Prisons and the California Budget

Prisons and the California Budget…. For weeks I’ve danced around the white elephant in the room; namely California’s Budget. I really should say lack of budget. No one issue or problem has brought this budget to the point of collapse. The budget problems are many and tangled. I’m only going to focus on the prisons and how they relate to the budget. Currently there are 34 men’s prisons in the state; several women’s prisons and I don’t know how many youth authority facilities. The budget for 2009 was approx $10 Billion. The average cost for a male inmate per year is $48,000 per year. The prison where I’m housed is supposed to house about 2100 male inmates. It averages over 5000. This same prisons budget for fiscal year 08-09 was approximately $200 million so the cost to house me is around $40,000 for fiscal year 08-09. (the figures for the $200 million and amount of inmates at PVSP came out of the Fresno County Grand Jury’s 08-09 PVSP report). The cost (actually) per inmate varies due to the type of housing, e.g.: cell or dormitory, dormitory being presumably less expensive. Also, age, medical needs, mental health needs and other special problems an inmate may have. This prison produces almost nothing to offset its costs. What I mean is: There is no farm or factory, etc. For the most part the inmates just go to school or vocational training-if both aren’t taken. (read my last blog). The rest of us deal with the overcrowding and cell time as each in his own way can, or cannot as is the case so many times. So, as the reader can see, the California tax payer is getting no “bang” for their buck. Sure, some men who committed crimes are locked up, who otherwise would be out there committing more crime. But, as I keep writing, 95% of all men and women sent to prison get out-then what? I say prisons should only be the last resort not the dumping grounds they have become. In the 5/28/09 USA Today, in an article by Donna Leinwand, she states: Half of all men arrested test positive for drugs. HALF! Why aren’t there more drug programs? I think for $40,000 a year, per person, it would be a very lucrative business to run. The state prisons have almost no drug programs. And why send a person to prison to get treatment. I’m quite sure a lockdown rehab would cost less than $40,000 per year. No return on the investment that is the problem. A man coming into prison does 2 or 3 years, gets out with minimal drug treatment or any real opportunity to receive some job training or education. The taxpayers aren’t any safer. The guy who just paroled with $200 from the state in his pocket, with no place to go because he lost everything when he was arrested- what do you think he is going to do to live? What jobs are there available to a felon-in this economy? No, the answer is not to keep the guy until things are better. The answer is not to send the man to prison in the first place. Yes, it sounds crazy but a sentence of 1-4 years is a waste. This is my opinion after observing and interacting with men in prison for almost 12 years. I believe the tax payer would be better served by sending drug users to lock-down rehab. Send people with mental health issues to facilities (lock down) to deal with whatever issues each may have. If we can divert the low level drug users and those with mental health problems from coming into the prison system I believe we will save billions of dollars and make our state safer. The money would be saved by not having to spend $40,000 a year to have a young man sit in a cell and get hardened at society. I’ve seen too many young men just change for the worse. I know when they get out they are going to commit more crimes. But, if society can try to correct the problem before it grows, maybe we can save some money and save some lives. Lastly I want to say that the voters of California got what they deserve. NO leadership out of the governor’s office or the legislature. Schwarzenegger is all about doing nothing. He’s more willing to cut health care to children than to let one inmate out one day early. He’s so afraid of the “Willie Horton” effect (that’s if someone gets out and reoffends in a horrific newsworthy way) that he, and for that matter the state house and senate, would cut anything else other than prisons. So, it’s up to the federal judges, on the 3 judge panel, to release California inmates. (This is so medical and mental health care comply with an agreement the state made in 2002) So, if an early release inmate makes the mews you can rest assured there will be Arnold blaming the “Liberal Activist Judges” and running on a tough on crime platform for US Senate. The only leadership in America in the last 30 years-if not 50 years- has come from the federal bench. Maybe we should just let the federal judges run the country. The politicians had their chance and look where we are. I just hope prison goes back to what it once was-the last resort. We as a people should spend on Education, Health Care and Care for our Elderly- NOT money pit prisons. With Respect, Veritas