A controversial bill that California legislators say would allow the early release of more than 27,000 inmates from crowded prisons will be taken up by the state Assembly on Monday.
The Senate on Thursday passed the corrections package 21-19, after Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, assured senators the changes would protect the public from the most violent offenders.
The legislation also would direct more resources toward parolees, he said.
Senate Republicans say the bill would undermine public safety. All 15 Senate Republicans voted against the measure.
Both houses of the legislature are controlled by Democrats.
Consideration of the bill comes as California faces a mid-September deadline for reducing its prison population by about 40,000 inmates. A special panel of three federal judges issued the order, contending the crowded prison system violates prisoners’ constitutional rights.
The judges said they will make the reductions themselves if the state fails to act.
The measure would save the financially strapped state $524.5 million, according to a statement from Steinberg’s office.
When coupled with budget revisions that lawmakers made in July, the total corrections savings would be $1.2 billion, he said. That is the amount that Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants as part of his efforts to cut state spending and balance the budget.
Republicans said the bill would lead to the release of about 27,000 prisoners, while Democrats estimated it would reduce the prison population by 27,300 in the 2009-10 fiscal year and 37,000 during fiscal year 2010-11.
Senate Republicans called the legislation a threat to public safety.
GOP lawmakers in the Senate also strongly opposed the creation of what they described as “an unelected and unaccountable sentencing commission that would be given broad authority to alter important public safety laws.”
(Source: CNN)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
6 Responses
The alternative is to pay more in taxes, or cut other services. Legislators have to make the decision.
Why not let them out.California deserves to have
them. It’s one of the most difficult places to be able to buy a weapon to protect yourself with, so
it’s a good idea to let out 50,000 crominals into
the streets.If you want to do something upside down, go to California where moast of the people
are upside down anyway.
#3. Now i know who you are.
If they do let these guys out, the best thing to do would be to commit a crime and be put behind bars. It will be the safest place to be, and by the time those criminals get locked up again they will let you out, under this new legislation. Makes sense??
#2- It is not that the Republicans in CA refuse to appropriate the money. They just have no money because the Dems spent it on irrational things. And the Dems are in power anyways…
#3- many people would take offense at your comments. They represent a biased, self centered opinion that makes everything outside your small bubble world “upside down”. There are normal people who live in CA, even those who have lived there their whole lives.
#5- only non-violent crimes will they let out. Um, what type of crimes are you advocating? Drugs??? great.
Yes, CA has problems, but so does NY and many other states. We have tough gun laws, but so does NY city. Once they release the prisoners they will see why we need to allow more citizens with no prior record to own guns to protect themselves.
Why doesnt each state do what the governor in Arizona (maybe I got the state wrong. maybe New mexico) decided to do with their overcrowded prisons. He said that criminals who destroy the country should not be treated any better than the soldiers protecting the country. They set aside a large area of the desert, fenced it in with barbed wires and security guards, and gave the prisoners pup tents to live in. No TV, work out rooms, recreation centers ect. They have hot pink uniforms to set them apart from the desert land. They were given the same slop the soldiers get, and there is a special doctor there to make sure they all get enough calories and nutrition. No extras and luxuries but why do they deserve it? If it is good enough for the soldiers, its good enough for the criminals.