The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

I agree.  They need to make the death penalty process more efficient so they can clean them out.

We haven't enough money for schools for a number of reasons and I would like to eloborate on one of them. We have made prison building the new pork project for state representatives to bring jobs back to their district.

We could reduce crime by making all the non-violent crimes no longer crimes.

By the way, where do you keep your spare house key?  I'd really hate to have someone break down your door to get in and non-violently steal all your stuff when they could just open the door.

Oh, and we are number one are incarcerating women.  

In our defense, some of the women I've dated...

I was going off what my father had told me years ago when he was the head psychologist at McAlester.

It was hard to find hard numbers or very recent numbers but here they are. Only half of all prisoners are convicted of violent offenses. The other half are property crimes and drugs. In 2000 22% of Federal prisoners were in for drugs, 50.5% of people in state prisons and jails were in for drugs. That was in 2000, I would assume those numbers to be higher today. I didn’t find anything on Oklahoma specifically.

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle-old/409/toohigh.shtml

http://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/usa/incarceration/

That’s a crap response.

Typical Republican inane sound bite red herring response.

Sometimes you guys on the left need a smack upside the head with a 2x4.

Of course it is.  At least you clarified your position.
Sometimes you guys on the left need a smack upside the head with a 2x4.

So, nearly 28% of the prison population is there for a drug offense, 10% of the population is essentially users.  I'm curious how many on distribution charges were more or less "trumped-up" based on having a large quantity for personal use?

You just thought they were women...

Don't go there. This isn't about left or right. Try and follow the conversation.

Conan, I actually largely agree with you on this. I might go a little farther, but on the basics, we've got essentially the same position. People who repeatedly commit crimes that harm others should be put in jail, violent or nonviolent. People who commit most violent crimes should be locked up for a spell the first time around (unless it's something like a stupid bar fight, in which case probation with an alcohol restriction is probably appropriate). People who aren't hurting other people should either have their offense redefined as "not a crime" or given probation.

There is no sense in locking up people whose crime doesn't involve harm to others. It's a waste of money. Most people should be given the chance to reform their behavior before being thrown in prison where they get the full on rape experience and learn how to be an even stupider criminal.

I think a large part of the issue is felony creep, though. So many crimes that used to be misdemeanors have been redefined as felonies as part of our various pushes to be "touch on crime" that it's much harder for the offender to re-integrate into society. It's nearly impossible to get a job as a felon.

Saw a show the other day (PBS maybe?) about Australia.  Seems like the Aboriginal population is 3% and their prison population is over 40%.  Our black population is about 12-14% of the country and over 40% of the prison population.

And the average drop out rate is about 25 to 3%.

We are doing something wrong.

I don't know what to tell you Heir, if a large percent of black people are committing violent crimes, then we are going to incarcerate a large percentage of them.  I have serious doubts in today's civil rights-oriented and PC world that more blacks being incarcerated on a per capita basis is remotely rooted in racism.

In a round about sort of way it is.  When you start out at the bottom, it is really hard to crawl out.  The majority of those being incarcerated come from this situation.  The blacks were put into this lower class decades ago, due to the racism of the time and for them it was a step up given the situation.  Some make it out, most aren't so lucky.

Now don't get me wrong, this is not an excuse in any way for people to commit crimes, or not take it on themselves to make a better life for themselves legally.  Just saying that the high number of black inmates stems from the high number of blacks in proverty, which stems from blacks as a whole starting in proverty generations ago because of racism. 

Just please tell me that makes more sense then stuff shadows posts

I understand your logic.  Much as the thread Nathan and I were discussing about poverty the other day, it's a choice.  You can't force someone to leave poverty, crime, and hopelessness behind.  There's plenty of help and opportunity for those who want it.  In many cases, the deck is stacked in favor of minorities to help them break this cycle.

Still though, I have a hard time accepting the actions 19 year-old they arrested yesterday for killing three people in October (and is now a "person of interest" in the Saturday double-slaying in north Tulsa) were the result of years of racism or slavery or otherwise being held down by whitey.

There's more to the disproportionate incarceration of minorities than just poverty. Part of is increased interaction with police. Not because police are racist, but because they patrol more in "high crime" areas, which happen to be where you have a greater concentration of minorities.

For example, blacks get incarcerated for drug crimes at more than twice the rate of white people. Counterintuitively, blacks are actually less likely to be drug users but since they have, on average, more interaction with the police they are more likely to get arrested for a drug crime. We end up being better at catching black people who have drugs, not because of racism, but because of where we concentrate our policing.

This disparity is partly responsible for the "eff the police" attitude many in crime ridden minority dominated neighborhoods. None of this is to excuse anybody's behavior, but more to explain it.

So basically, with the call for more police patrols in north Tulsa or typically black areas of the city to stem the violence we would likely see an uptick in arrests for other crimes.  That makes entirely too much sense to be logical  ;)

Did the polar caps swap or something?  I'm finding myself more and more in agreement with you lately.

Custo- I've been broke before, but I'd never go so far as to say destitute.  I agree it's not easy to dig out of, but you and I chose not to break any laws getting out of it nor out of desperation.  There's always a personal choice involved.

But us pretty people are better than the rest of you.

Don't hate me because I am beautiful.

You ain't that pretty.

Republican leaders in the Oklahoma Legislature have reached a deal to divert $5.2 million within the Department of Corrections to spare the agency from forcing prison guards and other workers to take additional furlough days.

 
A proposed bill obtained by The Associated Press on Tuesday directs the agency to tap money in its prison industries fund. Inmates run farms and make furniture and other goods. Prisons spokesman Jerry Massie says it's not clear what kind of impact the funding shift will have.

Guards and other workers still will take one furlough day a month, but using the industries fund would avoid their having to take up to four days off each month without pay.

The proposed bill is to be presented to a joint House and Senate committee Wednesday.

http://newsok.com/oklahoma-plans-5.2m-prison-fund-shift/article/3544998 (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-plans-5.2m-prison-fund-shift/article/3544998)

Am I reading this correctly, that money is being taken from programs that might actually involve corrective programs, to keep prison guards from having to take the couple of days off a year (that virtually every other work sector in the nation did)? 

OKLAHOMA CITY – A bill aimed to prevent additional furloughs at The Oklahoma Department of Corrections has been signed into law, the governor's office said Friday.

The bill will allow the Department of Corrections to use $5.25 million from a prison industries fund.

"This bill will get the Department of Corrections the funds it needs to safely operate our prisons and prevent additional furloughs," Fallin said. "I remain absolutely committed to public safety and I'm glad the department and the Legislature were able to work together with our office to reach this solution."

The bill is the piece of legislation signed into law by Fallin, who took office in January.

