City Council member Nick Licata explains why Seattle doesn’t need to build a new jail. Of all the places where we could be saving money right now, this is one of the most obvious. A Citizen’s Initiative has already been launched to find alternatives to building a new jail.
Back in January, Real Change hosted an event to air opposition to the plan. The video below contains some very insightful comments from Seattle middle school teacher Jesse Hagopian about how much we value prisons vs. schools:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CrByNwp5Gw[/youtube]
The issue of our ever-expanding prison population is finally coming to the fore, thanks to courageous politicians like Jim Webb, who recognize that it’s nothing short of a tragic failure that America has the world’s largest prison population by far. The fact that even here in “progressive” King County we’re looking at fixing a potential shortage of jail beds by trying to spend money on a new jail – rather than re-evaluating why we’re trying to arrest so many people for minor non-violent offenses in the first place – gives us a good idea of how entrenched in our political system this failure has become.
One primary impetus for this failure has been the increased tendency to treat people with mental health and substance abuse problems as criminals who need to be sent to jail. During the 1980s, we began to believe that spending money to treat those people wasn’t a smart way to spend taxpayer dollars. This past week, another hole was blown right through that bit of conventional wisdom. From Blake Fleetwood in the Huffington Post:
The two year study results are in. “Bunks for Drunks” saves tax dollars.
Providing housing for chronic alcoholics, who are still drinking, can save taxpayers more than $40,000 annually, per alcoholic, according to the study released yesterday in The Journal of the American Medical Association.
Of course, at the time the project was launched, conservatives criticized the plan:
“It’s a living monument to a failed social policy” said John Carlson, a conservative local talk show host. It’s “aiding and abetting someone’s self-destruction.”
As we now know, the policy did no such thing:
The researchers found the average cost of alcohol-related services — hospital emergency care, the nonprofit “sobering center” (where police bring alcoholics to dry out), and the King County jail was $57,984 per person, per year while the 95 were living on the streets.
The savings and results were nothing but dramatic. Twelve months after moving into the apartment building, the average cost for these services for the same population dropped to $11,496 per person per year — an annual savings of $46,488.
The study also found that daily drinking fell by roughly 2% per month while subjects were in the program, which offered the alcoholics permanent homes with some supportive services.
So not only did this program save taxpayers money, it helped reduce problematic drinking as well. This seemingly counter-intuitive result is similar to the results found when safe sites have been set up for other addictive drugs. Despite what many non-libertarian conservatives (and even some clueless libertarian ones too) have been telling us for years, it’s simply not true that when government allows a behavior it’s inherently encouraging or rewarding it. The idea that government can be a moral nanny is a fallacy, and there’s no greater proof of that than America having both the highest prison population and the highest rates of illegal drug use in the world.
Washington is facing a very serious budget crisis, and it’s critical for us to base our decisions on the best empirical evidence for what works and what doesn’t – especially when it comes to dealing with the nexus between public health and criminal justice. The fact that the legislature is slicing $1.5 billion in health and human services, but couldn’t even muster up the courage to decriminalize pot should give you a pretty good indication of how fucked we are on this front.
Wow, Lee! a whole 2% less drinking?
That would mean if a drunk previously polished off 1,000 beers/month before, he only now polishes off only 980 beers/month while in the drunk house.
Not sure how that whopping decrease is going to nominally minimize the affects of liver damage that he/she is inflicting on himself/herself…
@1
You have to compare it to what they’d do if they were homeless, Einstein. These people are likely going to end up with liver damage regardless, so why should we continue to waste taxpayer money pretending that we can somehow prevent that outcome by being cruel to them?
Lee @ 2,
It’s also worth pointing out that, out of all the other facts in that study, particularly the savings to taxpayers, the one fact that RD chooses to focus on is the side light involving the reduction in drinking. Not exactly a big-picture point to be whining about in terms of the overall policy discussion.
Lee, if I had an opportunity to steal $50,000 dollar from you, but instead only stole $10,000, would you say that was a good deal? Would you say that I saved you $40,000?
A Radical Response
It seems to me that we punish ourselves when we imprison anyone as punishment. Imprisonment makes good sense as a way of protecting the puboic from evil doers, but that goal is not the same punishment.
There are a number of punishments we could consider that would be very effective and cost less money:
1. penury. Many perps, marth Stewart comes to mind, would learn a lot more form being forces to live at welfare levels. For many crimes where money is abig issue .. from drug sales to Wall street, penury would be very effective.
2. humilation. What is wrong with using the stocks?
3. corporal punishment. Why are we so adverse to imposing pain but willing to imprison folks? As a start, I propose flogging for any misuse of government authority to impose violence .. lets water board Chaney!
4. branding. Some crimes DESERVE life long punishment, but that need not mean cutting of heads or imprisonment. Why not bring back the scarlet letter, BRAND the perps!
I thinl branding might be a more onerous penalty than imprisonment for .. rape, public fraud, etc.
Imagine Oly North appearing on TV with the letter “T” (for traitor) tattooed on his forehead.
I never hear wingnuts who are in favor of closing jails to save tax dollars — just public schools.
re 5: I realize your comments are tongue in cheek, but my opinion on that is that the people doing the sentencing would in many cases be the ones who should be getting the punishment — ie , the Salem Witch trials.
