POINT OF VIEW: INMATES' EARLY RELEASE HURTS SAFETY

IN RECENT weeks there has been much discussion and debate over the
release of approximately 1,000 "nonviolent" inmates from state prisons
to help alleviate budget deficits. Once again we are letting cost
rather than prudent policy dictate Oklahoma's public safety. The
Legislature has historically underfunded the Department of Corrections
in Oklahoma. This has led to the release of dangerous and habitual
criminals in the past. Only 7.4 percent of the state's 2003 budget is
directed to our corrections system. Contrary to rhetoric, endangering
public safety by slashing funding to the Corrections Department will
not solve our education funding problems. House Speaker Larry Adair
recently stated that public safety should be the Legislature's No. 1
priority. I agree, which is why I am opposed to creating another
revolving door for convicted criminals.

Under the proposed "early release" plan we will be putting potentially
dangerous criminals back on the street. Who are these criminals? They
are drug dealers, burglars, thieves, forgers, even Health Department
"ghost" employees as well as drunken drivers with multiple
convictions. Like most Oklahomans, I believe that drug use, theft and
drunken driving are harmful to society, and criminals who perpetually
violate our laws should be punished.

At some point along the road to justice for all of these offenders a
judge, jury or district attorney firmly believed these 1,000 criminals
should be behind bars. These are the same judges, juries and district
attorneys whom we entrust to determine which offenders are a menace to
society and should be imprisoned. In fact, many of these criminals
pleaded guilty in exchange for the sentence they are serving. Why do
we now want to second-guess our entire judicial system?

I fought hard to pass real truth-in-sentencing laws that require
habitual and violent criminals to serve 85 percent of their sentences
and to require nonviolent offenders to serve a larger percentage of
their sentences. According to the Oklahoma Criminal Justice Resource
Center, the time served by "nonviolent" criminals has increased from
21 percent in 1995 to 41 percent in 2002.

Not surprisingly, crime rates have dropped dramatically in Oklahoma.
There is a correlation. Statistics show that a relatively small
percentage of criminals commit a significant proportion of the crimes.
By requiring these criminals to serve a larger percentage of their
sentence, we are preventing future criminal activity. The goal of law
enforcement, prisons and our judicial system is to protect us from
these criminals.

In addition to the pain and anguish that these criminals inflict upon
their victims, the simple truth is the public always pays for the cost
of crime in one way or another.

When someone steals, we all pay higher property insurance rates. When
drunken drivers are involved in accidents, we all pay for a share of
the medical expenses and increased automobile insurance rates. We the
taxpayers also pay for the staggering cost of cleaning up dangerous
meth labs. We should never forget that drugs and drunken driving are
not victimless crimes. A chronic drunken driver is a manslaughter
waiting to happen. Personally, I would rather see my valuable tax
dollars used to keep criminals in jail and to keep the public safe.

We know from past experience that early release of criminals endangers
the safety of the public. Let's not go down that road again.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Morgan, R-Oklahoma City, is the outgoing minority leader of the state
House of Representatives.