.An offender on extended supervision for a sex crime was required to getpermission from his parole officer to masturbate.
Gov. Jim Doyle originally proposed an extremelylimited early release program and then ended up watering down his own programfurther with budget vetoes.
Neither Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett nor CountyExecutive Scott Walker, the leading Democratic and Republican candidates forgovernor, appear to have enough political courage to advocate reducing Wisconsin’s financiallywasteful over-incarceration of nonviolent offenders.
Even a Republican governor in Californiawho once played a killer cyborg from the future is far more progressive on thisissue than Wisconsin’sso-called political leaders.