We just like having prisoners. It makes our politicians look tough on crime.

Oklahoma incarcerates 665 per 100,000 population.
Kansas is 312. Arkansas is 502. Missouri is 506. The national average is 447.

We are number four. Only Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi have a higher incarceration rate.

Oh, and we are number one are incarcerating women.  

And this sort of crap is why we have to have so many prisons. It serves absolutely nobody to lock this guy up for 20 years. Freakin' meth manufacturers get less:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=14&articleid=20110730_14_A15_CUTLIN753886

Really?  Care to ask the victim's family about that?

He had a wanton disregard for other's safety when he got loaded and got behind the wheel of his Hummer.  It doesn't matter how he took someone else's life, the fact is three people are dead because of his utter lack of concern for anyone else's safety.  Sorry Nate but driving effed-up is no different than pointing a loaded gun at someone.  Are these people any less dead than a convenience store clerk who took a bullet to the forehead?

I could agree with you if he'd been locked up for 24 years for simple possession or smoking a doobie walking down a sidewalk.  Driving after smoking dope and eating xanax is a triple fatality wreck waiting to happen, especially on slick roads.

But the point is that the ambulance tech testified that he wasn't impaired, and THC will continue to test positive in the bloodstream for well over a week.

Not saying he wasn't at fault, but do we know for sure if he was impaired when the accident happened?

And this sort of crap is why we have to have so many prisons. It serves absolutely nobody to lock this guy up for 20 years. Freakin' meth manufacturers get less:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=14&articleid=20110730_14_A15_CUTLIN753886

How the hell would the EMT know.......They don't administer sobriety check in the back of the bus.....

I would think that an EMT would be able to ascertain a lot better than say...you?

No, not really.  I believe he was also in possession at the time and blood tests revealed he was on xanax, IIRC.  The blood test is the mitigating factor here, as well, he had stated that he was distracted by his dog right before the accident. 

Sorry, no mercy for narcissistic dipshits who don't have regard for fellow human's life and safety.  It's no different than firing a gun into a crowd of people, people wind up just as dead, Hoss whether that was the shooters intention or not.  And you know what?  I feel the same way about distracted driving.  I believe in as harsh of penalties if it's proven someone was texting when they cause an accident of this magnitude.

Driving is serious business, not a passive activity.

I'm not saying he was not at fault.  But to say he was impaired?  Might be a stretch given that the THC tests cannot determine when a person has smoked.  I emphasize yet again, that I'm not saying he should be absolved from blame, because you are right; distracted driving probably causes more accidents then say, being mildly impaired on the chronic.

My concern is that they were aligning the sentence to reflect his impairment.  Should he be punished?  Sure, to the fullest extent the law allows.  Should that punishment include driving while impaired?  That's debatable.

If the evidence was weak his attorney would have gone to trial. 

The evidence would have been weak were it not for the state law that writes off science. Here in Oklahoma, a positive THC test is taken as evidence you're impaired. This sort of stuff is precisely why I think field sobriety tests are more important than a number. If a person is too impaired to drive, it should show up on the video.

Motor skills aren't near as impaired under the influence of pot, so not as easy to tell on a FST.

Sure, they're not likely to be literally stumbling, but there are effects on motor skills, nystagmus, among other observable physiological effects.

Declaring that anyone who has smoked a joint in the last month or so is guilty of DUI and subject to manslaughter charges should someone be killed in a crash is just stupid.

If he really wasn't loaded when the accident happened, he would have gone to trial.  There's got to be more evidence than just what you and I have heard.  I know I sure as hell wouldn't have pled out if all they had was some THC in my blood from a party a few weeks before.  The kid was driving a Hummer, I'm guessing his parents could have gotten him an attorney to fight it.
...
Wouldn't you fight tooth and nail if it was occasional pot use and you know you weren't under the influence?  Most people have a pretty strong survival instinct, especially when it comes to wanting to avoid imprisonment.

Motor skills aren't near as impaired under the influence of pot, so not as easy to tell on a FST.  Generally someone won't have trouble balancing on one foot, walking a straight line, reciting the alphabet, etc. unless they just finished off a whole joint of some really potent one hit wonder.  However, it can affect judgement, make a person easily distracted, and give a false sense of increased mental acuity.

Just like talking on a cell phone while driving.

"BLOOD TESTS: In some situations, including accidents and roadside sobriety checks, blood tests may be used. Blood tests are a much better gauge of current impairment than urine tests because they detect the actual presence of THC in the system; however, they can be sensitive to other metabolites as well. Blood tests generally register positive for just a few hours after smoking, though heavy chronic smokers may be positive for a couple of days. Less sensitive are saliva tests, which register positive for about 2-4 hours after smoking. If you have used marijuana in the last few days but are not currently under the influence, you should insist on a blood (or saliva) test instead of a urine test if at all possible, since you are more likely to turn up clean. On the other hand, if you have smoked recently, you may do better to take a urine test, since this will at least leave open the question as to whether you were under the influence. Also, urine doesn't turn positive until several minutes after smoking."

http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=4934

And drunk.

Watkins was NOT drunk at the time.

Motor skills aren't near as impaired under the influence of pot, so not as easy to tell on a FST.  Generally someone won't have trouble balancing on one foot, walking a straight line, reciting the alphabet, etc. unless they just finished off a whole joint of some really potent one hit wonder.  However, it can affect judgement, make a person easily distracted, and give a false sense of increased mental acuity.

Watkins was NOT drunk at the time.

What was his excuse then?  He just "missed" that car parked in front of him with the brake lights lit and the turn signal on??

Maybe he was just texting....

http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A42000

I was just reading this over lunch. According to Arnold Hamilton, it will cost over $50mm for Oklahoma to house 48 people imprisoned with no-parole life sentences on drug charges.

I really don't have a problem incarcerating someone at the head of a cartel, like George Jung, for life but bit players shouldn't be getting terminal sentences.  People imprisoned ONLY for use don't belong in a prison unless that was a related charge to another felony.

It would be interesting to see that if those 48 people were going to be released how many people would write to the governor to protest over it.  My guess, very few.

MIAMI (AP) — The U.S. is locking up more illegal immigrants than ever, generating lucrative profits for the nation's largest prison companies, and an Associated Press review shows the businesses have spent tens of millions of dollars lobbying lawmakers and contributing to campaigns.

The cost to American taxpayers is on track to top $2 billion for this year, and the companies are expecting their biggest cut of that yet in the next few years thanks to government plans for new facilities to house the 400,000 immigrants detained annually.

After a decade of expansion, the sprawling, private system runs detention centers everywhere from a Denver suburb to an industrial area flanking Newark's airport, and is largely controlled by just three companies.

The growth is far from over, despite the sheer drop in illegal immigration in recent years.

