subject: The Cost of Aging Inmates [print this page] The Cost of Aging Inmates The Cost of Aging Inmates
It has become a "hot button" issue for states struggling with ever decreasing budgets. States now regularly transfer inmates from one prison to another in order to relieve overcrowding and some have even had to release the less violent offenders in order to bring themselves back in line with state and federal guidelines. Do you think that's a good plan-putting young, able-bodied offenders back on the street?
Personally, I don't see it that way. What kind of deterrent is that to crime when we just release them back to the streets where they can offend again, possibly escalating their dirty deeds to include more violent crimes? It's kind of like what's happened since taking "corporal punishment" out of the schools. Now, instead of a principal's paddle, we have metal detectors, drug-sniffing dogs and campus police. I think that paddle cost a heck of a lot less, don't you? It certainly did the job of deterring misbehavior on school campuses and therefore produced men and women who were, and still are, a value to society.
So, what is the solution for prison overcrowding? Maybe we should be looking to the aging population of inmates. A recent study by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) found that it costs about $48,000.00 more a year to house an elderly and infirm inmate than it does a younger prisoner. And while the prison population only grew by 18% between 1999 and 2008, the number of prisoners age 55 or older grew by 76%! 76% - wow!
Some people argue that the strain on the welfare system would be incalculable if these elderly inmates were to be released, but let's look at some facts here. By releasing people that are more likely to reoffend, we are bringing more inmates back into the system and again incurring a huge cost for them. The costs include more police officers on the streets, public defenders, an overwhelmed justice system and more and bigger prisons and the care associated with inmates.
Of those that don't reoffend, how many of those are actually going on welfare because they can't get or keep a job. How many of those people are a burden to society and will continue to be? So, why not keep the younger guys in jail that we can keep off the street, while reducing the crime rates, and let these elderly guys and girls out. Statistics show that once they get past 50, the chance of them reoffending violently is almost nil, regardless of what they were in for.
I'm not saying to just have a "cut-off" age, but to look at each case individually. Someone in a wheelchair or who is bedridden is not very likely to commit armed robbery or cold-blooded murder. Many of these inmates have family members that are willing and able to take care of them in their "final" days or golden years. At 50, some of them may even become a valuable asset to society, but mandatory minimum sentencing and "one for all" laws are preventing states from taking creative and innovative steps that may alleviate the prison systems and help the states' budgets.
I think it's time that states take some initiative and be given the freedom to make some of these decisions that have been taken out of the hands of the people that are doing the job. Government red-tape, both on the state and federal level has tied the hands of those people best equipped to deal with the issues at hand. What do you think? If states can solve the problem of overcrowded prisons and the drain on the budget, maybe some of this money can go back to buying paddles for principals and our educational system can be the next beneficiary to these budget solutions.
One of the things Tina enjoys doing is working in her garden. She uses diatomaceous earth to keep the bugs off of her vegetable plants!
