How tough on crime squeezes the budget

In this week’s web feature, I highlight the increased spending on prisons, noting that in terms of effectiveness, we’d be better off investing in cheaper approaches such as crime prevention and restorative justice. In choosing to put more people in prison for longer periods, Canada is emulating our neighbour to the south, which has the highest rate of incarceration in the world. But just as we are moving in this direction, some US states are starting to back away from it. Their primary motivation? They just can’t afford to be “tough on crime” any longer.

One in 100 adults in the US is now in county jail, state or federal prison, compared to 1 in 400 in the 1970s. This incarceration boom had a significant impact on prison budgets – according to a study by the Pew Center on the States, 1 in every 15 state dollars is now going to corrections. In 1987, the 50 states spent $10.6 billion of their general funds on corrections; but 2007, they were spending $44 billion, an increase of 127% when adjusted for inflation.

California, which has by far and away the highest prison budget, spent $8.8 billion in 2007, more than double Canada’s federal/provincial/territorial prison spending combined for a population roughly the same size. California spends only one-seventh the amount per pupil in its education system that it spends per prisoner. In fact, many states are finding that prison spending is putting a constant squeeze on their budget, reducing the dollars available for other priorities.

As a result, some states are adopting new approaches to crime that are more cost-effective and at least as effective in reducing recidivism simply to provide some relief for their budgets. The Pew Center study details three states that have experienced success with alternative approaches.

In Texas, which has the second highest incarceration rate of all the US states, the prison population increased 300% between 1985 and 2005, requiring significant resources to build new prisons. Faced with another half a billion dollar expansion in 2007, a bipartisan consensus developed to try another approach. Rather than sending everyone to prison, some offenders are being given alternative sentences such as drug treatment. For those who violate parole or probation, community-based sanctions such as community service and electronic monitoring have replaced incarceration. These changes are expected to save Texas as much as $500 million.

Kansas was also faced with a half a billion dollar prison expansion if it was going to house its growing population of prisoners. Instead, lawmakers surveyed the public and discovered that there was public support for a combination of new prisons and new programs to help those on parole and probation avoid returning to prison.

And finally, Nevada responded to a squeeze on its state budget by expanding earned time credits – credits that allow inmates to shave time off their sentences through good behaviour or completion of education and rehabilitation programs. Since the legislation was introduced in 2007, Nevada’s prison population has declined, while the crime rate and arrest rate have not increased.

On a totally unrelated note, check out this Maclean’s review “Is flogging less cruel than jail time?” If you think the answer to that question is easy, you might be surprised at how Peter Moskos challenges your perceptions of what’s cruel.