In 2011, nearly half the beds in the nation's civil detention system were in private facilities with little federal oversight, up from just 10 percent a decade ago.

The companies also have raked in cash from subsidiaries that provide health care and transportation. And they are holding more immigrants convicted of federal crimes in their privately-run prisons.

The financial boom, which has helped save some of these companies from the brink of bankruptcy, has occurred even though federal officials acknowledge privatization isn't necessarily cheaper.

This seismic shift toward a privatized system happened quietly. While Congress' unsuccessful efforts to overhaul immigration laws drew headlines and sparked massive demonstrations, lawmakers' negotiations to boost detention dollars received far less attention.

The industry's giants — Corrections Corporation of America, The GEO Group, and Management and Training Corp. — have spent at least $45 million combined on campaign donations and lobbyists at the state and federal level in the last decade, the AP found.

CCA and GEO, who manage most private detention centers, insist they aren't trying to influence immigration policy to make more money, and their lobbying and campaign donations have been legal.

"As a matter of long-standing corporate policy, CCA does not lobby on issues that would determine the basis for an individual's detention or incarceration," CCA spokesman Steve Owen said in an email to the AP. The company has a website dedicated to debunking such allegations.

GEO, which was part of The Wackenhut Corp. security firm until 2003, and Management and Training Corp. declined repeated interview requests.

Advocates for immigrants are skeptical of claims that the lobbying is not meant to influence policy.

"That's a lot of money to listen quietly," said Peter Cervantes-Gautschi, who has helped lead a campaign to encourage large banks and mutual funds to divest from the prison companies.

The detention centers are located in cities and remote areas alike, often in low-slung buildings surrounded by chain-link fences and razor wire. U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agents detain men, women and children suspected of violating civil immigration laws at these facilities. Most of those held at the 250 sites nationwide are illegal immigrants awaiting deportation, but some green card holders, asylum seekers and others are also there.

The total average nightly cost to taxpayers to detain an illegal immigrant, including health care and guards' salaries, is about $166, ICE confirmed only after the AP calculated that figure and presented it to the agency.

That's up from $80 in 2004. ICE said the $80 didn't include all of the same costs but declined to provide details.

Pedro Guzman is among those who have passed through the private detention centers. He was brought to the U.S. by his Guatemalan mother at age 8. He was working and living here legally under temporary protected status but was detained after missing an appearance for an asylum application his mother had filed for him. Officials ordered him deported.

Although he was married to a U.S. citizen, ICE considered him a flight risk and locked him up in 2009: first at a private detention facility run by CCA in Gainesville, Ga., and eventually at CCA's Stewart Detention Center, south of Atlanta. Guzman spent 19 months in Stewart until he was finally granted legal permanent residency.

"It's a millionaire's business, and they are living off profits from each one of the people who go through there every single night," said Guzman, now a cable installer in Durham, N.C. "It's our money that we earn as taxpayers every day that goes to finance this."

The federal government stepped up detentions of illegal immigrants in the 1990s, as the number of people crossing the border soared. In 1996, Congress passed a law requiring many more illegal immigrants be locked up. But it wasn't until 2005 — as the corrections companies' lobbying efforts reached their zenith — that ICE got a major boost. Between 2005 and 2007, the agency's budget jumped from $3.5 billion to $4.7 billion, adding more than $5 million for custody operations.

Dora Schriro, who in 2009 reviewed the nation's detention system at the request of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, said nearly every aspect had been outsourced.

"ICE was always relying on others for responsibilities that are fundamentally those of the government," said Schriro, now the New York City Correction Commissioner. "If you don't have the competency to know what is a fair price to ask and negotiate the most favorable rates for the best service, then the likelihood that you are going to overspend is greater."

Private companies argue they can save Americans money by running the centers more cheaply.

Pablo Paez, a spokesman for Boca Raton, Fla.-based GEO, said in an email his company supports public-private partnerships which "have been demonstrated to achieve significant cost savings for the taxpayers." He declined to answer specific questions.

But ICE Executive Associate Director for Enforcement and Removal Operations Gary Mead said the government has never studied whether privatizing immigrant detention saves money.

"They are not our most expensive, they are not our cheapest" facilities, he said. "At some point cost cannot be the only factor."

One fundamental difference between private detention facilities and their publicly-run counterparts is transparency. The private ones don't have to follow the same public records and access requirements.

President Barack Obama has asked for less detention money this year and encouraged the agency to look at alternatives to locking people up. He also ordered DHS to stop deporting young immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally, which could reduce the number behind bars. Congress, however, can approve more detention spending than DHS requests.

Beyond civil detention centers, private companies are also making more money locking up non-citizens who commit federal crimes.

To deter illegal border crossers, federal prosecutors are increasingly charging immigrants with felonies for repeatedly entering the country without papers. That has led thousands of people convicted of illegal re-entry, as well as more serious federal offenses, to serve time in private prisons built just for them.

A decade ago, more than 3,300 criminal immigrants were sent to private prisons under two 10-year contracts the Federal Bureau of Prisons signed with CCA worth $760 million. Now, the agency is paying the private companies $5.1 billion to hold more than 23,000 criminal immigrants through 13 contracts of varying lengths.

CCA was on the verge of bankruptcy in 2000 due to lawsuits, management problems and dwindling contracts. Last year, the company reaped $162 million in net income. Federal contracts made up 43 percent of its total revenues, in part thanks to rising immigrant detention.

GEO, which cites the immigration agency as its largest client, saw its net income jump from $16.9 million to $78.6 million since 2000.

"Another factor driving growth ... for the private sector is in the area of immigration and illegal immigration specifically," Chief Financial Officer Brian Evans told investors in GEO's 2011 3rd quarter earnings call.

CCA warned in its 2011 annual earnings report that federal policy changes in "illegal immigration could affect the number of persons arrested, convicted, and sentenced, thereby potentially reducing demand for correctional facilities to house them."

Utah-based Management and Training is not publicly held, so it does not post earnings.

At just the federal level, these companies, their political action committees and their employees have spent more than $32 million on lobbying and on campaign contributions since 2000 — with the national political parties getting the largest campaign contributions.

An AP review of Federal Election Commission data found the prison companies and their employees gave to key congressional leaders who control how much money goes to run the nation's detention centers and who influence how many contracts go to the private sector.

James Thurber, head of American University's Center for Congressional & Presidential Studies, said amid the heated national debate over immigration, the companies have been savvy not to donate heavily to those sponsoring legislation, which could spark backlash.

There are more discrete and more powerful ways to influence policy, Thurber said.

"Follow the money," he said. "If the money is being increased significantly for illegal immigration, then that is a shift in policy ... a significant shift."

