New Democrat Update

STOPPING THE REVOLVING-DOOR PRISON

Unfortunately, crime and its frequent companion, substance abuse, may be making a comeback. In 2005, jurisdictions with populations between 50,000 and 250,000 saw homicide increases of about 12.5 percent - far larger than the big cities. Rural areas have been especially hit hard by a growing and troubling methamphetamine crisis, while gang and drug problems are invading smaller cities and towns.

One of the country’s endless and almost always unproductive debates has centered on the fight against crime and the war on drugs. Criminal violence and substance abuse go hand in hand but effective solutions are rarely implemented because of the policy gridlock between those who demand more drug treatment and those who want more punishment.

The reality is that about 60 percent of convicts are serving time because of drug peddling and addiction. People often go to jail because they robbed a home to get money for drugs or beat up someone while drunk. Yet many enter and leave the criminal justice system without ever getting any effective treatment. In fact, others actually pick up the drug habit while in prison.

One idea might pull the treatment and punishment sides together. Concentrating drug testing and treatment on probationers, prisoners and parolees could reduce both drug use and crime without violating civil liberties.

Colorado could closely monitor those in its criminal justice system by adopting an "enforced abstinence" program. All probationers and parolees would be checked for drug or alcohol abuse regularly, making intensive supervision an alternative to prison for those whose criminal behavior is clearly attributable to substance abuse problems.

Those who fail the test would be penalized with additional prison time. Enforced abstinence could also be used for first-time or small-time criminals with drug problems, again with the prospect of doing more time as the "stick" for staying clean.

Enforced abstinence is a cost-effective deterrent to repeated offenders, a major factor in refilling prisons. A prison cell takes about $65,000 to build and it costs about $28,000 a year to house an inmate, the same amount of money it takes to send a couple of students to a public university. States, including Colorado, spend nearly $50 billion a year on corrections, more than four times the amount from 20 years ago, and they are projected to spend an additional $25 billion over the next five years to accommodate more prisoners.

Criminal justice, like any other area of public policy, should be cost-effective. Locking up violent criminals and sex offenders makes sense. Putting many nonviolent offenders behind bars does not.

In addition to enforced abstinence, Colorado should consider what Texas and Kansas have done. Both initiatives are showing that safe, much less expensive, alternatives to imprisonment can get the job done.

Texas has developed residential treatment centers for low-risk, substance-abusing offenders in prison and under community supervision, as well as intermediate-sanction facilities for probation and parole violators. Kansas has implemented an incentive initiative for counties which cut their revocation rates by 20 percent. Additional funding is provided to counties if they meet that target - with the savings coming from the prison construction that otherwise would have been required.

A study by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy showed that $1 spent imprisoning drug offenders produced 37 cents in crime reduction benefits. The same $1 spent to give offenders community-based drug treatment produced $18.52 in benefits. New technologies, treatment strategies and community corrections programs can cut rates of repeat offenses by 25 percent.

Helping offenders “kick the habit” will make neighborhoods safer and help make these individuals productive members of society. More employed and law-abiding citizens will contribute to the economic health of our state. More tax-paying, rather than tax-receiving, Coloradans will make it easier for the rest of us.

The debate should not be about being blindly “tough” versus going “soft” on crime. Rather, solutions must shift to those that protect citizens and, at the same time, spend taxpayer dollars wisely.

GETTING MORE MONEY TO THE CLASSROOM

Improving schools to ensure that all children have an opportunity to succeed requires new investments to boost teacher quality, raise standards, and provide additional support for struggling students. However, in these tough economic times, Colorado and its school districts simply do not have enough money for proven initiatives.

Tight public budgets, combined with the imperative for educational improvement, demand that states and school districts employ a "cut and invest" strategy to ensure limited resources are put to their most effective use. Efficiency reviews, audits, and financial benchmarking can help officials find new ways to save money or use available money more wisely.

The State Auditor, the state Department of Education, Office of State Planning and Budget or some other agency could be tasked to bring teams of performance management specialists to work with school boards and administrators. The focus would be on pinpointing areas for cost savings and redirecting resources to improve quality in the classroom.

Likewise, financial benchmarking software could help policymakers and administrators examine costs and expenditures against similar school districts and help determine where savings may be available. Standard and Poor's School Evaluation Services (SES), for example, uses business-world financial expertise and technology to analyze school and district budgets and student achievement, and makes the results available online to inform parents, educators, and the public.

As Virginia’s Governor, U.S. Senator Mark Warner instituted a two-part efficiency review of education spending to complement his commitment to increased support for education and help school districts use the new resources effectively. Auditors and management specialists worked with individual school systems to identify administrative savings through better organization and management, and redeployed these resources in classrooms. Once those efficient practices were identified, audit teams shared them with other districts, spreading savings across the state. Also included was a statewide performance review that monitors how effectively school districts use their resources to increase achievement.

Analyzing how money is spent is a cost-effective approach for identifying new funds for higher student achievement. Cutting unnecessary or inefficient administrative expenses, and redeploying them to more effective uses, is an important way to increase classroom spending and improve public education.

It is time for some simple realities to be faced and for false choices to be discarded. Too many unproductive arguments over public education get caught between the need for more investment and more reform. Investment without accountability is a waste of money. Accountability without investment is doomed to fail. While money alone will not solve every problem, neither will a lack of resources.

Colorado’s schools need both because reform itself requires more resources.