Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, September 22, 1994 TAG: 9409240021
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-11 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: RAY L. GARLAND
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
In view of the work of two commissions studying the subject over many months, and the public input already received, it was the governor's strong opinion that the legislature should get right to work.
In his address to the joint assembly, Allen was far from confrontational, but his charge was pointed: "[T]he present lenient and dishonest system is not just. It is not working. The people are disgusted by it and demand change." At the end, however, there was a hint of the political retribution that might fall upon obstructionists: "Please remember that, with each day of delay, you're not rebuffing me - you're rebuffing the people of Virginia."
But Democratic leaders succeeded in slowing the train down by at least a week, insisting on another round of public hearings. That maneuver passed on a straight party-line vote, with all Republicans voting to begin considering the bills immediately, and all Democrats voting to adjourn for a week to take additional public comment. Democrats narrowly lost a vote to expand the charge of the special session to include other crime-prevention measures.
While it's hard to argue against taking additional soundings, we have a pretty good idea of what these new hearings will be like. The Allen administration will orchestrate an approving claque that will be countered by those brandishing charges of "racism" and insisting that the proper priority is attacking the "root causes" of crime.
But it's hard to see what points Democrats hope to score by demonstrating they're still in charge of the assembly's timetable. Allen has rounded up 31 Senate sponsors, out of 40 members, including such prominent Democrats as Majority Leader Hunter Andrews and the chairmen of the committees directly involved in shaping the legislation. In the House, the governor has 74 sponsors for his bill, including almost half the Democrats, out of 100 members.
All this is testimony to Allen's skill in carefully preparing the ground on which he hopes to erect his place in political legend and Virginia history. This raises the question of just how much tinkering Democrats will dare to do. Rest assured, however, with fear and loathing they will try to put their stamp on it. But the main outline of what we'll get is before us.
And it's just that, largely an outline, resting mainly on the deliberations of a new state agency, the 21-member Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission, to be organized in January.
The commission basically will write the script for future punishment in Virginia by establishing a range of sentences for each felony offense. The midpoint of that range will be determined by taking the average time actually served in each category during 1988-92 and increasing it by 13.4 percent. For crimes of violence, the time will be further increased from 100 percent to 700 percent. Judges will have the discretion to depart from these sentencing guidelines, but must give their reasons in writing.
In addition to ending parole, the governor would also scrap the state's generous policy of reducing sentences by time off for good behavior. For those convicted after Jan. 1, such credits would not exceed 15 percent of the total sentence imposed.
Having read the bill and the report on which it was based, I'm still in the dark on one little fact: How do you have all this toughness without exploding the prison population beyond all reason?
In the original presentation last month, it was stated that in the next 10 years the number of state inmates would increase by at least 150 percent - from 20,000 now to 50,000. But only one-tenth of that vast increase, or 3,000, would be accounted for by implementing the governor's ideas.
In his speech to the assembly, Allen didn't quote this figure. But he twice emphasized that three-fourths of his $1-billion prison-building program would be required even if nothing is changed. Much of this has to be guesswork, of course, but I suspect the explanation rests upon the assumption that many prisoners won't be serving more time than they would now, and some will serve less. In other words, "toughest on the tough," which most people would say makes sense.
Meanwhile, the staff of the House Appropriations Committee, run by Democrats, raised a red flag on the governor's $1-billion estimate for new prison construction over the next 10 years. "At a minimum," the committee report stated, "the construction-related costs could easily range from $1.9 billion to $2.2 billion." Nor would it stop there. On top of at least 30,000 new beds needed over the next 10 years, a further 16,000 beds are said to be required by 2012!
If these state projections are true, and local jail populations increase at the same rate, it means that only 18 years from now, Virginia will have 100,000 people behind bars. That would almost certainly be more than the prison population of Great Britain or Japan!
While no one seems to know what to do, there is at least some evidence that the people are worried about the road we're going down. In a recent poll conducted for The Richmond Times-Dispatch, 45 percent said they believed the governor's plan would reduce Virginia's crime rate while 47 percent did not. On the critical subject of how to pay for it, more people opposed both higher taxes and more debt than favored them.
But you can't bring a horse to the gate with this much fanfare and not let it race. May I hazard a prediction as to the outcome? This will be launched with high hopes that after a few years will founder on the rock of cost. But the sentencing commission will be there monitoring trends and quietly making adjustments. The question is, if time is reduced, will the assembly quietly accept it?
Ray L. Garland is a Roanoke Times & World-News columnist.
by CNB