The top beneficiaries of the campaign contributions include:

— The Republican Party. Its national and congressional committees received around $450,000. Democrats received less than half that.

— Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain. He received $71,000, mostly during his failed presidential bid against Obama, well after he dropped support for a bill that would have given illegal immigrants a path to citizenship and reduced detentions.

— House Speaker John Boehner received $63,000.

—Kentucky U.S. Rep. Hal Rogers received about $59,000. Rogers chaired the first subcommittee on Homeland Security and heads the powerful House Appropriations Committee. He often criticizes ICE for not filling more detention beds.

— Former U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. He received $58,500. The lawmaker from Tennessee, where CCA is headquartered, led the Senate at the height of the nation's immigrant detention build up from 2003 to 2007.

More than campaign contributions, though, the private prison companies spent most of their money each year on lobbying in Washington, peaking in 2005 when they spent $5 million.

In just 2011, CCA paid the Washington firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld $280,000 in part to "monitor immigration reform," federal reports show.

They also lobbied heavily against a bill that would force them to comply with the same open records requirements governing public facilities.

Owen, the CCA spokesman, said the company ramped up lobbying to acquaint new lawmakers with the industry.

"In recent years, federal elections have been very volatile, resulting in a lot of new faces in Washington," he said. "The result of that volatility means a lot of people at the federal level who may not be familiar with the work we do."

The prison companies' influence at the state level mirrors that in Washington, although the money is even harder to track since many states, such as Arizona and Illinois, where the companies have won lucrative detention contracts, don't require corporations to disclose what they pay lobbyists.

The AP reviewed campaign contribution data from the three companies' political action committees and their employees over the last decade, compiled by the National Institute on Money in State Politics. From 2003 to the first half of 2012, state candidates and political parties in the 50 states received more than $5.32 million.

In the 10 states where the companies' committees and employees contributed the most, the AP found they also spent at least $8 million more lobbying local officials in the last five years alone. It is impossible to know how much of this lobbying money was aimed only at immigrant-related contracts. But that money generally went to states along the border, such as Florida and Texas, which have high numbers of immigrants, as well as states such as Georgia and Louisiana, where large numbers of immigrants also are detained.

ICE has begun providing more oversight as part of the Obama administration's pledge to overhaul the nation's system for jailing immigration offenders. It recently scrapped plans for CCA to build a 1,500-bed immigrant detention center in a high-end Miami suburb following months of local protests.

But it remains committed to adding more private beds. Plans are on track to build or expand private immigration jails in Newark, N.J., in the suburbs of Chicago and along a lonely stretch of California's Mojave Desert

plus an assurance that the prison would remain at least 90 percent full

The Oklahoma Department of Corrections is out of beds for female offenders, DOC Director Justin Jones said Friday. His comments came following a Board of Corrections discussion of the overall prison system population during a monthly meeting in Vinita. Mabel Bassett Correctional Center in McLoud, Eddie Warrior Correctional Center in Taft and Hillside Community Corrections Center in Oklahoma City are pretty much at capacity, Jones said. All three house female offenders. ”The key is we are already full,” Jones said. “We had been experiencing a downward trend and all of a sudden we are heading back up. That is the key.”

TULSA, Okla. (AP) — Oklahoma prison officials are asking for $6.4 million in additional funding as the state's prisons near capacity.

Officials say the supplemental funding request is needed to pay for expenses that include the increased use of private prisons and halfway houses.

The state Department of Corrections reports that in October there were almost 800 more inmates than in October 2011. DOC Director Justin Jones told the Tulsa World that state prisons are consistently at 96 to 98 percent capacity — meaning any increase pushes the system to being nearly full.

Oklahoma also has nearly 1,700 convicts in county jails awaiting transportation to the state Department of Corrections when beds become available.

Oklahoma also has nearly 1,700 convicts in county jails awaiting transportation to the state Department of Corrections when beds become available.

Maintaining people sitting out fines and traffic tickets alongside killers and rapists.
That sounds like a plan, Oklahoma.

/sarcasm

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — Oklahoma prison officials want legislators to provide more money for a system that is struggling with overcrowding and turnover among employees.

A legislative budget panel is to hear presentations Thursday in advance of the coming legislative session.

The Department of corrections has struggled to retain prison guards, who often cite the low pay as a reason for leaving their jobs. Prisons in rural counties are particularly hard hit when it comes to turnover.

Many people working as prison guards can double their pay by going to work in the oil fields.

In December, prison officials asked for an additional $6.4 million to accommodate a gain of 800 prisoners over the past year. The money would, in part, go toward paying for private prisons and halfway houses.

Interesting article.

Oklahoma incarcerates more women per capita than anywhere in the world. TulsaPeople asks, “why?”

The recent momentum to reduce Oklahoma’s exceptionally high incarceration rate has fizzled out, officials said this week. The Justice Reinvestment Initiative, signed by Gov. Mary Fallin last May, aimed to encourage rehabilitation of nonviolent offenders, lessen the emphasis on prison time and supervise prisoners after release, among other provisions. Last week, less than a year after signing the bipartisan law, Gov. Mary Fallin rejected federal funding to implement the program. Additionally, a grant program from the attorney general to local law enforcement hasn’t been implemented and legislators are considering about 10 bills that would increase prison time or create new felonies.

Legislators look to add more felonies
http://woodwardnews.net/local/x624710659/Legislators-look-to-add-more-felonies (http://woodwardnews.net/local/x624710659/Legislators-look-to-add-more-felonies)

Efforts to reduce the state’s growing prison population go back decades and haven’t managed to put much of a dent in the state’s prison population. A highly touted criminal justice reform measure passed last session may be yet another failed effort. Last week, the leaders of a working group overseeing the implementation of what is called the Justice Reinvestment Initiative abruptly resigned, pointing fingers at the Governor’s Office, which they say is not serious about following through with the law she signed.

It's an oldie, but still a goody:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-march-7-2006/uncaged-heat

A national report released Thursday details how private prison operators frequently have "lockup quotas" and "low-crime taxes" built into the language of their contracts.
http://tulsaworld.com/lockupquotas

The report by In the Public Interest, a nonprofit research and policy institute, illustrates how many contracts for private prison operators feature language guaranteeing 80 percent to 100 percent prison occupancy and forcing taxpayers to pay penalties for empty beds.

Of the 62 private prison contracts that the group received and analyzed, nearly two-thirds - or 65 percent - include occupancy guarantees and force taxpayers to pay for empty prison beds if the lockup quota is not met.  These policies result in taxpayers essentially paying more money to house inmates even when crime decreases, becoming a de facto low-crime tax, according to the report.

