Eye on the Courts: Conservative Makes His Case For Prison Reform

It was a remarkable op-ed column in the Sunday New York Times where Richard Viguerie, chair of ConservativeHQ.com, made the conservative case for prison reform arguing: “Conservatives should recognize that the entire criminal justice system is another government spending program fraught with the issues that plague all government programs.”

He continues: “Criminal justice should be subject to the same level of skepticism and scrutiny that we apply to any other government program.”

He argues that this is not just about the excessive and unwise spending offending conservative values, but also that prisons “are harmful to prisoners and their families.”

He adds, “Reform is therefore also an issue of compassion” as the “current system often turns out prisoners who are more harmful to society than when they went in, so prison and re-entry reform are issues of public safety as well.”

Three core principles, he argues, lie at the heart of conservative philosophy: public safety, compassion, and controlled government spending.

The most cogent argument he might offer, however, is that conservatives will have more credibility, politically, than liberals in addressing prison reforms.  This “only Nixon can go to China” thinking makes some sense.  Conservatives traditionally have run on a law and order platform and have criticized liberals for coddling criminals and making prosecution more difficult by insisting on a fair process.

For me, this argument boils down to the fact that everyone is realizing that the prison system is broken.  We have too many people in prison, many of them for relatively minor offenses.  Incarceration costs too much money.  And the vast majority of people – who are not serving life sentences – end up with few opportunities once they are released from prison and thus fall back into the same lifestyle of poor decisions and eventually end up right back in prison.

As Mr. Viguerie notes, “The United States now has 5 percent of the world’s population, yet 25 percent of its prisoners. Nearly one in every 33 American adults is in some form of correctional control.”

During Ronald Reagan’s presidency, the total correctional control rate was less than half, at 1 in every 77 adults.

Indeed, the cost of the prison system is about $50 billion a year, which is up from $9 billion in 1985.

He writes, “It’s the second-fastest growing area of state budgets, trailing only Medicaid. Conservatives should be leading the way by asking tough questions about the expansion in prison spending over the past three decades.”

“Increased spending has not improved effectiveness,” he writes. “More than 40 percent of ex-convicts return to prison within three years of release; in some states, recidivism rates are closer to 60 percent.”

“Too many offenders leave prisons unprepared to re-enter society,” he writes. “They don’t get and keep jobs. The solution lies not only inside prisons but also with more effective community supervision systems using new technologies, drug tests and counseling programs. We should also require ex-convicts to either hold a job or perform community service. This approach works to turn offenders from tax burdens into taxpayers who can pay restitution to their victims and are capable of contributing child support.”

The irony here is that everything that he is suggesting here we have written about in the past few years.  But this is coming from a conservative.

Richard Viguerie believes things are about to change and writes of a national conservative movement dedicated to reforming the criminal justice system, which includes volunteer pastoral counseling for prisons and more frequent contact with family members.

He writes, “This Right on Crime campaign supports constitutionally limited government, individual liberty, personal responsibility and free enterprise. Conservatives known for being tough on crime should now be equally tough on failed, too-expensive criminal programs. They should demand more cost-effective approaches that enhance public safety and the well-being of all Americans.”

We couldn’t agree more.

He notes some prominent national Republican leaders who have joined in this effort: “Jeb Bush, Newt Gingrich, the anti-tax activist Grover Norquist, the National Rifle Association leader David Keene and the former attorney general Edwin Meese III.”

It is not that we necessarily agree with the total agenda here, but it is important to start the dialogue and look for common approaches.

“Right on Crime exemplifies the big-picture conservative approach to this issue,” he writes. “It focuses on community-based programs rather than excessive mandatory minimum sentencing policies and prison expansion. Using free-market and Christian principles, conservatives have an opportunity to put their beliefs into practice as an alternative to government-knows-best programs that are failing prisoners and the society into which they are released.”

He argues that these principles work and notes that there has been a shift on crime and punishment policy across the country.

He writes, “It really started in Texas in 2007. The state said no to building eight more prisons and began to shift nonviolent offenders from state prison into alternatives, by strengthening probation and parole supervision and treatment.”

He adds, “Texas was able to avert nearly $2 billion in projected corrections spending increases, and its crime rate is declining. At the same time, the state’s parole failures have dropped by 39 percent.”

We agree with this approach.

Since that point, a number of other states have followed suit, and “much of the focus has been on shortening or even eliminating prison time for the lowest-risk, nonviolent offenders and reinvesting the savings in more effective options.”

Mr. Viguerie cites efforts in South Dakota, where “lawmakers passed a reform package in January that is expected to reduce costs by holding nonviolent offenders accountable through parole, probation, drug courts and other cost-effective programs.”

He concludes: “By confronting this issue head on, conservatives are showing that our principles lead to practical solutions that make government less costly and more effective. We need to do more of that. Conservatives can show the way by impressing on more of our allies and political leaders that criminal justice reform is part of a conservative agenda.”

While this represents a good start, we have been concerned in recent weeks with efforts of politicizing California’s realignment, which in many ways simply captures some of the approaches highlighted above – finding alternative ways to deal with less violent and dangerous crime.

Along those lines, we have received guarded but positive reports from the Neighborhood Court program that conservative DA Jeff Reisig has enacted in Davis, which looks toward restorative justice principles to deal with some low-level offenses – in particular, public intoxication.

It is early, but there is some real excitement about the potential of this program from a number of people who have been skeptical of the DA’s office in Yolo County.

—David M. Greenwald reporting

Categories: