CRIME AND PRISONERS: NEITHER PAYS AND THEY'RE BREAKING OUR BANK

Is there anyone out there whose childhood didn't include liberal
sprinklings of the adage, "Crime doesn't pay"? We've learned after the
financial skyrocket of the '90s, of course, that some big, bold
white-collar crimes did pay, but those days are mostly gone and many of the
loopholes are welded shut. After several decades of a
lock-'em-up-and-toss-the-key binge, most Americans are learning a
corollary: Incarceration doesn't pay, either.

In most states, the cost of punishment threatens to exceed the cost of the
crime.

Our prisons are filled to bursting -- we lead the world in the percentage
of our populace behind bars. With a steady stream of new prisoners, coming
from courts bound by tough mandatory-sentencing laws, most states are
shell-shocked by the looming costs of even more prisons.

Many are looking for a way out. And why shouldn't they? There is plenty of
evidence that harsh mandatory sentencing and "three strikes" laws are
little more than a political play on the fears of the electorate. There are
countless stories of those tough laws resulting in long sentences for petty
crimes. The three-strikes laws have created some especially bizarre stories
of offenders getting life sentences for little more than a minor
misdemeanor. It may satisfy a national craving for vengeance against
criminals, but it also results in demonstrably cruel and unusual
punishment. And we, the taxpayers, are footing the bill -- food, clothing,
shelter, security and everything else -- for every one of those prisoners.
Dangerous felons belong behind bars. There are plenty of criminals in our
prisons who should be there -- violent, habitual offenders who must be kept
out of society.

But is it worth the expense to impose long sentences automatically, not
because a judge believes it's necessary, but simply because a formulaic law
mandates it? Despite complaints from defense attorneys, and even judges,
that the law often forces unfair, overdone sentences, the law-and-order
majority in most states has resisted any attempts to change it. But money
talks louder.

There are nearly thousands of inmates in Tennessee prisons and jails, and
the number is growing steadily. If for no other reason than the state's
going broke, something needs to give. It's time to look at ways to
stabilize, or even shrink, the size of the state's prison population. Some
changes in mandatory-sentencing laws are one place to begin.

Creative sentences for nonviolent crimes are another.

Technology now makes it possible for an offender to work at a
public-service job during the day and be locked in his or her home
(monitored by an electronic bracelet) at all other times.

For many in our prison population, rehabilitation is an option, and it
should be pursued with the same fervor that marked the imposition of
mandatory sentencing. Common sense should dictate that approach.

But if that isn't enough, perhaps sticker shock will do the trick.