tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post4012182853475909505..comments2024-03-25T20:06:39.794-05:00Comments on Grits for Breakfast: 'Cap and trade' proposal could end mass incarcerationGritsforbreakfasthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10152152869466958902noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-90285684589846040012017-08-30T09:55:27.182-05:002017-08-30T09:55:27.182-05:00This idea is not original, it was proposed by the ...This idea is not original, it was proposed by the LBB here back in the late 80s. I distinctly recall candidate Ann Richards (a former county official) telling me it was "the stupidest thing I've ever heard of." More recently the DOC director in North Dakota proposed this idea, to great resistance. I thought it was a good idea in the 80s but I was new to this business, and now it strikes me as an abdication of the responsibility of legislatures to reconcile the resources they devote to corrections and supervision, with the sentencing policies they adopt.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01672151905477651021noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-91744264956803380652017-08-29T00:18:16.990-05:002017-08-29T00:18:16.990-05:00I would be nice if the prosecutors believed that ...I would be nice if the prosecutors believed that when a young person commits a felony (murder) at 20 years old while under the influence of alcohol and drugs, could and should be given a second chance instead of rottening away with a 40 year flat time incarceration. Anyone can make a serious mistake, and people mature and learn from mistakes. He could and would be a productive person and a taxpayer. Give them "GOOD TIME", "Give Them A CHANCE"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-15973106085133080972017-08-27T14:03:02.277-05:002017-08-27T14:03:02.277-05:001:23 asks, "Don't they pretty much pay al...1:23 asks, "Don't they pretty much pay all the costs associated with misdemeanor convictions"?<br /><br />Of those costs you name, that's the only relevant comparison to the question of who pays for felony punishment. And lo and behold, because they're required to pay 100% of costs for jailing people convicted of misdemeanors, counties ALMOST NEVER DO SO.<br /><br />That's exactly the point and why I'm confident that the economics of "who pays" so importantly effects decision making by local officials.<br /><br />And FWIW, IMO there <i>should</i> be reimbursement for ICE immigration holds now that the Lege has made them mandatory. It's the volitional stuff where local decisions drive costs where counties should be made to share the expense.Gritsforbreakfasthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10152152869466958902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-21244769217187518232017-08-27T13:23:33.028-05:002017-08-27T13:23:33.028-05:00Seems to me that counties already have quite a bit...Seems to me that counties already have quite a bit of equity in the incarceration business. Don't they pretty much pay all the costs associated with misdemeanor convictions, pretrial detentions, probationers detained prior to revocation, not to mention all the blue warrant detainees held until parole authorities can make a decision on revocation? In addition, I'm guessing the counties probably should be expecting any reimbursement from the feds or the state for inmates subject to ICE immigration holds. That said, if we could go back to the days of county penal farms, chain gangs and public hangings on the courthouse square, I suspect there might be a lot of Texas counties willing to make that trade. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-73171071921893404242017-08-27T12:39:52.643-05:002017-08-27T12:39:52.643-05:00Would love to see someone like McClellan DA Reyna ...Would love to see someone like McClellan DA Reyna face this. Speaking of: http://www.wacotrib.com/news/top-assistants-in-da-s-office-got-hefty-pay-bumps/article_3be7d777-4494-5d73-97bc-78f9ce75c1fb.htmlGadflyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13075757287807731373noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-86905817819518420752017-08-27T11:02:32.744-05:002017-08-27T11:02:32.744-05:00This wouldn't have the state "get out of ...This wouldn't have the state "get out of the way," of course, 10:57. It would pay for a baseline level of incarceration. The locals would only have to buy extra bed-years from other counties if they wanted to exceed those levels. The over-incarcerators pay extra - so sort of like Robin Hood for the schools, but with the extra economic obligations based solely on the choices of local officials rather than the income-levels of their constituents.Gritsforbreakfasthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10152152869466958902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-559933287517413162017-08-27T10:57:12.700-05:002017-08-27T10:57:12.700-05:00The same arguments could be made for state funding...The same arguments could be made for state funding of primary and secondary education. If the state would get out of the business of school funding, perhaps the local voters would be less inclined to approve bond elections for expensive high school football stadiums and other extras.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-42418283935797982832017-08-27T10:18:35.016-05:002017-08-27T10:18:35.016-05:00A genius idea. I've practiced criminal defense...A genius idea. I've practiced criminal defense law for 27 years (with a six year stint working as AGC for the Board of Pardons and Paroles. They let the fox inside the henhouse.). I have watched counties across the State, mostly rural, "Clean up" their communities by ridiculously long sentences for those they consider lesser beings. Should those counties be held responsible for the cost, or a large portion thereof of that "Clean up," informed taxpayers might enforce a new kind of criminal justice.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com