No parole for repeat violent offenders? Not so fast, critics warn

WITH EVERY violent crime committed by a repeat offender, get-tough politicians and police bemoan crime's incalculable cost to society - the lost victims, the rising public-safety fears, the ruined reputation of a thug-choked city.

Now there's a preliminary price tag on a plan that would stiffen sentences and end parole for repeat violent offenders in Pennsylvania: $55.8 million.

The Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing estimates that State Rep. Brendan Boyle's bill - introduced this spring - could dump an additional 1,685 inmates into the state's 50,653-inmate system, at a projected 30-year cost of $55.8 million.

In this violence-weary city and state, Boyle's bill quickly got a high-five from the governor and other bigwigs, and is getting fast-tracked through the state House.

"These are the people we have to use our resources for," Seth Williams, the Democratic nominee for Philadelphia district attorney, said at a recent news conference to rally support for the bill.

But as policymakers ponder how to shrink ballooning correctional costs in a state that spends $1.6 billion on prisons yearly, the staggering sum has some folks questioning whether the plan is worth it.

Critics complain that the bill is a knee-jerk reaction to the recent police slayings and will only make things worse.

Eliminating parole removes the incentive for inmates to behave behind bars, said Bill DiMascio, executive director of the Pennsylvania Prison Society.

The projected cost also virtually ensures that the state will have to build another prison to lock up the baddies who'll be affected, DiMascio added. Plans to build four new prisons already are under way in a state that now has 27, state Department of Corrections Spokeswoman Susan McNaughton said.

Pennsylvania already has a three-strikes law that allows prosecutors to request mandatory 10-to-20- year sentences for second-strike felons and 30-to-50-year sentences for third-strikers.

But convicts often are able to dodge that law, in large part due to the prevalence of plea bargains, lawmakers and experts agree. The average minimum sentence now served by the sort of second-strike felon that Boyle's bill targets is about eight years, data show.

Under Boyle's bill, persistent perpetrators automatically would be charged under the three-strikes law, eluding mandatory sentencing only if prosecutors ask for an exemption. And the bill will boost the mandatory minimum penalty for second-strikers to 15 to 30 years, essentially doubling the punishment they typically now face.

Advocates for juvenile offenders already vow to challenge the bill, which would allow courts to count juvenile convictions when tallying a person's strikes.

"Kids at juvenile court don't get jury trials, unlike their peers who did not get decertified, as well as adults," said Marsha Levick, deputy director and chief counsel of the Juvenile Law Center. "So, there's a due-process violation."

But Boyle, in insisting that juvenile convictions should be included, cited studies showing that the younger that offenders are when they first commit crimes, the likelier they are to commit more.

He also defended his bill's cost as a long-term savings, saying that removing problem predators from communities should drive down crime rates. The $55.8 million cost averages less than $2 million a year, a tiny fraction of the prisons system's annual budget, he added.

The cost projection is a guideline, said Mark H. Bergstrom, executive director of the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing. The bill's actual cost will depend on everything from its final wording to unforeseen trends, Bergstrom added.

"Keeping repeat violent offenders in prison longer obviously will add to the cost to run our prisons," said Boyle, a Democrat whose district in Northeast Philadelphia and Montgomery County is where many of the slain Philadelphia officers either worked or lived.

"But it is an incomplete analysis to only look at prison costs," Boyle said. "Violent crime in America has a cost one way or another: We either pay it in prisons or we let them out on the streets and pay the cost in loss of life, medical costs, lost jobs. If lives are saved through this legislation, then it is worth any cost to pay."