Lockup quotas in private prison contracts range between 80 and 100 percent. Arizona, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Virginia have the highest occupancy guarantee requirements, with quotas requiring between 95 and 100 percent occupancy.  Three of the Oklahoma prisons included in the data - Cimarron in Cushing, Davis in Holdenville and the Lawton Correctional Facility - have a 98 percent occupancy guarantee provision, according to the report.

Both Cimarron and Davis are operated by the Corrections Corporation of America, Lawton is operated by the GEO Group.
Former Oklahoma Department of Corrections Director Justin Jones was among a group of experts who commented on the findings in a conference call Thursday.
"What corrections should not be is a turnkey for-profit machine," he said. "And that's exactly that we've turned them into when we guarantee occupancy, with no requirement to produce results."

In 2012, CCA, the largest for-profit private prison company in the country, sent a letter to 48 state governors offering to buy their public prisons. The corporation offered to buy and operate those states' prisons in exchange for a 20-year contract, which would include a 90 percent occupancy rate guarantee for the entire term.

The institute recommends that governments ban "lockup quota" language from contracts with private prison providers to protect the taxpayers' interests, she said.
"They have gamed the system and tied the hand of policy makers," she said. "We urge lawmakers nationwide to end this practice."
Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin could not be reached for comment, a spokesman said.

The private prison industry relies on rising numbers of inmates to increase profits, and some states - including Oklahoma - have lobbied against justice reform efforts to ensure it won't affect their companies' bottom lines, according to Jones.

The report outlines several statements made by CCA regarding their concerns about justice reforms, including this from its 2010 annual report: "The demand for our facilities and services could be adversely affected by the relaxation of enforcement efforts, leniency in conviction or parole standards and sentencing practices or through the decriminalization of certain activities that are currently proscribed by our criminal laws."

The Center for Responsive Politics reports that CCA spent $17.4 million in lobbying expenditures from 2002 through 2012, while GEO Group spent $2.5 million from 2004 to 2012.  According to the report, CCA spent $1.9 million in political contributions from 2003 to 2012, and Geo Group spent $2.9 million during the same time period.  Both own and operate multiple prisons in Oklahoma.

Sean Wallace, executive director of Oklahoma Corrections Professionals, said he didn't think expanding the use of private prison beds was the answer. The state locks up too many low-level, non-violent offenders, he said.

The Oklahoma Department of Corrections says it needs 45.7 million additional dollars. Corrections Interim director, Ed Evans, presented the budget figures to the State Senate Public Safety Appropriations Committee.

"Thirty-one point five million would go towards funding FY-2014 contracted bed space already in use and anticipated to remain in use," Evan says. "Fourteen point two million would be  used for salary adjustments that would aid in the retention and recruitment of needed staff, in particular correctional officers."

That would bring this year’s total budget request to 509 million dollars. Evens says as of today, there are over 26 thousand inmates incarcerated by the state.

His proposal includes over 14 million dollars to address low pay and a high turnover rate among guards.

"I believe it's about 33% or 35% of those officers leave the agency that are within their first 12 months," Evans says.

Evans also requested 13 million dollars in supplemental funding to this year’s budget. Those dollars would be used to reimburse counties for holding state inmates.

Kick the private operators out too.

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — A plan to target Oklahoma's highest-in-the-nation female incarceration rate with a prison diversion pilot program in Tulsa has unanimously passed the Oklahoma Senate.

The Senate voted Wednesday for the bill by Republican Sen. Kim David of Porter that targets women convicted of drug or other nonviolent crimes. David says female offenders first must enter a plea of guilty, which a judge can withhold and waive if the woman completes the 12-to-18-month program.

David says the participants must stay sober and keep a job to remain in the program, which also reunites the women with their children.

David says she was particularly touched by the testimony that some of the women in the program delivered during a Senate committee hearing.

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — A bill to allow some aging prisoners to be released from prison early has been shot down in the Oklahoma Senate.

The Senate voted 29-14 on Wednesday against the Parole of Aging Prisoners Act. The bill would have allowed the state Pardon and Parole Board to parole prisoners who are 65-years-old or older if they have served 10 years in prison or at least one-third of their sentence.

Sex offenders or those convicted of one of about two dozen crimes that require inmates to serve 85 percent of their sentences would not have been eligible for the program. The bill specifically targeted inmates who pose what was called "minimal public safety risks."

Oklahoma has one of the highest rates of incarceration in the nation.

The winds of change. . .

Today, by a vote of 13 to 5, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved what the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA) calls "the biggest overhaul in federal drug sentencing in decades." The Smarter Sentencing Act, introduced by Sens. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah) last July, would cut mandatory minimum sentences in half for some drug offenses, make the reduced crack penalties enacted in 2010 retroactive, and expand the category of defendants eligible for sentencing below the mandatory minimums. "The Smarter Sentencing Act is the most significant piece of criminal justice reform to make it to the Senate floor in several years," says Laura W. Murphy, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Washington Legislative Office.
http://reason.com/blog/2014/01/30/senate-judiciary-committee-approves-majo

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) — House and Senate legislative committees have approved $13 million in supplemental funding to help Oklahoma's prison system pay for operational costs for the rest of the fiscal year that ends June 30.

Budget panels in both the House and Senate on Monday approved a bill that authorizes the $13 million and gives the Department of Corrections more authority to tap an internal agency revolving account.

The bill still must be approved by the full House and Senate and signed by the governor.

Norman Republican Rep. Scott Martin who sponsored the bill in the House says the money will be used to pay for private prison beds, a backup of inmates in county jails, and inmate medical services.

DOC Director Robert Patton says he appreciates the additional funding.

U.S. Justice Department officials plan to phase out their use of private prisons to house federal inmates, reasoning that the contract facilities offer few benefits for public safety or taxpayers.

In making the decision, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates cited new findings by the Justice Department's inspector general, who concluded earlier this month that a pool of 14 privately contracted prisons reported more incidents of inmate contraband, higher rates of assaults and more uses of force than facilities run by the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

"They simply do not provide the same level of correctional services, programs and resources; they do not save substantially on costs; and ... they do not maintain the same level of safety and security," Yates wrote in a memo Thursday.

At their peak, contract prisons housed approximately 30,000 federal inmates. By May 2017, that number will have dropped by more than half, to 14,000, Yates wrote. The Bureau of Prisons tends to use contract facilities to confine inmates who require only low security and who tend to be in the country illegally. The U.S. government spent $639 million on those facilities in fiscal year 2014, according to the Inspector General report, in payments to three companies: Corrections Corporation of America, GEO Group, and Management and Training Corp.

The Justice Department announcement will not touch the vast majority of prisoners in the country who are incarcerated by state and local authorities. But federal officials hope their decision will be a model across the correctional field.

