Nonviolent Drug Offenses. Sentencing, Parole and Rehabilitation.
Allocates $460,000,000 annually to improve and expand treatment programs. Limits court authority to incarcerate offenders who commit certain drug crimes, break drug treatment rules or violate parole. Fiscal Impact: Increased state costs potentially exceeding $1 billion annually primarily for expansion of offender treatment programs. State savings potentially exceeding $1 billion annually on corrections operations. Net one-time state prison capital outlay savings potentially exceeding $2.5 billion.
I’m voting Yes on Prop 5.
The issue of how to deal with non-violent drug offenders is one that doesn’t get the attention it deserves.
From a purely financial standpoint, this initiative represents a cost savings to the taxpayer. It simply costs more to incarcerate a criminal than it does to provide treatment programs, especially in an era of overcrowded prisons. Furthermore, if rehabilitation is a viable option, the person is allowed to be a functional member of society, as opposed to being largely wasted in confinement.
The implications are even deeper, however. According to a report by Human Rights Watch from 2000, “one in every 20 black men over the age of 18 is in a state or federal prison, compared to one in every 180 whites.” Since that time, these numbers have gotten worse. When the statistics are analyzed, a racial imbalance clearly reveals itself.
The social causes and effects that lead to this situation are complex. However, the present situation is a downward spiral. Non-violent, incarcerated males with children are also absent fathers. The punishment extends to the younger generation, thereby reducing their chances of obtaining a better life.
I favor methods of rehabilitation over incarceration, where rehabilitation offers clear benefits to society.
Additional information is available at Ballotpedia.
