A recent proposal by Department of Corrections head Matthew Frank and Gov. Jim Doyle to reduce the amount of time spent on probation by select misdemeanor violators is a fantastic idea. By knocking back the extent of probation a convicted misdemeanant can receive up to one year for Class A misdemeanors and six months for Class B and C misdemeanors, some semblance of reality may start to take shape with our criminal justice system.

Wisconsin has one of the worst, and by that I mean out of touch, criminal justice systems in the country.

Unfortunately, this discussion always becomes a chicken and egg argument. Reformers like myself believe treatment, job training, education, addiction counseling, fines and other such impositions, but not hard time, are the solution to many of our criminal justice issues. Hard-liners, of the “lock them up and throw away the key” school of criminal justice administration think simple punishment gets the job done. The completely misguided, extraordinarily expensive and unduly punitive Truth-In-Sentencing laws are the purest example of this mentality.

What is so interesting about the push and pull I see in the criminal justice system is that, by and large, the people who run the system are competent, just, professional and concerned about whom they are helping and how it gets done. It is the designers of that system, which are our elected representatives, and by extension, us, who are the problem.

Many scholars have noted that starting in the 1980s, the “tough on crime” stance by politicians turned into a win-win. In no way could you lose votes by getting tough on crime.

Republicans led the charge with their War on Drugs. This war may have existed, to some degree, sociologically, but when it came to “cleaning up the streets” the solution was simply to sweep the dirt under the rug. Job loss, a dysfunctional education system, family cohesiveness issues; these items were not on the Republican agenda (or if they were, were only paid lip service).

Democrats were just as guilty. After smear ads (foreshadowing the Swift Boat slimers) connected Michael Dukakis to a paroled convict who committed a murder, Democrats soon learned they gained few votes being the voice of reason. So they too climbed on the eye-for-an-eye bandwagon.
Crime rates nationwide have been lowering since the 1970s. The reason I referenced the chicken and egg argument earlier is that many conservatives point to their get tough on crime stance as contributing to this solution. I hold there has been no such thing.

The population boom of the 1950s and 1960s has created a large population of youth. It is a simple statistical fact that young people commit crimes more than old ones. Thus, when you have a bunch of younger people around (the Baby Boom Generation), crime rates go up.

The same is true of poor economic conditions. Almost all crime is done for economic reasons, either to better yourself or to pay for an addiction (usually brought on by a sense of helplessness due to lack of opportunities, poor education, bad family life and yes, no job).

What does locking up and putting away for a long time those who break the law do for the community? Except for predatory criminals (not the majority of them), absolutely nothing.

In fact, the focus on the criminal frequently demonizes the community they come from, which increases negative impressions of members of that community (read: racism) while serving the community a thin gruel of tough love. How interesting that 5.7 percent of our state’s population is African-American, yet they make up 38.8 percent of the prison population?

I do not believe that these small steps by Gov. Doyle (which saves $4.55 million while still keeping the old probation periods in place for domestic violence, gun crimes and sex crimes) will magically make our state fairer. It is heartening to know that the money saved will be diverted into drug and alcohol treatment centers for convicts.

This is a step in the right direction towards a saner administration of our criminal justice system.

If our politicians abdicate that responsibility by getting tougher without getting smarter, then someone else should take the reins.

Rob Deters ([email protected]) is a third year law student.