Last month, the DOJ declined to renew a contract for 1,200 prison beds in a private facility. And it is making changes to a new contract bid to reduce the size of demand there, too.

In a blog post to department employees, the deputy attorney general pointed out that the federal prison population has been dropping overall, to fewer than 195,000 inmates, because of a shift in how low-level, nonviolent drug criminals are treated. Yates did not shut the door on demand for private contract facilities in the future, however, and a new presidential administration could handle the issue differently.

Marc Mauer, executive director of The Sentencing Project, nonetheless said the Justice Department announcement represented a "major milestone in the movement away from mass incarceration."

"It has been a stain on our democracy to permit profit-making entities to be handed the responsibility of making determinations of individual liberty," Mauer said in a prepared statement. "Today's action moves us closer to a moment when government can once again assume this important responsibility."

I will say that privatization always kind of sounds like a good idea, but only from a financial prospective. It has basically turned our congressmen into money managers instead of legislators.

Without legislative action, Oklahoma will need three new prisons during the next 10 years

http://newsok.com/without-legislative-action-oklahoma-will-need-three-new-prisons-during-the-next-10-years/article/5530785

Heironymous - you pretty well just described Cuba or North Korea.  All "essential" services and commodities are government run.  Not even France or the Nordic countries goes as far as you are arguing for.

I mean, good for you.  We need some old school pinkos to move the overall needle to the left.  But damn!   ;)

Here’s my question:

If a private company can step in, run a prison, and make real profit with zero in subsidies how can the operate a prison cheaper than the government can?

If they pay lower wages than the state to make a profit then it seems they would have a staffing shortage.  If it’s economy of scale on purchases, it would have to only be a marginal gain in profit considering the purchasing power state government would generally have.  Many state governments will operate a system much like GSA does- if you want to sell us floor wax and toilet cleaner, you have to give us a discount spread over given quantities.

In my personal experience, I worked for a Fortune 500 which had such interface with city, state, and the GSA.  I can positively say that a large health facility company like Columbia HCA didn’t get a better discount than the GSA or that one of the private prison operators didn’t get a better pricing structure for supplies than the federal prison system.

I’d love to know how this is possible.

Not sure where to start...  so I will regress.  Not even the most socialist countries take it as far as you are advocating.

For the most part, I'm neutral on privatization of government services.  It is not inherently good or inherently bad.  In some instances it is great, in others it is an utter disaster.  Sometimes those norms hold over industries or services, sometimes one government can provide a service way better than private industry while another government cannot.  Examples:

The American hybrid system for electric utilities works fairly well.  We get more power, more consistently, to more people, more affordably than any other nation.  It is relatively efficient and the overall service is spectacular.  Yet private industry absorbs the risk and is allowed to make a marginal profit.  Same for our refuse collection.

Water systems are largely government run.  We have among the best water in the world - BUT, political pressure has caused those systems to degrade as a cost "saving" measure.  The result is the need for massive investment in the near future to avert additional crisis like we saw in Flint.  Or, for that matter, frequent ruptures and costly repairs like we see in Tulsa.

Most of our infrastructure is built by private contractors - allowing many entities to bid on a job.  Lets see who can do it well and the most efficient.  If the government was given a monopoly on such projects, the efficiency inevitably declines.

Healthcare is messed up - I readily acknowledge that.  We are really bad at preventative care, healthy lifestyles, and at keeping costs reasonable.  But the US private healthcare industry does a better job on the technical and innovative aspects of medicine than anyone else r (yes, universities and grants do a lot of good work also.  But private dollars overwhelm public ones).  Cuba or Canada, with their excellent healthcare services, are not providing technological or pharmaceutical innovations.    In fact, the US far and away spends more money on R&D than the rest of the world in most fields. (http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GB.XPD.RSDV.GD.ZS?year_high_desc=false)  

Certainly internet innovation is a great example of the private sector taking a government idea running away with it.  Without government research, there would be no internet.  Without the private sector taking it up, the internet would remain a research and military curiosity.  The actual utility aspect of it is more complicated, and I agree with the Obama administration that it should be treated like a utility and carefully scrutinized for abuse of monopoly power.  I have no problem with municipal coops entering the marketplace if that's what it takes to keep competition moving forward.  (Two or three companies coming to dominate their respective exclusive zones is bad for innovation, bad for progress, and bad for consumers)

Some things I am extremely leery about being private:  security at the Courthouse for example (either there is a real need for real security, or there isn't), I think private "security contractors" in war zones or to protect US military basis is a horrible idea, and I think private prisons are an idea worth examining - that have now been examined and turned out to be bad policy.  It creates a profit motive to lobby for mass incarceration.  When closing a prison is "bad for business" there are business incentives contrary to public good.  So the idea should be rolled back.  That business incentive vs. public good applies to many, many areas of privatization (see, e.g., privatizing Social Security).

So private/public is a debate that needs to be had, and needs to be updated frequently. But historically, when the government monopolizes something it becomes inefficient and stagnant.  That holds true over and over, and it isn't likely to change. So if/when the government monopolizes something or decides to enter the marketplace, there needs to be a good reason and close inspection.

Anything that directly affects the overall well being of the population and adversely affects the concept of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness..." for more than 50% of the population.

Just my thoughts - overcrowding brings more money per head, so private prisons work on keeping business hot.  I'm guessing their lobbying is all about keeping weed illegal and three strikes rule going strong.

High Female Lockup Rate Targeted in Bill

http://kwgs.com/post/high-female-lockup-rate-targeted-bill (http://kwgs.com/post/high-female-lockup-rate-targeted-bill)

'Not a wish list': Corrections asks Legislature for $1.57 billion, including $92 million for hepatitis C treatments

The Oklahoma Board of Corrections voted unanimously Tuesday to ask the state Legislature to triple its funding next fiscal year and provide the agency with a $1.57 billion budget.

“This request is not a wish list,” said Oklahoma Department of Corrections Director Joe M. Allbaugh. “This is what we need. Oklahoma continues to send more people to prison, and it costs real money to house, look after and provide those individuals medical care — all of which we are required to do.”



Tulsa World journalism makes a difference. Be part of the story. Join us. Start a digital subscription for only 99¢.

The $1.57 billion budget request includes: $884 million to add 5,200 beds to the prison system; $91.7 million to provide inmates with expensive hepatitis C drug treatments; $31.9 million for facility repairs, maintenance and critical needs; and $18.5 million for staff pay raises.

The request comes at a time when state prison facilities are at 113 percent of capacity, with 1,993 inmates assigned temporary beds and 975 sitting in county jails, waiting to be transferred to prison, officials said. The inmate population is expected to grow by 2,367 inmates by 2026.

