Rehab pushed in prison debate

Key legislators resisting department's call for three more units


Thursday, January 4, 2007
By EMILY RAMSHAW
The Dallas Morning News


Texas prisons are packed, and state corrections officials are urging the Legislature to build three units. But traditionally tough-on-crime lawmakers appear ready to take a different approach � rehabilitation.

Legislators at the forefront of the debate say they can meet a projected shortfall of 11,000 beds in 2011 by moving thousands of low-level or parole-ready prison inmates into supervised community programs and by bolstering substance-abuse programs to free up beds held by minor drug and alcohol offenders.

Texas prisons already hold 151,000 inmates, and the state is short 3,500 corrections officers. Adding prisons isn't cost effective, these lawmakers say, and doesn't get to the root of the problem.

The Texas Department of Criminal Justice "has fewer and fewer allies as the facts get out," said Sen. John Whitmire, the Houston Democrat who chairs the Senate Criminal Justice Committee.

"We're at a crossroads," he said. "There's a strong consensus to do things differently, to continue being tough, but to be smart about inmates who need a different kind of treatment."

Corrections officials say they are already working to bolster treatment programs and provide housing alternatives for low-risk inmates. They want more money for in-house substance abuse treatment facilities, halfway houses, mental health services and local community supervision programs, some of which were slashed in 2003 budget cuts.

But even with such solutions, the officials argue, new penitentiaries are unavoidable. The state needs two new general-population prisons and another emphasizing alcohol treatment to house a combined 5,000 inmates, at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice says.

"We're not just suggesting building new prison units � we're looking for ways to transition them back into society," said Michelle Lyons, an agency spokeswoman.

A push to expand the state's prison system nearly a decade ago tripled capacity to more than 150,000. Already, the state has more inmates than it can manage and is contracting with county jails to house inmates � the result of rising conviction rates, longer sentences and declining parole approval rates in that time period, according to a state Sunset Commission report on the prison system.

"It's not an ideal situation. We would like to be able to house the inmates in our own custody," Ms. Lyons said. The new prisons, "coupled with the expansions of existing programs, are what we're looking to do to alleviate capacity issues."


Formidable opposition

But corrections officials have a formidable � and bipartisan � opposition. Rep. Jerry Madden, the Plano Republican who serves as Mr. Whitmire's counterpart on the House Committee on Corrections, jokes that the two unlikely bedfellows are an "allied front � the compassionate Republican and the fiscally responsible Democrat."

Both say they fear pouring money into new prisons just to watch them fill � what Mr. Madden calls the "build it and they will come" phenomenon. They're ready to take a more progressive, preventive approach, they say.

Low-level, nonviolent inmates could be placed in intensely monitored community probation programs, instead of left in prison, Mr. Madden said. There are 900 inmates currently approved for parole, he said, but not enough halfway houses to hold them.

"We need to think about what the alternatives are for people you and I are not afraid of," he said. "That's giving them assistance to straighten out their lives."

Another option? Getting imprisoned drunken drivers and other drug offenders into treatment programs, Mr. Whitmire said, instead of letting them take up general population prison beds. According to the Sunset Commission report, nearly 60 percent of inmates have a chemical dependency but only 5 percent are admitted to substance abuse programs in prison. In some cases, they can't be released without finishing the rehabilitation program � but the waiting lists are six months or longer.

There are about 5,500 inmates with drunken-driving convictions "housed with murderers and rapists," Mr. Whitmire said. "The easiest thing in the world would be to just build another prison. You have a whole damn prison you could release tomorrow."


Vowing to stay tough

Corrections and parole officials say it's not that cut-and-dried.

Even with improvements in rehabilitation and shorter waiting lists for programs, officials say, more prison space will be needed within four years. And many of those inmates aren't ready for supervised release into the community, they say � which is why it hasn't happened yet.

And in Texas, where criminal justice trends have included tougher penalties and longer minimum sentences, some experts say a more flexible parole and probation system might not be politically palatable.

But legislators say their proposals are anything but a softie approach to criminal justice. When it comes to murderers, rapists and child molesters, Mr. Madden said, "we'll lock them up and throw away the key."

But they firmly believe these efforts will cut costs in the long run without jeopardizing safety. According to the Sunset Commission report, a combination of inpatient and outpatient rehabilitation programs could result in 2,000 fewer incarcerations a year and save $31.9 million annually. It would also delay the need for new prisons, the report says � which rack up hundreds of millions of dollars in debt service bills and annual staffing and maintenance costs.

"The tragedy, during the buildup, was that we did not provide more funds for rehabilitation," said Sen. John Carona, R-Dallas. "Now we end up with prisoners who, upon their release, are no more skilled, but meaner and tougher than when they entered."

Legislators say they plan to start working out the appropriations details this month, as well as designing a bill to fix an ailing parole and probation system. They're asking corrections officials to reconsider their request for new prisons.

Ms. Lyons said agency officials are ready to come to the table. They just don't want to find themselves out of beds in 2011.

"Hopefully, we won't find ourselves in that situation," she said. "Everyone in the game knows what the challenges are and realizes we have a capacity issue."


Maybe it's just karma, but I am in the process of indicting three cases (all within the last week) where the darlings barely got out/started probation before they reoffended. How is rehab any good for these guys?

I agree. A good many of my voters are very angry that inmates only serving a fraction of the time they are given. Try explaining to the three children without a mom that it was good ok to have paroled a man who left his half way house in Houston to kidnap and murder a mother just because he needed a liitle money and some wheels.

It seems like we are well on the way to getting probation "reform" whether we like it or not.

