HARD TRUTHS ABOUT TRUTH IN SENTENCING

Another Y2K bug lurks. It goes by the name of truth in sentencing.
This tough-sounding law, scheduled to kick in Jan. 1, is supposed to
clear up public confusion over the length of prison sentences. But it
could amount to deceit in sentencing, crowding the prisons even
further and pushing dangerous criminals onto the streets
prematurely.

Lawmakers ought to delay the start of truth in sentencing until they
come up with a comprehensive plan to ensure that the statute doesn't
boomerang.

The Legislature should heed the task force it authorized, which warned
that truth in sentencing would not work properly without reforms in
the state's criminal justice system.

First, a bit of background: Now, when Judge Pumpernickel gives
Quickhands Smith 10 years (fictional names both), what the judge means
is that he expects the defendant to serve about five years behind bars
and another five on parole - a practice that confuses the public, who
may think that a parolee has conned the system into releasing him or
her early.

Under truth in sentencing, the judge specifies precisely the amount of
time to be served behind bars and the amount to be served on parole,
which is renamed intensive supervision.

One factor, prison crowding, makes this proposition less simple than
it sounds. Despite a spate of construction, Wisconsin's prisons are
badly crowded, prompting the release of some inmates ahead of
schedule. So long as crowding persists, officials will have little
choice but to continue that practice under truth in sentencing. The
first targets for premature release would be prisoners sentenced under
the old rules. Eventually, even truthfully sentenced inmates could be
sprung early - making a mockery of the law.

Indeed, truth in sentencing itself may accelerate crowding. The big
unknown is how Judge Pumpernickel will react to the new law. Will he
still sentence Quickhands Smith to 10 years, or will he scale back to
five? The smart money says the judge will exceed five, so as not to
appear lenient, but may not hand down 10. If such sentencing is the
rule, crowding will speed up.

Clearly, for truth in sentencing to work, officials must resolve the
congestion problem. The Assembly has passed only a partial solution -
a measure that repairs the criminal code so it's more consistent and
reasonable and that spells out some sentencing guidelines.

More reforms must take place, however. As the Criminal Penalties Study
Committee notes, many Milwaukee County judges sentence defendants to
prison only because they lack faith in probation, where caseloads are
overwhelming. Lawmakers must bolster probation.

They should step up treatment for drugs and alcohol, which are
implicated in many arrests. And they should create alternatives to
prisons.

The criminal code provision is now before the Senate, which should
slow the process so it can initiate a more comprehensive set of
reforms and thereby keep truth in sentencing from becoming a lie.