CRISIS IN PRISON OVERCROWDING CRIES OUT FOR A CORRECTION

Sacramento -- Want elected officials to represent your views? Look no
further than the Legislature. For years, it has mirrored the
electorate on crime and punishment.

On no issue have Capitol politicians been more reflective of the
people than prisons.

The timid being led by the blind.

The voters and lawmakers -- not all, but most -- have demanded that
California lock up the bad guys and keep 'em there for a very long
time. But they haven't wanted to pay for it.

The inevitable result is acute overcrowding, with inmates stacked
virtually like cordwood in some lockups. About 173,000 are stashed in
prisons designed for 100,000.

There's triple bunking. Roughly 17,000 convicts are housed in gyms,
dayrooms and hallways, leaving little room for rehabilitation,
education, job training, exercise and drug treatment. No wonder the
recidivism rate is 70%, twice the national average.

There'll be 17,000 more sardined into the facilities within five years
at the current rate.

Fine, one might say. They're criminals. Punishment isn't supposed to
be comfy.

The federal courts don't see it that way. A federal judge has put the
state on notice: Relieve the overcrowding by June or a cap could be
imposed on the number of inmates. And the cap could be much lower than
173,000. That would mean opening cell doors for thousands of convicts.

Federal courts already have declared California's sorry healthcare for
prisoners -- medical, mental and dental -- to be unconstitutional and
have essentially taken charge.

On Friday, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger announced he'll ship roughly
6,000 prisoners out of state to private lockups. But that's only a
partial solution, and it's sure to be challenged in court.

So the governor and Legislature face a real and rising crisis,
requiring more urgent action than anything else before them.

Here's a two-step example of the dilemma politicians face, often
brought on by themselves:

In 2004, the voters -- urged on by Schwarzenegger and the GOP --
chose to keep a tough "three strikes and you're out" sentencing law,
ensuring that three-time losers would be locked up for at least 25
years and perhaps life. Voters rejected an initiative to reduce the
penalty for third strikes that weren't "serious or violent."

The "three strikes" law, passed by both the voters and a voter-wary
Legislature in 1994, has produced much longer sentences for repeat
offenders. Tougher sentencing -- not just because of "three strikes,"
but also other popular laws -- has led to prison overcrowding. It's
also commonly cited as a reason for California's reduced crime rate,
along with aging of the population.

But voters don't want to dig deeper to keep the crooks behind bars,
as illustrated by a statewide poll last month.

The survey by the Public Policy Institute of California found that
voters overwhelmingly favor spending any extra money Sacramento
generates on schools or reducing the state debt, but 57% oppose
plopping it into prisons. Only 38% favor it.

Similarly, majorities think the state should spend more money on
education, healthcare and infrastructure.

But only one-third believe more dollars should go to prisons. About
the same number, in fact, think less should be spent on the lockups.

"People have a hard time feeling compassion for prisoners and spending
more money to create better conditions for them," says the pollster,
Mark Baldassare. "They just think that shouldn't be a priority."

The state is spending $9.2 billion this fiscal year on prisons -- its
third-most-costly program -- but that isn't enough to keep up with the
longer sentences.

Sen. Michael Machado, a San Joaquin County Democrat, says: "Governors
and the Legislature and the public have turned their backs on the
prison system for so long that it essentially now is
dysfunctional."

Machado, chairman of a prison budget subcommittee, partly blames
"one-upmanship" by legislators incessantly trying to jack up
penalties. "They get a press release and a campaign piece."

"We need to depoliticize sentencing," asserts Sen. Gloria Romero
(D-Los Angeles), chairwoman of the Public Safety Committee.

Not so fast, say Republicans, who have benefited politically from
being "tough on crime."

Indeed, Assembly Republicans have scheduled a photo-op today at Folsom
Prison near Sacramento to outline their "prison reform priorities."
It'll be the kickoff of a statewide prisons tour -- the GOP equivalent
of the Democrats' camera-generating classroom visits.

"It's important to go where the issue is," says Assembly GOP Leader
Michael Villines of Clovis.

In the past, Republicans have advocated building prisons and Democrats
have championed sentencing "reform." And neither side has budged. Now
there's growing recognition by both camps that they'll have to give.
Everybody agrees about the need for better rehabilitation and parole
programs.

Schwarzenegger has proposed an ambitious package that includes $10.6
billion in bond financing. These bonds wouldn't have to be approved by
voters, because it's widely assumed that asking them would be a waste
of time and money.

The governor proposes adding 16,000 bunks at prisons and building
45,000 local jail beds, about half of which would be filled with state
prisoners. He also advocates building 6,000 community reentry beds for
inmates about to be released.

One controversial idea is to create a sentencing commission, like 24
states have. There are two thoughts.

Schwarzenegger wants a commission that merely would advise the
Legislature and governor on appropriate sentencing. Democrats want a
panel with teeth, one that would actually set sentencing guidelines,
subject to legislative veto.

"We've got a stack of reports 3 feet high," Romero says. "That's a lot
of trees that have given up their lives to advise us."

Republicans don't want any commission.

"That's the role of the Legislature, to create law," asserts Sen.
George Runner (R-Lancaster). "One of government's primary roles is to
protect citizens. Why would we distance ourselves from
sentencing?"

Because politicians -- egged on by voters -- have botched it and the
feds are threatening to turn the bad guys loose.