$1.57 billion budget the DOC is requesting is about $500 per citizen of Oklahoma and 20% of the entire state budget!

It is about $980 per tax-filer and around $1,500 per state-income tax payer. That is a tremendous amount of tax dollars per capita. We have more prisoners than New Jersey which has more than 9 million residents! Oklahoma is #1 in incarcerations per capita. We have more incarcerated than Vermont, DC, ND, RI, Wyoming, Maine, Alaska, New Hampshire, Hawaii and Montana combined!

This is the end-game of our state's policies along with our culture (Go drug war! Screw education! Abandon cities and exodus to the 'burbs! We're tough on crime!). If you keep cutting education, you'll pay for it eventually with higher crime and fuller prisons. Time to decriminalize as much as we can and forgive non-violent offenders (which is a very small percentage of criminals though).

Time to work on educating criminals with real skills they can use like plumbing, electrician certs, HVAC, auto-mechanic, etc... Let's be honest that most won't be able to or want to become business professionals. It's so much cheaper and better long term to just have a trade and work for honest wages.

https://medium.com/@Chris_Powell/drew-edmondson-oklahomas-chief-jailer-da1308feec35

All of this and yet property crimes and theft are completely out of control with virtually no viable and reasonable punishment for habitual law breakers. People flagrantly steal because there's no real deterrent, even if they are caught. This is a huge deeply embedded societal problem that keeps getting worse the more the government tries to fix it. We need to look to Kansas/Colorado and see what they've done to curb crime AND keep a very small prison population compared to the region.

We don't just have the highest incarceration rate in the United States, we are highest in the world. We're number 1?

True, the US is #1 in that by a wide margin so I guess that's a given (but still mind-boggling) that Oklahoma is the #1 incarcerating government on planet earth!

7.6 billion people and hundreds of governments, but Oklahoma has risen to #1, defying all odds!

Keep voting Republicontin - keep getting same results.

But Kansas has far lower incarceration rates but is also a strongly republican state (Same for Utah, one of the lowest). There is more at work than just R vs D. That link showed that Drew Edmonson (D) was a big part of increasing incarceration rates and instrumental in getting private prisons going. He could've pushed for reform and at least tried to stifle that.

It's a tough situation and I don't see any easy way to fix it. Education is typically the best thing to fix it but not a cure all. The economy and society have to function also. The issues with society are pretty deep. Education and better job stability can fix some but that always creates others. Cities are the hubs for regional issues too (homelessness, crime, poverty).

At this point the only thing they can do is start releasing prisoners and decriminalize anything they can. We voted to lower crimes for that but results of those changes haven't quite kicked in. Oklahoma is definitely in an incarceration crisis and yet crime rates remain ridiculously high. So locking up =/= lowering crime.

At this point the only thing they can do is start releasing prisoners and decriminalize anything they can. We voted to lower crimes for that but results of those changes haven't quite kicked in. Oklahoma is definitely in an incarceration crisis and yet crime rates remain ridiculously high. So locking up =/= lowering crime.

Whew!  Exactly which history book did you get that from??   When Frank Keating took office (1995), we spent $0 dollars on private prisons.  Two years later, we were spending $60+ million per year on them.  (That was also where Mary Failin' got her education as Lt Gov.)   His closer personal friend, J Michael Quinlan, was with Corrections Corporation of America, and recommended to get some private prisons.

And don't forget the $250,000 Keating received to promote the use of Dilantin in the prisons.

Your link is typical deflection, dissemination, distortion, and outright fabrication.  Edmondoson never had the power to pass a law or issue an executive order or any of the REAL things required to pursue a policy that leads to mass incarceration.  He was in position to enforce Oklahoma law.  And that he did.  To the full extent the ignorance of the time dictated - and has 'doubled down' on since.  And now we are where we are - getting worse every year in the state on a wide variety of issues.  Scott Pruitt was there from 2011 until he took his corruption train to DC, and 'stepped up' the efforts for even more Psychosis in Government.   Along with Failin' and the Clown Show Legislature.

Edmonson was against MMJ until the  most recent vote passed and said it's the will of the people. He's been a fan of the drug war. He could've used his influence to stand for reform but went with the way things were for decades, not standing up or speaking out that change was needed. He was involved with getting private prisons going. Those directly incentivize those corporations to do what they can (especially politically) to boost incarceration rates.

Deflection alert!   You said, "That link showed that Drew Edmonson (D) was a big part of increasing incarceration rates and instrumental in getting private prisons going. He could've pushed for reform and at least tried to stifle that."

I called BS and showed EXACTLY who was the big part of increasing incarceration rates and instrumental in getting private prisons going.   And it was NOT Edmondson.

Denial is not just a river in Egypt...

You're as bad as anyone else with the "GO TEAM RED!!!" "GO TEAM BLUE!!!" arguments who see the splinter in the other sides eye and ignores the plank in their guy's eye.

Most all politicians have had their hands in the dirt. Glad you don't have red glasses on, but you need to take off the blue colored glasses. Edmonson is not perfect. Tax & spend democrats had control of this state for many decades and didn't do much better.

See how one of our former tax and spend democrat governors Boren did with financials as OU's president:
http://www.newson6.com/story/39234366/ou-president-says-he-is-determined-to-fix-the-universitys-overspending (http://www.newson6.com/story/39234366/ou-president-says-he-is-determined-to-fix-the-universitys-overspending)

The main advantage to a democrat as governor is that they can veto the crazy bills the legislature puts out to keep them in check (but that means that just about nothing will get done). At some point someone has to own up to the fact we need to spend less than what we have and should be saving as well. Will Edmonson be able to actually tax the ultra-wealthy or big oil? Not without a super-majority in the legislature. So we will continue the same path where the common people subsidize the wealthy and barely keep up with paying the bills.

You haven't read all of my comments have you - I am much more moderate than what you seem to 'see'.  Go back and look at my replies (attacks) on the left with their gun control BS.

Now into projection, I see...

True - Gene Stipe (Dem) was a master of getting a vastly disproportionate share of state money for his area.   And he, of course, got his fair share of "consulting fees" from lobbyists and organizations.  As did Charlie Ford (Rep) at about the same time.  They knew how to work with each other for the good of themselves...and sometimes even the good of the state!


And now we have the next Mary Failin' clone to carry on her bad tradition!!   "Go Team Stupid.!!"   Or "Go Team Vote For The Guy Whose Business Practices Get Him Banned For Life In Georgia!"

"Go Team Vote For The Guy Whose Business Practices Get Him Banned For Life In Georgia!"

Oklahoma Republican gubernatorial candidate Kevin Stitt had no direct role in actions that led to a 2009 consent agreement barring Stitt and his company, Gateway Mortgage Group, from doing business in Georgia, according to Gateway General Counsel Scott Gesell.

