First, the state needs a general overhaul of its sentencing standards. Reforms proposed by Gov. Bob Riley's Sentencing Commission could resolve unfair discrepancies in sentencing for similar crimes found from one county to another.

But more important, they could take a serious bite out of the state's long-running problem with overcrowding in its prisons.

Additional help for overcrowding would come from a second measure, which would expand rehabilitative programs for inmates, such as setting up transition centers that would move some inmates who are close to being released to community-based facilities, which would offer intensive drug counseling, education and vocational training.

Both measures seem to have considerable support among legislators. A recent Associated Press poll found that about 60 percent support sentencing reform and nearly 80 percent support creation of transition centers. With such support, legislative leaders should be able to move both measures quickly through both houses.

Alabama holds 27,000 inmates in facilities meant for half that number. As a consequence, the state leaves inmates in county jails well past the 30 days within which they should be moved to state facilities. That burdens county facilities, and violates a 2003 federal court order. As of December, 1,299 inmates ready to be transferred remained in county jails. More than 800 had been there more than 30 days.

But state prison officials have little choice. The prisons are full. That's why sentencing reform and alternative programs are important.

By most serious measures, Alabama locks up too many people, and in the case of nonviolent offenders, for too long a stretch. One of the Sentencing Commission's recommendations is to reduce sentences for nonviolent drug possession and minor property crimes.

It makes sense. Too much valuable prison space is taken up with men and women who could more appropriately serve sentences in community-based work-release programs or drug and alcohol counseling centers.

That would certainly be better than building more prisons to accommodate an ever-growing prison population. Construction costs alone would soar into the tens of millions, which the state can't afford.

Even if the money could be found, new facilities would quickly be splitting at the seams, too, if legislators don't reform the criminal code to ensure more fair, more reasonable sentences.

Some of the 40 percent or so of legislators who said they were undecided about sentencing reform may fear being labeled "soft on crime" if they support the changes. But that's rubbish.

Freeing up space in the prisons by moving out nonviolent offenders would give the state more resources to hold violent criminals for appropriately long sentences.

The reforms have the backing of Gov. Riley, and few could honestly call him soft on crime. The Legislature should get behind him on this.

Back to News