For Oklahoma, more time and fresh opportunity for prison reform
Share this Article: Twitter Facebook Republish Print
YouTube Video

Published: 18-Jun-2013

OKLAHOMA CITY – Our state leaders boast, and rightly so, about what is called “The Oklahoma Standard” – the compassion, speed and effectiveness of responses to natural disasters like this spring’s tornadoes and/or acts of terror like the Murrah Bombing in 1995. 

Let’s apply that standard to counter the financial time bomb that lies at the end of the state’s unsustainable prison policies. Making the Oklahoma Standard work for prison reform is both practical and principled – a moral response to a legal problem eating at the fabric of our society.

Oklahoma remains disastrously lost in the mire of one of America’s highest prison incarceration rates.

Now that the director of corrections has announced he is leaving, Gov. Mary Fallin and other state leaders should make a fresh start on implementing transformational policy changes enacted in 2012, and virtually ignored since then. 

Justin Jones will leave his job at Corrections in a few weeks. That is no surprise, as the news comes after a rocky three-year relationship with Fallin and current legislative leaders. 

Some conservatives faulted Jones for often seeking supplemental appropriations. He said he needed the cash to stay ahead of the state’s burgeoning prison population (a number driven fundamentally not by his administration but by public policy in the form of “tough” sentences).

In recent months, Jones clashed with Fallin’s budgeteers for, they asserted, hiding around $22 million in operating reserves. The disputed amount was closer to $6 million – but agency reserves are no surprise to anyone who regularly monitors government budgeting. 

To his credit, Jones supports the “justice reinvestment initiative” intended to advance alternatives to incarceration. Given Oklahoma’s unenviable record for the highest rates of female imprisonment – and top-five spots for male incarceration – this reform is overdue.

Our neighbors in Texas, no squishes on crime, have been among national pioneers in lowering incarceration rates. Under Gov. Rick Perry, the Lone Star State has pursued clear-eyed strategies that led, remarkably, to cancellation of prison construction in 2011-12. 

Once upon a time, there might have been a rationale for quick resorts to long prison terms as the primary response to wrongdoing. When U.S. prison populations expanded about 30 years ago, research on effective alternatives was spotty or inconsistent.

However, since then laborers in the criminal justice vineyard have learned that early interventions (avoiding incarceration for non-violent offenses in the first place), treatment for first- and second-time offenders, and post-release supervision could flatten or reduce the numbers (and the cost).

Such efforts work -- when focused on redeemable individuals not yet settled into permanent lives of crime, yet at high risk for committing future crimes. 

Obviously, for the most violent crimes, incapacitation remains a valid and moral response. But for many violations, including minor drug offenses, lengthy incarceration is ineffective. “Real time” information about factors that drive crime in the first place, and recidivism in the second or third place can help policymakers to a more righteous job.

One thing that works is keeping a closer eye on past offenders once they get out of jail. That’s why House Bill 3052, former Speaker Kris Steele’s reform measure signed into law by Gov. Fallin, included explicit language requiring such supervision. 

Yet Barbara Hoberock of the Tulsa World has found that a key provision of H.B. 3052 – the mandatory monitoring for felons after their incarceration – is being largely ignored. In fact, statewide only nine offenders are getting that supervision, whereas 1,621 should be under post-sentence scrutiny.

It’s time for a fresh start. This week’s news means Oklahoma still has time and opportunity to take a better approach, based on the successes in Texas and a handful of other states.

Gov. Fallin should insist upon, and the Corrections’ governing board should conduct, a national search for an administrator with proven success in keeping the worst offenders locked up, while providing a path to re-entry for the non-violent and the salvageable. 

In addition to Fallin’s representative, any hiring committee should include public servants with actual experience in Corrections and advocates of data-supported proven reforms. 

The foregoing would be a practical step, and a way for Gov. Fallin and her allies, including Attorney General Scott Pruitt, to prove me and other analysts wrong in concluding that prison reform is being “slow-played” and deliberately gutted right now.

Oklahoma can do better, and it must.

In his commencement address at Harvard University in 1978, “A World Split Apart,” Russian patriot Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn spoke truth to power when he said: 

“I have spent all my life under a Communist regime and I will tell you that a society without any objective legal scale is a terrible one indeed. But a society with no other scale but the legal one is not quite worthy of man either. A society which is based on the letter of the law and never reaches any higher is scarcely taking advantage of the high level of human possibilities. The letter of the law is too cold and formal to have a beneficial influence on society.

“Whenever the tissue of life is woven of legalistic relations, there is an atmosphere of moral mediocrity, paralyzing man’s noblest impulses.”  

Moral mediocrity is unworthy of Oklahoma’s governing structures, including its prisons and jails. Mary Fallin should insist on excellence.

You may contact Patrick B. McGuigan at Patrick@capitolbeatok.com and follow us on Twitter: @capitolbeatok.



sign up for email updates

Steal Our Stuff