Hey, there has not even been a bill presented, so how can the issue be decided? It is typical for legislators to make many bold announcements before and during the session. But that's a long way from passing a bill.

Similar statements were made last session, resulting in a bill that was vetoed by the Governor. We need to continue doing our part -- speaking out to newspapers, radio and television and contacting our state reps and senators and participating through TDCAA in the legislative process.

The legislative process really is an amazing trip and well worth seeing. C'mon, give Shannon a call. He is just sitting in his office, lonely, and waiting for someone to tell him what needs to be done.

If you have a "darling" who would make a great poster child for what's wrong with early release, it is simple to contact a local reporter and ask them to do a story. I did so with a "nonviolent" drug dealer who was paroled out of a 60-year prison sentence, only to be re-caught and reparoled. Makes for a great example.

JB makes a good point.

Last session, certain supporters behind these "reforms" did their best to limit input from prosecutors during public hearings and forums. The members need to hear from all sides, not just the treatment folks, and they need to be told it isn't a zero sum deal. We didn't have enough bodies last session to even have observers at all those meetings. Maybe we could come up with a list of folks willing to volunteer to come to Austin one time during a particular week just to hit one of these forums and make sure the legislators hear all the facts.

[This message was edited by JohnR on 01-09-07 at .]

quote:

---

Originally posted by JB:
C'mon, give Shannon a call. He is just sitting in his office, lonely, and waiting for someone to tell him what needs to be done.

---

Thanks, John B., but I'm already married, so consider that position filled.

Oh, you mean legislatively. In that case, yes, I am always eager to have more help riding herd on all these bills. Austin is lovely this time of year, so y'all come on down and see what's what!

Shannon, you likely know the data on this, but doesn't creation of "rehab" programs presume that there is some rational basis to believe in the efficacy of such efforts? And while there may be such, it may also not exist. The legislature needs to know.

That's the sort of research that used to be done by the Criminal Justice Policy Council. Bottom line is they found that most rehab programs don't have any better outcome than confinement. The exception was properly run inpatient drug and alcohol treatment with appropriate follow-up. Of course, that is very expensive and wasn't funded. We can't tell, yet, what sort of "programs" anyone in the Leg is talking about because everything is being reported rather vaguely. That should worry you.

Good point, Dr. Floyd. But you'll be happy to know that the policy wonks at the Lege have discovered something called "evidence-based practices," which they repeat as often as possible when trying to sell folks on their ideas.

I'm sure that will help everyone sleep at night.

It seems to me that there was overwhelming support during the last session for probation reform / early release. If anything, due to the last election results, support has only gotten stronger and seems to be more than enough to override any vote (at least by my count). So running up to Austin to voice complaints seems to be a waste of time.

It seems to me the better thing to do is to try to get ahead of the ball and make some suggestions on how best to do the reforms. Simply arguing against early release is a losing bet since all you are going to do is turn everybody off and ALL of your arguments will be ignored. But if you argue in favor of early release - but with certain exceptions that are REASONABLE and in keeping with the theme of reform - people will be more open to what we have to say.

The rock bottom line is that no new prisons will be built - period! So we need to make constructive suggestions on how best to use what little we've got. Otherwise the Leg. will just ignore us (like last time) and they'll do whatever they want to do.

The point is that we deserve to be a part of the process as well. The point is the big fat I TOLD YOU SO when everyone who isn't involved in the system seems to think they understand the realities faced within the system, goes along with what's popular, and it still doesn't work.

I think you're right to the extent that we have to present reasonable solutions for our own credibility's sake. But we also can't just give up on what's important and what we believe just so that we will be listened to. If you tell them what they want to hear, of course they'll listen. It takes fortitude to stand up for what you believe in. The difficulty being, of course, that not everyone agrees on the proper solution, and not everyone can be happy with the result.

Not that prosecutors ever disagree, of course. I've NEVER seen that before...

Well, RTC, you sound pretty sure nothing will happen with prison construction. But, that's why sometimes you hear legislators making such pronouncements early in the process. They look to scare off anyone from coming to Austin and daring to disagree.

As a policy of prison population management, I personally don't think early release is ever appropriate. And that's what some legislators want to use it for.

The "system" doesn't need yet another re-write that moves the game pieces around. It needs financial support for the programs that are supposed to be used within the current system. An example is the state jail felony.

The state jail division no longer exists in law. It was superceded, through an amendment of the Adminstrative Code, to consolidate it into the prison system, all of it being now called "Correctional Institutions Division.

There is no longer a state jail director. So no one promotes programs in state jails.

There are virtually no programs in state jails. Almost no treatment. So, they have become virtual county jails.

So, why should we buy into yet another new system, that will likely follow a similar path?

Let's re-invest in what already exists. Promote the good work that should be going on in state jails. Put back the programs. Add the treatment.

Otherwise, it will all end in yet another round of early releases and rising crime rate.

The Point is that we might have input as to what "evidence based practices" actually work, and what has been tried unsuccessfully in the past. Heck, rehabilitation is part of the system--its in the Penal Code. Some folks, certainly, can be rehabilitated. What we could do is make sure that they don't simply move the same dollars from other parts of the system dedicated to public safety. The rehabilitation budget has been slowly cut over the years, both directly during tough times like '03, and indirectly when the legislature failed to fund natural growth and restore prior cuts. They have to fund both jail beds and treatment programs--it is not a zero sum game.

People are tired of a 10 year sentence really being 2 years.I'm going to give my local paper this thread. Maybe they will lead the charge to build more prisons.There are people who need to stay in prison for their full terms.I can think of 2 victims that would not have been hurt had the State done its job to protect them.