What do the most recent state budget cuts mean for public safety?
What do the most recent state budget cuts mean for public safety?
by David Rogers, PSJ Executive Director
Last week Governor Kulongoski made official the nine-percent budget cuts across the board to all state agencies. These cuts will have devastating impacts on schools while life-saving programs for Oregon’s elderly and other vulnerable populations will be cut or disappear altogether.
This must have been a very difficult decision for the governor as we come to terms with limited revenue from an ailing economy. Ironically, the one thing Governor Kulongoski did not seem to think very much about is closing prisons as was proposed by Max Williams, the director of Oregon’s Department of Corrections (DOC). Kulongoski quickly and categorically proclaimed that prisons would not be closed.
Given the severe and disturbing impact these budget cuts will have on life-saving programs across the state, it is a little perplexing that the governor quickly drew this metaphorical line in the sand. Why is closing prisons not worth discussing at the same time Oregon is about to leave vulnerable seniors high and dry? The answer: policy driven by the politics of fear rather than facts.
Oregon’s prison spending has been on an unsustainable trajectory for the past decade and the Department of Corrections budget has been one of the fastest growing agency budgets in Oregon. We are one of a very small number of states that spends more money on our prison system than on higher education. Is this the future we want for Oregon?
Ninety-five percent of all state prisoners will return to the community. We need educated and thoughtful conversations about whether releasing some a little earlier could actually improve public safety by taking the savings it would produce and investing it into programs better equipped to reduce and prevent crime. It is so easy for tough-on-crime advocates to create a lot of misleading hype and exaggerated fear that releasing several hundred incarcerated people a few months early will somehow have an apocalyptic impact on increasing crime. It is time we question the scare tactics and move Oregon toward a Smart on Crime framework.
It is concerning that closing prisons is not even part of the conversation when we look at what else is being cut in Oregon’s public safety infrastructure. We are cutting community-based and prison-based addiction treatment as well as drug courts, all of which help break the cycle of crime at a fraction of the cost of incarceration. The Oregon Domestic and Sexual Violence Services Fund, the only state-based funding for critical community-based programs like domestic violence shelters, is also on the chopping block. And it is possible that an entire youth detention facility could close which means a number of kids will get transferred to adult prison. Based on all the national research that shows the benefits of treating kids in the juvenile justice system rather than in the adult system, it sounds like we are implementing a recipe for failed rehabilitation and increased recidivism. I bet you feel safer already.
Interestingly, people are so focused on these immediate cuts that there has been very little attention to what next biennium’s proposed DOC budget will include. Those of us who are paying attention know there will likely be a proposal to start building a new prison in Junction City. This is projected to cost Oregon taxpayers over $600 million when all the interest is paid.
Smart public safety policy requires support for evidence-based programs and research-driven analysis—not reactionary, fear-based responses. Oregon’s failure to get a handle on the skyrocketing growth of our prison spending will continue to have a dramatically negative impact on schools, community colleges, and health and human services. The legislature has been starting to take smart and intentional steps in the right direction, but much more work is needed.
If we are serious about public safety we will not continue to sacrifice our kids and grandparents with budget cuts without having intelligent conversations about how to reel in corrections spending. Although there is much about these recent budget cuts that leaves us disappointed and concerned, the governor has made a number of useful recommendations in his “Reset” proposal for Oregon.
We agree that it’s time to rethink sentencing policy. By now it should be clear that Measure 57 is unneeded and unaffordable, while we unquestionably need expanded use of drug courts and evidence-based diversion programs. Oregon also needs to begin to allow access to earned-time for people serving Measure 11 sentences. Why withhold an incentive that promotes rehabilitation and can reduce recidivism?
There are smart ways we can improve public safety without dumping money into prisons at the cost of other critical state services that Oregonians depend on. We are looking forward to future budgetary decisions and debates that aren’t so knee-jerk when looking at what’s the most fiscally responsible public safety policy.
