County Prosecutors Pushing Back Against Proposed Indiana Sentencing Reform

It was bound to happen: a fiscally responsible recommendation that promotes more judicial discretion and less incarceration has been labeled “soft on crime” by the Association of Indiana Prosecuting Attorneys.

The proposed legislation stands to save the state of Indiana over $1 billion in the coming years by encouraging alternatives to incarceration that actually promote rehabilitation and lower recidivism. But in taking plays from a tired and unsuccessful playbook, county prosecutors in the state have voted to oppose the measure.

Proposed changes were first recommended in a state commissioned report from the Pew Center on the States and the Council of State Governments Justice Center. Soon after the report was released, I reported that Gov. Mitch Daniels (R) was supporting the recommended changes, which include more judicial discretion in the least serious of offenses, bolstering incarceration alternatives like mental health and drug treatment centers, and tightening the reins on high risk offenders under community supervision -- all aimed at reducing the prison population, preventing recidivism and saving bundles of taxpayer money.

But rather than objectively evaluating the proposed changes and their benefits to the state, prosecutors have spoken out in opposition, claiming the recommendations would put the people of Indiana at risk -- and using the term we’ve all grown to hate: “soft on crime." They must have missed the part of the report that stated 55 percent of new incarcerations in the state are for nonviolent thefts and low-level drug offenses. Maybe they also overlooked the part showing Indiana’s incarceration rate is about three times higher than other states in the region.

While the board of prosecutors' dishonest claims won't have an immediate impact on whether or not reforms are enacted, they have certainly succeeded in framing the argument in the same old tired rhetoric. The question is, will legislators fall for the “soft on crime” assertions, or will they see it for the antiquated rhetoric it is and embrace "smart on crime" solutions?

Sen. Lindel Hume (D-Princeton) says lawmakers “don’t want to be put in a position where they’re not considered ‘law and order.’” They must not think their constituents have the intelligence to differentiate between new, smart policies, then, and those policies that have boosted Indiana's prison population 40 percent between 2000 to 2008.

Most Indianans want to be safe, for certain, but many also understand someone who is allowed to maintain employment within the community and stay close to family is a more productive member of society than the one sent to prison for a $200 theft charge.

While prosecutors state they are willing to support some of the proposed changes, it’s the sentencing reductions they say they can’t get behind. But these reductions won’t affect the more serious offenders, just those accused of low-level drug and theft crime -- differentiating between someone who stole less than $100 from someone who stole more than $50,000. Indiana is the only state where every single theft crime is considered a felony.

Since I first reported on the proposed changes and Gov. Daniels’ support, dozens of Change.org members have shown their support for reform, sending letters to lawmakers in that state. As the fight for these progressive changes heats up, lawmakers there need to hear from the public more than ever. Join Gov. Daniels, Chief Justice Randall T. Sheppard, Rep. Ralph M. Foley (R-Martinsville) and other Change.org members in signaling your support for sentencing reform.

Have a story tip? Email us at criminaljusticetips@change.org. And keep up with the site using Facebook, Twitter and RSS.

Photo Credit: Colin Grey