There is a reason that we have the department of corrections and not the department of punishment. Also, the word ‘penitentiary’ has a very different meaning than punishment.
1 My sister-in-law used to work at the facility in question. There’s a pretty watercolor painting on my office wall that one of the residents sold in a crafts fair they held a while back. Seems when some of those guys get off the street into a warm, dry space of their own, they’re able to start doing stuff that exercises whatever talents they happen to have, doing things that are a little difficult to work on in the drunk tank or a cardboard box under the freeway. With something else to keep occupied with, it stands to reason someone might not be less inclined to drink.
6 The Cheap Labor Conservatives(tm) would dearly like to do away with schools for the “common folk”. Education is still seen as a surefire way to ruin a good…..you know, “field hand”.
Lee, haven’t you figured out yet that the cost of implementing conservative ideology is no object? After all, it’s not their own tax money they’re spending. They don’t pay taxes, only the little people pay taxes. At least, that’s their long-run plan.
Lee, it’s not going unnoticed by me that you are afraid to answer my question.
@1 Yes, I can visualize some of you rednecks drinking 1,000 beers a month. After all, that’s only 5 1/2 six-packs a day. If you beer swillers start drinking as soon as you wake up at 10 AM and continue drinking until you fall asleep at 3 AM you should be able to polish off that much. Given how you yahoos think, talk, and vote, it does appear that some of you are continuously drunk.
@4 So you’d rather spend an extra $40,000 of my money to prevent compassionate treatment of people who suffer from the illness of alcoholism?
@5 Branding is good. I like that. Make all the Republicans wear a scarlet “R” on their foreheads.*
* Hey, just kidding! Wingnut humor. I used to be a Goldwater conservative, you know, so I tell a lot of Ann Coulter jokes, which always get big laughs from the conservative crowd.
@12 Do you really believe anyone notices you? Frankly, I didn’t realize you were still here.
@16
Do you believe that in my #4 example that Lee should thank me for “saving” him $40,000?
15 So, Roger…you were a Goldwater conservative and now you’re regarded as a flaming liberal? Well, join the club–describes yours truly as well.
The thing is, we didn’t change. Everything around us did. If Barry were still around, either he’d be a Democrat or he’d be carpet bombing his Republican “colleagues”, because they’re our country’s real enemies.
re 12: Would you consider it an improvement if ‘someone’ decided to cut off your hand instead of your head?
Although, in your case it might be a moot point.
I can see that Troll is afraid to answer my question.
Tell me, are you glad that I saved your head?
#1 – Are you and the fellow Republicans just totally INSANE now? Republicans USED TO be all about saving money, spending less and trying to have ‘effective’ government program where they existed. Here’s two solutions. Solution A costs MORE and works LESS well. Solution B costs LESS and works BETTER. The Republicans want solution A. What the F**K!? Where are the old school “main street” common sense Republicans of old? How did the Republican party get taken over by the religious wingnuts? The Republicans need to have a revolution and take back their party.
Yet it was the picks for the obama cabinet, not the bush cabinet, that have turned out to be tax cheats.
Go figure.
Exactly.
What happened to the “ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.” democrats?
Today, democrats believe that the government should do everything, including providing automobile warranties.
If you listen closely, you can hear JFK turning in his grave.
23 JFK and Goldwater were close friends.
If either were alive today, he wouldn’t give you the sweat off his balls.
Yeah let’s see how serious the right wing turds are about cutting the budget. Stop building jails. Stop building prisons. Do away with victimless crime laws and 3 Strikes You’re Out. The righties say cut spending – okay let’s start there!
Headless Lucy
Actually I am quite serious about non prison punishment.
Imagine Martha Stewart srving a five year penury senyence or Blogo sentenced to ten years living on welfare?
Prison is a waste of tax money for these … folks.
@4
Lee, if I had an opportunity to steal $50,000 dollar from you, but instead only stole $10,000, would you say that was a good deal? Would you say that I saved you $40,000?
The answer to your first question is no. The answer to your second question is yes.
The fact that you think that those two questions relate to the post above in any way is a good indication of how little you understand what I’m writing about here.
Lee Squeals:
As I stated before, how does drinking 980 rather than 1,000 beers in a month “help reduce problematic drinking”? You’ve got your head in the sand on this one, Lee.
___________________________
No, we leave insanity to Democrats, they seem to take to it rather well.
Show me an effective Government program and I’d agree with you. Point to one…Please! I beg of you to point me to just one “effective Government” program.
We’re still here, it’s just that Democrats in general lost all semblance of common sense and you can’t recognize it any longer. Your anti-religion bigotry is your issue to deal with, so I wish you Godspeed in your recovery.
We prefer to have a revolution and take our country back from a socialist president Obama. I’m sure you’ve heard of the organized tea party’s set to kick off on the 15th of this month.
Unlike you, I wouldn’t ask for the sweat off his balls.
@28
As I stated before, how does drinking 980 rather than 1,000 beers in a month “help reduce problematic drinking”?
I could give you a math lesson here, but I doubt it would make much of a difference.
And by the way, it’s 2% per month, Einstein.