Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, September 18, 1994 TAG: 9409200055
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: A-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: By LAURENCE HAMMACK STAFF WRITER NOTE: strip
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
The only questions are how much, and how quickly.
Gov. George Allen, who swept into office last year on a campaign pledge to abolish parole and establish ``truth in sentencing'' in Virginia, will try to deliver on that promise when the special session convenes Monday.
With polls showing crime is the No.1 concern of Virginia citizens, and with politicians mindful that the entire General Assembly will be up for re-election next year, odds are good that Allen's proposal will pass - at least in some form.
``I would think there will be some form of enhancement of punishment and some form of parole abolition,'' said Del. Clifton ``Chip'' Woodrum, D-Roanoke. ``But exactly what form it will take remains open in my mind.''
On the eve of the special session, Allen's plan - dubbed Proposal X - has lost some of the momentum that carried it through a summer of highly orchestrated public hearings, televised town meetings and commercials, and a public relations blitz.
In recent weeks, Democrats have offered at least two alternative plans; opposition has surfaced from groups such as the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the American Civil Liberties Union, inmate advocacy groups and members of the clergy; and there is talk of an effort to recess the special session as soon as it starts to hold more hearings across the state.
``I don't think there's any question that we will be seeking a recess,'' said House Majority Leader Richard Cranwell, D-Roanoke County.
Under Proposal X, parole would be abolished for all crimes committed after Jan. 1, 1995. All criminals would serve at least 85 percent of their sentences, and violent and repeat offenders would spend at least twice and up to seven times as long behind bars.
Before the governor appointed a conservative Parole Board this year, most inmates in Virginia served about one-third of their sentences.
While Roanoke Valley legislators all embrace the basic concept of keeping violent offenders locked up longer, the level of enthusiasm for Allen's plan seems divided along party lines.
Sen. Brandon Bell, R-Roanoke County, Del. Morgan Griffith, R-Salem, and Sen. Malfourd ``Bo'' Trumbo, R-Fincastle, are all co-patrons of the governor's legislation - joining 31 supporters in the 40-member Senate and 74 backers in the 100-member House of Delegates.
Allen has said that such ``unprecedented bipartisan support'' is a sign that ``the law-abiding people of Virginia are being heard.''
Cranwell, Woodrum and Del. Victor Thomas, D-Roanoke, have not signed on as supporters of Allen's bill. During interviews last week, they voiced some of the concerns most often heard from critics of the plan - that it virtually ignores programs that would prevent crime, and that its estimated cost of $1 billion for new prisons may be too high a price to pay.
``The way I see it right now is that we're being asked to sign a blank check for the future,'' Cranwell said.
Some say that while reaping the short-term political benefits of appearing to be tough on crime, legislators run the risk of diverting future resources away from areas such as transportation, public education and higher education.
"The insidious part of it ... is it appears to me that we're putting in the budget a vacuum that's going to suck all of the available money out of the state coffers for corrections,'' Cranwell said.
Allen is expected to ask legislators to approve a $367-million bond issue to pay for one-third of his prison-building plan. Financing for the rest of the $1-billion proposal would be decided later, administration officials say, with much of it likely coming from another bond issue that would have to be approved by voters next year.
The governor, who promises to ``stop the bleeding'' in Virginia by keeping violent repeat offenders locked up longer, is scheduled to address the legislators at 1 p.m. Monday. He has said that ``what the people of Virginia and I will not tolerate is delay.''
But after he speaks, the first topic of debate may be whether the General Assembly should recess so House and Senate committees can hear testimony about the plan in hearings around the state.
``The plan has not been out that long,'' Woodrum said. ``They've been talking about it since January, but we have seen nothing on paper until the last two weeks. ... The commission had from January to August, so why can't we take a month or so?''
But Republicans bristle at what they see as a delaying tactic by some members of the Democratic majority.
``We've had ample public input,'' Griffith said, citing hearings across the state held by the governor's Commission on Parole Abolition and Sentencing Reform and by a legislative panel that studied parole reform under the leadership of Del. James Almand, D-Arlington. Lt. Gov. Don Beyer and Attorney General Jim Gilmore have also traveled the state to hold public forums on crime.
``If a delegate hasn't already had plenty of opportunity to talk to their constituents and go to the public, then that must be their fault,'' Griffith said.
With opposition to the Allen plan still in the formative stages, an extra week or two of public hearings could give critics time to mobilize.
Virginians who support the governor's plan may not have time to travel to distant public hearings on short notice, Trumbo said. ``The only people you're going to hear from are the organized special-interest groups that can travel across the state and do that all the time.''
The special session was initially expected to last no longer than two weeks, but a recess could stretch it out indefinitely.
``It is my impression that the purpose for [a recess] is to put everybody in a pressure cooker and to twist arms,'' Trumbo said. ``Whether you're for it or against it, there is no substantive reason for prolonging this.''
If there is an effort under way to derail Proposal X, it seems far from unified.
While some Democrats complain that Allen's plan is too sweeping, others say it is not tough enough. And while some Democrats are lining up behind a plan proposed by Almand's commission - having inmates serve a mandatory minimum sentence, and then face up to twice as long behind bars if they are considered a risk to society - Beyer has gone one step further by saying parole abolition should be made retroactive for some 7,500 violent offenders already in prison.
Mark Rozell, a political analyst at Mary Washington College, said the opposition and alternatives may be ``too little, too late.''
``Here we have a case where the loyal opposition is unable to unify behind a single position,'' Rozell said, ``and consequently it will be difficult for the Democrats to oppose the governor if all they're offering is a cacophony of voices.''
by CNB