Phasing in Measure 57: Not soft of crime, but smart on crime

This week, state troopers are back on the road 24/7 across much of the state for the first time in years. Had Steve Doell of Crime Victims United and the others who wrote a recent commentary on criminal justice in The Oregonian had their way, this week would be spent gearing up to begin the release of some 2,000 prisoners in order to balance Oregon's criminal justice budget.

In their one-sided and misleading commentary, Doell and his co-authors made it seem as if there were a real choice between cutting the criminal justice budget or leaving it whole.

Truth is, from the sheriffs to the district attorneys to the director of the Corrections Department, there was broad agreement that the budget for prisons -- like that for schools, higher education and human services -- needed to be cut during this global economic crisis.

The question was how to cut that budget, not whether it needed to be done.

The legislative group that worked on this issue was presented with a number of choices. The preferred path of some was to simply set free 2,000 prisoners who were within six months of their release date.

That option wasn't viable for a number of reasons, including the cost of resentencing hearings and the fact that many legislators believed that it was far too risky.

Instead, we opted for an approach that phased in Measure 57.

As Doell well knows and neglected to point out, the bill passed by the Legislature keeps Measure 57 in place until February 2010.

Then, while significant parts of the measure that affect the worst offenders stay in effect, some of the provisions dealing with lesser property crimes are put on hold until January 2012 -- a date whereby Oregonians will be better poised to honor the promise of Measure 57, a promise that included $40 million in new treatment dollars that, unfortunately, we cannot afford during this worldwide recession.

The phase-in allows us to keep our public safety system whole. It's not a soft-on-crime approach. It's a smart-on-crime approach that was designed by a prosecutor and a former police lieutenant as well as supported by a bipartisan group of more than two-thirds of all legislators.

Make no mistake: This Legislature cut more than $2 billion from the budget.

The cuts affected schools, human services and public safety, the three areas that account for more than 93 percent of our state's budget. Our goal in making the cuts is to protect core services and minimize the impacts on all areas. Prisons and other public safety areas had to tighten their belts just like the rest of the state.

Would it have been fair for us to cut schools and colleges more, while holding the prison budget harmless?

We're already one of the few states that spend more on prisons than on higher education and that's a trend we need to reverse if we are to succeed economically in the future.

No one relished the idea of making the cuts.

But when we were faced with fully implementing Measure 57 or cutting state troopers, we chose to keep law enforcement on the streets and highways and keep the public safety system intact. No one said these were easy choices. But we made them to the best of our ability. And Oregon will be better off in the long run because of them.

Chip Shields, a Democrat, represents Portland in the Oregon House of Representatives.