Oregonians Prefer Prisons to Teachers

That's the message of this superb editorial from The Oregonian, which bemoans how the state legislature has yet again refused to reform their long, harsh mandatory sentencing policies -- all the while putting school jobs on the chopping block.  It's good enough to reprint in its entirety:

Locking in Prison Spending

Once again, lawmakers are going to kick the can of Oregon prison policies down the road.

Across most of state government -- education, health care and services to the elderly -- lawmakers and Gov. John Kitzhaber are pressing for dramatic reforms, sweeping cost savings, painful layoffs. On Tuesday, yet another major Oregon school district, Salem-Keizer, announced 420 layoffs.

But not corrections. Negotiations have broken down even over a trio of small-bore bills to adjust probation policies, reclassify certain felonies and take other steps to save a modest $20 million. Instead, lawmakers are moving to implement voter-approved Measures 57 and 73 and lock up tens of millions of more dollars a biennium for corrections.

Of course, some lawmakers are posturing about cutting corrections spending right along with other state services. But most of that is disingenuous, ridiculous, or both -- lawmakers huffing and puffing about the cost of supplying inmates with soda pop or salt and pepper. The prisons shut off the soda in 2008 and 2009, and, we hate to break this to lawmakers, it will take more than emptying the salt shakers to slow one of the fastest-growing budgets in state government.

Two things drive Oregon prison costs -- sentencing policies and the salaries and benefits of corrections employees -- and lawmakers are afraid to confront either one.

If nothing is off-limits in education or health care, lawmakers act as though virtually everything about corrections policy -- excepting salt, soda and inmate treatment programs -- can't be touched. So there has been virtually no public discussion about further delaying the implementation of Measure 57, the measure establishing longer mandatory sentences for property crimes.

Moreover, there's been little debate in Salem about containing the costs of Measure 73, yet another seductive tough-on-crime measure sponsored by failed gubernatorial candidate Kevin Mannix and approved by voters. Measure 73 requires longer sentences for repeat sex offenders and repeat drunk drivers.

Mannix put a neat little clause in Measure 73 that requires the state to cover the costs of incarcerating the drunk drivers it targets. That helped win county support for the measure, but puts the state on the hook for $14 million in additional corrections spending in this and future biennia.

It also will warp the decision-making of county sheriffs dealing with crowded jails. Say a jail commander has to decide whether to release a repeat drunk driver, or someone who has committed domestic violence. Remember, the state's paying the costs of incarcerating the drunk driver. Who goes free? Is that the right policy?

Voters and legislators skip right past such questions. Here's another: Does it really make sense to cut funding for alcohol and drug treatment and cognitive programs proven to reduce repeat criminal behavior while spending more on longer sentences for property crimes already at a historic low across the state?

And one last question: Are you satisfied with the prevailing wisdom in this state that it is always easier, always better, to cut short a school year -- or lay off hundreds of teachers -- than it is rethink a prison sentence?