OVERFLOWING PRISONS COSTLY

Too Many Petty Drug Offenders Strain a Limited State Budget. Alternative
Programs Are Cheaper, Effective.

The state Legislature has blown an opportunity this year to begin seriously
exploring alternatives to South Carolina's preference to lock up such a
large proportion of its citizens. An effort to study the issue over the
summer - with an eye toward proposing reforms next session - is
encouraging. This state desperately needs to match the size of its prison
population with its means and do so without compromising public safety.

Because the cost to incarcerate is staggering, it is necessary to review
laws that require mandatory jail time and long prison sentences and expand
alternative sentencing programs. This state already spends more than $340
million on prisons, even after laying off 500 prison guards and cutting the
budget $40 million over the past three years. With little tolerance for
more cuts, Corrections has resorted to deficit spending.

Without reforms, this cost and deficit spending are expected to grow.
Corrections is already about 1,000 inmates above capacity.

South Carolina is consistently among the top-10 states in the nation in the
proportion of its citizens that it imprisons. And we've resisted expanding
alternatives to incarceration even while many states have effectively used
strict home detention programs for some offenders. These programs are
attractive because they often allow inmates to work and shift the
cost-burden for housing to offenders. Expansion of such programs is needed
and does not run counter to this state's traditionally stern stance on
crime and punishment.

In fact, incorporating more alternative sentencing should not be much of a
stretch for our Legislature. It already has recognized that some inmates
thrive when given treatment and counseling without incarceration. The
state's Drug Courts have a remarkable track record.

These first-time drug offenders who complete the rigorous path to
graduation in Drug Court are far less likely to commit future crimes than
those who are incarcerated.

South Carolina has a comparatively high concentration of drug offenders
within its prison population. For a quarter of inmates, or roughly 5,700,
the most serious conviction stems from a drug offense. A good share are
lesser possession offenses, hardly the work of major drug traffickers. But
strict sentencing guidelines often prohibit leniency or eligibility for
alternative programs. It is here that the state must seize the opportunity
to reduce its prison population.

Without major changes, South Carolina will struggle to keep up with the
cost of incarcerating so many of its citizens. This will adversely affect
other necessary services. And it is simply implausible to imprison the same
numbers while continuing to cut the budget. We may have already arrived at
the point where that strategy has compromised safety. Already, the
guard-to-inmate ratio is nearly twice the national average. It is no
coincidence that prison assaults, against both guards and inmates, are on
the rise.

It's clear that South Carolina's prisons are too costly. Cutting funding,
without reducing the prison population, is too dangerous. Therefore, this
state must look within its laws, program offerings and pocketbook to find a
manageable prison population.