Senate R’s Change Their Tune
May 24th, 2007 at 9:13 pm
A month ago, the Senate unanimously passed a measure by Sen. John Whitmire (D—Houston) to quit funneling parole violators back into prisons for minor screw-ups. As it is, breaking parole will land you back in the clink for another year. Whitmire’s bill prescribed a shorter stint in an intermediate sanction facility — like a prison, but without the long-term inmates around.
It was just one piece of the Whitmire/Madden reforms, but it could quickly translate into fewer people spending less time in prison. That means fewer occupied prison beds, and makes building three new prisons less necessary — especially with the new budget likely to include funding for them.
The House stranded the bill at the end of the calendar early this week, so Whitmire amended it onto another bill in the Senate Wednesday. This time, support was less than unanimous. If debate on the Senate floor is any indication, some of the prison diversion programs inching toward the governor’s desk could have a bumpy road ahead.
Sen. Steve Ogden led the Republican charge against Whitmire, asking why people who break the law shouldn’t go back to prison. Whitmire replied that parole violations are often for breaking the rules. If what they’ve done is a crime, they’ll be punished for it, he said. Whitmire argued that a year in prison is unnecessary, and wasteful, for punishing someone who breaks their parole by leaving the county, or sitting down at a bar.
“Then I guess you get a ‘get out of jail free’ card,” Ogden said.
Whitmire looked exasperated that he’d have to defend his proposal against a sound bite. “This bill is so critical to our capacity reuirements at TDCJ,” he replied. He told Ogden the amendment would cut the number of people locked up for minor offenses, “so we don’t have to spend $231 million on unnecesary prisons.” Unnecessary prisons, it should be noted, that Ogden supplied himself in the budget. Wonder if Ogden’s worried about cutting off the demand?
Whitmire postponed his amendment and spoke with Senate Republicans in a back room. When the bill came back up, the amendment passed with a compromise: violators would go to an intermediate facility the first time they broke parole. Any more violations, and it’s back to the pen.
Whitmire was frustrated afterward that some senators are backing off their support. After putting together a research-based package of reforms, he didn’t having to tweak his proposal on the spot. Mostly, though, he said he recognizes that the reforms he does get through the Lege won’t have an automatic “Rick Perry” stamp waiting for them. When the leadership is pushing Jessica’s Law and three new prisons, reforms and diversion could prove a tough sell.
May 26th, 2007 at 9:15 am
We totally agree with you on this issue. May I suggest another alternative? Discontinue extreme punishment. Especially for first time offenders. My son is doing 5.5 years in TDCJ for being in a fight (first offense) when he was 18 at a party full of drunken teenagers. He is and has always been a great kid. Honor roll, athlete, most popular. He made a very very bad judgemnet call. But who doesn’s when they are 18. He is a law abiding taxpaying home owner learning how to become a criminal in the TDCJ system.
You may also want to consider allowing time served when they are out on bond wearing an ankel braclet. He did for 16 months without ever violating the conditions, payments, or call ins. He received no time served for this period.
July 7th, 2007 at 1:07 am
I am a mom of a 23 yr old son, who is currently incarcerated in the state of Tx.. Originally, he had participated in childhood mischief and was placed on 10 yr probation. He had a fight with a friend, broke his jaw and was taken off his probation and an additional 5 years added. He was taken to the penn. Now, at the hands of a few very mean guards, we are watching helplessly as they are starving our son. He has gone from 180 pounds, down to 108. He has been being fed for a few days and then they will just pass him up for 3 or 4 days. Is there nothing that a parent can do to exercise their parental rights in matters as this??