The ban on Gateway was permanent, while Stitt agreed not to do business in Georgia for five years.

“There were no findings that involved Kevin,” Gesell said. “He’s free to do business there now.”

Gesell said the Georgia Department of Banking found several violations of state law in a routine 2008 examination. The violations were by staff in the Georgia office, and primarily involved noncompliant background checks and “misrepresentations” of whether the houses being mortgaged would be owner-occupied.

The employees involved were dismissed as a result of the examination, Gesell said.

The AP reviewed actions taken in both states and found the company’s license was only suspended in Georgia in 2009, amid allegations that the company made false statements and misrepresented facts to lenders, according to documents from the state’s banking agency. In June, Stitt and Gateway reached an agreement with Georgia regulators that the company can reapply for a license at any time.

You haven't read all of my comments have you - I am much more moderate than what you seem to 'see'.  Go back and look at my replies (attacks) on the left with their gun control BS.

Now into projection, I see...

True - Gene Stipe (Dem) was a master of getting a vastly disproportionate share of state money for his area.   And he, of course, got his fair share of "consulting fees" from lobbyists and organizations.  As did Charlie Ford (Rep) at about the same time.  They knew how to work with each other for the good of themselves...and sometimes even the good of the state!


And now we have the next Mary Failin' clone to carry on her bad tradition!!   "Go Team Stupid.!!"   Or "Go Team Vote For The Guy Whose Business Practices Get Him Banned For Life In Georgia!"

All fair points.  However, I very nearly started working for Gateway in 2015.  At the time their office was just down the street from mine.  I also knew several people who worked there from an old employer.  And when I say knew them, I worked very closely with them with for several years at this employer.  I got the impression they didn't like Stitt.  Not necessarily for his business dealings, but his overt religion that he infused into the company.  Example:  they held prayer before the beginning of every business day (I heard, I have no way of confirming this to be true)j.  And while that may not be illegal, if I'd have started working for that company and found this out on day one, I'd have been gone.  If you want that kind of proselytizing in your place of employment, then go work for Hobby Lobby or Chick Fil A. 

Funny you say that because Gateway Mortgage is not banned from Georgia or any other states. That was the biggest negative I heard about Stitt... which is an attack on his billion-dollar company that he founded himself. Please find me a billion dollar company that has had zero mishaps or run-ins with regulations, especially with 1,300+ employees in 41 states in a highly-regulated industry.

Early results are in on State Question 780: Felony charges dropped 28.4 percent statewide in one year, sharply reversing at least a 10-year upward trend that pushed Oklahoma’s prison rate to highest in the nation.

Correspondingly, the number of misdemeanor cases filed rose 13.6 percent. The number of felony and misdemeanor filings each returned to levels not seen since 2008.


SQ 780 reclassified simple drug possession as a misdemeanor instead of a felony, also raising the threshold for many felony property crimes to $1,000 from $500.

“It’s very encouraging to see that SQ 780 is working as intended,” Ryan Gentzler, director of Open Justice Oklahoma, said in a statement. “Thousands of Oklahomans are avoiding felony records for low-level drug and property offenses, while crime rates continue to fall.

“Oklahoma’s experience shows that we can have both less crime and less punishment if we pursue smart criminal justice reform.”

FWD.us and the George Kaiser Family Foundation are the primary funders of Open Justice Oklahoma, according to its website.

Cases involving reclassified charges greatly shifted from felony to misdemeanor filings, an intended consequence of SQ 780, according to the report’s data.

Statewide, felonies for drug possession in a single year fell from 18,942 to 4,841 — a 74.4 percent drop. Drug possession misdemeanors climbed from 4,867 to 12,963 — up 166.3 percent. Property crimes mirrored this trend but to a lesser degree.

In Tulsa County, felony drug possession dropped 68 percent to 808 cases from 2,488. Misdemeanors jumped 186 percent to 1,322 cases from 462.

“This suggests that drug possession was the most serious charge for the vast majority of these cases prior to SQ 780,” the report states.

The Open Justice Oklahoma report released Tuesday is the latest in attempts to measure SQ 780’s outcomes.

Oklahomans for Criminal Justice Reform recently put out its assessment of SQ 780 after a year, though its conclusion was less rosy. The report found that despite reforms, the state’s prison population is still projected to climb.


OCJR said data shows SQ 780 on its own isn’t enough to turn the tide. OCJR, which organized the movement in favor of SQ 780, is placing emphasis in the upcoming legislative session on making its laws apply retroactively in some fashion.

“Now, more than a year after it went into effect, the change has been limited, suggesting that further reforms are needed to achieve its full impact,” the OCJR report stated.

One particular area has been under scrutiny in trying to ascertain SQ 780’s affects: felony possession of drugs with intent to distribute.

Proponents of SQ 780 have voiced concern that district attorneys may try to circumvent the will of the people by utilizing the charge of felony possession with intent to distribute.

Open Justice Oklahoma found that those cases increased statewide by 13.7 percent, or 433 cases. In Tulsa County, that increase was 10.4 percent, or 64 more cases.


Gentzler said prosecutors hold considerable discretion because statutes don’t require a minimum quantity of a drug to trigger an intent to distribute charge instead of possession.

He noted that some counties, including Dewey, Haskell, Logan and Payne, had filings multiply several times over. That is an indicator that those prosecutors might be filing harsher drug charges in SQ 780’s wake.

“There’s tons to unpack there,” Gentzler said. “I wouldn’t want to draw any strong conclusions from one year of data. But I think it’s fair to say prosecutors (in general), and at least in Tulsa, haven’t adjusted in a punitive way to State Question 780.”

Corbin Brewster, chief Tulsa County public defender, said the drop in felonies charged is encouraging. He noted that Tulsa’s homicide rate is down and other violent crimes haven’t increased since SQ 780 arrived.

“So to me, that shows that 780 is working and working well and working without any cost to public safety,” Brewster said.

Stephanie Horten, director of the local Criminal Justice Collaborative, said Open Justice Oklahoma’s findings are a reason to celebrate. But, she cautioned, during the same period Tulsa County sent more women to prison than the previous year.

Horten said there was a 75 percent increase in fiscal year 2018 in the number of women put into custody of the state Department of Corrections.

“Filing fewer felony charges is a good first step, but we must also change how the criminal justice system responds to those who are charged with a felony,” Horten said. “We must increase access to substance-abuse and mental-health treatment and decrease the number of people we choose to incarcerate.”

SQ 780 seems to be working as intended.  Amazingly the Oklahoma Legislature managed to not screw this up.  Though there is some concern about prosecutors about monkeying with charges to still attain a felony rap.

https://www.tulsaworld.com