PSU Magazine Winter 2004

rl:TJ hen you're in the middle of an I.A.I economic boom, everything seems affordable. for Oregonians fed up with cnrne in the 1990s, one of those things was stiff prison sentences for repeat and violent offenders. Measure 11, the mandaLOty minimum sentences initia– tive passed by voters in 1994, may have contributed in some small way to reducing crime by locking up more crimmals for longer periods of ume. But state officials are finding that it is also responsible for nearly doubling the prison populauon in the last decade and strammg the state's coffers. Ben deHaan, former head of the Oregon Department of Corrections and the current director of PSUs Criminal Justice Policy Research lnsl!tute, says Oregon can't afford to stay on this track. Neither can the rest of the coun– try. After briefing 40 governors' chrds of staff at a conference m September, he said the tough-on-crime measures that swept the country durmg the '80s and '90s have produced not only a financial burden for the states, 6 PSU MAGAZINE WINTER 2004 but a prison system that is largely ineffective. The solution, deHaan says, is to make the correcl!ons system better, not necessarily bigger. That is what many states that rode the throw-away-the-key bandwagon of the last two decades are clomg. Texas has mandated probation instead of prison for certain low-level offend– ers. Kansas has chosen required treat– ment instead of prison time for most drug offenders. Washmgton state legis– lators recently shortened sentences for drug offenders, set aside money for drug treatment, and mcreased the time inmates convicted of drug and property crimes could earn to get out of prison early. This is all from the state which was the first in the country to pass a "three strikes and you're out" law. r., nc of the soluuons deHaan touts ~ to improve the system is makmg sure that prisoners don't go back to jail after they've sen·cd their time. This is done, for example, by havmg programs inside prisons to teach social skills, offering incentives for good behavior, and closely monitoring ex-prisoners after they get out, he says. But many ex-cons-even the ones who posed the least danger to society when they first went in-encl up back in prison because conditions on the inside turn them mto more hardened criminals. "There is a lot of evidence that shows ways in which we've spent a lot of money and made people worse," says deHaan. "The best way to make them worse is to put low-risk offenders m with high-risk offenders and givmg them lots of time together in an unstructured environment ." fl1 mform sentences for persons ... who commit certain crimes is one of the unfortunate aspects of Mea– sure l I. The law makes no distinction between first-time offenders, mcluding teenagers, and career cnmmals who ha\'C been col1\'icted of their third or fourth \ iolcnt offense.