BYPASSING THE BIG HOUSE

Government must be mindful of how it spends tax funds, but its first duty
is the welfare of the governed. The General Assembly looks after both
priorities when it funds robust prison alternative programs. A perfect case
in point: The N&O's Thomasi McDonald recently chronicled the story of Ollie
Hooker, a longtime cocaine user who fortunately was diverted to a two-year
drug treatment program in Winston-Salem. Hooker went from being a
$250-a-day narcotics user who stole to feed his habit to the holder of two
college degrees who works as a counselor for a substance abuse treatment
program that serves Wake County.

It wasn't the best decision when lawmakers in 2001 severely cut prison
alternative programs, under the Sentencing Services division, as state
revenues began to nosedive. The $5.8 million budget was trimmed by 40
percent. About 400 drug treatment slots, of about 2,100, were lost.
Governor Easley doesn't restore that funding in his budget proposal for
next fiscal year. Advocates for the programs are hoping that the General
Assembly will.

They should - Hooker's isn't an isolated case. A study funded by the
Governor's Crime Commission found that nearly three-quarters of Sentencing
Services clients had not committed another crime within two years of
treatment. (Most clients receive treatment for drug and alcohol abuse,
while some programs serve the mentally ill.)

Imprisoning Hooker for one year would have cost taxpayers about $24,000.
It's clear that diverting just a few hundred people from prison adds up to
significant savings. Those rescued lives also represent taxes that
productive members of society would be paying.

It's especially important that funding be returned to earlier levels -- and
even increased -- in view of the larger numbers of younger criminals and a
spike in women being sent to prison. Non-violent defendants who are
relatively new to crime deserve a chance to reverse course.