Candidates shy away from criminal justice reform

By Marjorie R. Esman
Guest Columnist

At a forum for the gubernatorial candidates held in Baton Rouge in early April, the four major contenders— Scott Angelle, John Bel Edwards, Jay Dardenne and David Vitter—spoke about the looming $1.6 billion budget deficit staring Louisiana down. In varying degrees they all blamed Governor Jindal for the “mess.” Angelle called the budget, “out of whack.” Edwards talked about “no more band aids in the first aid kit.” Vitter and Dardenne chimed in with their own criticisms of Jindal.

However, when it came time to offer recommendations that might fix the mess, all four played it safe. All agreed with conventional wisdom that potential fixes could be had if the state were to review its incentive programs for businesses, and also take a closer look at some of Louisiana’s budget areas that have historically been protected from cuts. Conspicuously absent from their conversations were any discussions about criminal justice reform. Yet Louisiana continues to have the world’s highest incarceration rate, costing up to $700 million annually for the Department of Corrections alone, not counting the costs for local jails and the costs of police and the justice system. If we want to fix our budget, we must look at reforms in our justice system, which saps far more money than it needs to.

Put Reform at the Top

On April 15, the ACLU of Louisiana and a coalition of supporters issued a call to the gubernatorial candidates to put criminal justice reform at or near the top of their platform. We asked them to address three issues: closing the pipeline feeding the criminal justice system; helping people get out of the criminal justice system; and creating a criminal justice system that is fair to everyone, regardless of their race or background. These issues can be addressed in many ways, including revisions to life without parole sentencing and opportunities for parole for the elderly; alternatives to incarceration for minor offenses, including community service; shorter sentences for minor offenses particularly where Louisiana’s sentences are inconsistent with those of other states; revising our punitive bail system that keeps poor people in jail prior to trial; and reforming our marijuana laws, which disproportionately affect minority communities and often serve no public safety purpose. These are just some examples of changes that can be made, and we need our candidates to tell us what they think. As a coalition, we asked for the candidates to tell the people what they think – and so far, not a single candidate has responded.

What are they afraid of?

In recent years bipartisan coalitions have emerged to address the issue of criminal justice reform, both nationally and here at home. This isn’t new, and no one should be afraid to talk about it. The fact is that with Louisiana’s high incarceration rate we aren’t any safer, we just have a steep bill and pay a high price in squandered human potential. Last year our neighbors in Mississippi passed widespread criminal justice legislation that will begin reducing the state’s incarceration rate and ultimately save the state a projected $266 million over the next ten years. If Mississippi can do this, so can we -if we have the right leadership.

The men who want to lead our state for the next four (or eight) years owe us their vision of this very serious problem. If they haven’t thought about it, they must. If they have, why won’t they tell us what they think?

What we can do? As voters, we need to ask these questions. We need to seek answers at every opportunity. We need our media voices, our community leaders, and our spokespeople to demand that the candidates address this pressing issue. Now is the time, as we seek to curb expenses. Like other states, we can do this through the justice system and enhance public safety, if we do it right. We just need the right leadership.

Candidates, are you paying attention?

This article originally published in the May 11, 2015 print edition of The Louisiana Weekly newspaper.