I’m still banging through this new list of recommendations to cut prison spending, but the very first page offered an incisive, and sad, analysis of the state of Michigan’s leadership.
I quote from the first footnote (emphasis mine): “During the initial meetings, the Justice Center and the working group agreed that any analyses and policy options related to the Department of Corrections’ operations (such as labor management, where there might be opportunities for increased efficiencies) would be beyond the scope of the project. Additional policy options were discussed and considered during the working group process; however, policymakers concluded that the options offered in this brief were among the most likely to achieve consensus on reducing crime and victimization and generate significant savings given the current circumstances in Michigan."
So, let me get this straight ... the duly elected lawmakers of Michigan have to rely on an out-of-state group, the Council of State Governments, to determine what’s politically feasible in Michigan? This is like Red Wings’ management going to Norway to ascertain how much fans will pay for a rink-side seat.
Here’s the current landscape in few short points:
1. Michigan imprisons at a far greater rate than its neighbors — and to no discernible advantage in crime rates.
2. Michigan’s corrections budget is so large, it hamstrings the state’s ability to invest in anything else or even maintain a stable balanced budget.
3. People in prison can’t victimize the law-abiding the way a released prisoner could.
4. Released prisoners have committed crimes, some trivial, some heinous.
5. In the world of politics, the safe play is to advocate for more prisons, more prisoners and longer sentences.
6. In the world of politics, it’s easier to cast change as jeopardizing the safety of our streets than it is to show how rampant incarceration impoverishes the entire state.
A CSG report, or the CSG itself, can’t alter that landscape. Only Michigan voters and their elected representatives can.
