‘Hard Time’ Initiative Likely A Done Deal

Speaking out against Initiative 159 - the Hard Time for Armed Crime measure - is liable to get a politician accused of coddling criminals.

The initiative attracted more than 200,000 signatures over the summer and fall. Polls show it has public support in the 85 percent range. As such, the initiative that toughens the sentences of criminals who use deadly weapons is the closest thing to a done deal in the 1995 Legislature.

So opposing it is not only politically dangerous, it’s probably futile. Even asking questions about the costs of the initiative is enough to put a legislator in the soft-on-crime category.

During the measure’s maiden hearing in the Legislature’s first week, lawmakers who worried about the extra burden the initiative would place on an already strapped state government were orally chastised. How could they think about money when lives of crime victims were at stake?

“I hear the talk about the costs,” said Sheryl Kinard, whose former husband was murdered last summer. “We, the people, don’t give a damn. We want safer streets.”

Initiative sponsor John Carlson stigmatized lawmakers who worry about the initiative’s costs as out of touch, as captives of Olympia.

“There are two realities,” Carlson said. “One reality here in Olympia and one reality in the rest of the state.”

The reaction to questions about costs falls into two camps. One, led by Carlson, suggests there will be little net increase in costs if the state would only run its prisons more efficiently. Carlson also supposes that such a measure would cost little because it will deter criminals from acting out in the first place.

The other camp acknowledges the relatively high cost of tougher sentencing but is willing to cover it by reducing spending elsewhere. Spanaway Democratic Rep. Tom Campbell suggested to the House Corrections and Law and Justice committees that the state release nonviolent offenders so violent offenders could serve longer terms. And Pierce County Prosecutor John Ladenburg asked the state to reset its priorities.

“Do we want paved roads or safe streets?” he asked.

Of course, there will be costs associated with the measure. The state Sentencing Guidelines Commission estimates the get-tough plan would eventually create the need for 933 more prison beds - about 9 percent more than the state has now. A prison that size would cost at least $100 million in 1995 dollars.

Short-term, the measure would cost about $10 million to house an additional 385 inmates during the next two years.

And there are other public costs that are difficult to estimate. Jim Krider, the new Snohomish County prosecutor, guesses his county will need to hire several more deputy prosecutors and perhaps a new judge. Similar costs could fall to other counties.

Initiative sponsors can make one point accurately, however - legislators were less concerned about costs when adopting get-tough measures was their own idea. Since 1986, legislators of both political parties have endorsed seven bills that have added about 3,500 prisoners to the state’s penitentiaries and work camps.

Only one of the bills - the Omnibus Drug Act of 1989 - included new taxes to pay the costs. The rest were simply added to the state general budget. Why should initiative sponsors be more fiscally responsible than elected legislators have been?

Initiative 159 raises another prickly public policy question - budgeting by initiative. Voters have already capped state spending by approving Initiative 601. Each new initiative that appropriates money, therefore, must be paid for by reducing spending in other areas.

As the Washington Legislature restructures government under Initiative 601, constituencies that see less state money may well go the initiative route to get their share back.

California, another state with broad initiative powers, has likewise capped the amount state and local governments can spend. Budget cuts have sparked a new type of initiative that carves out special areas of spending and gives them special status. For example, California’s teachers union helped pass an initiative that requires schools receive at least 40 percent of the state general fund.

In 1988, conservationists succeeded with an initiative requiring $776 million in parks and open space spending. The same sponsor succeeded with a $1.9 billion mandate for public transportation spending. Neither measure included new taxes.

All were popular. But all were endorsed in a vacuum without competing with other state spending priorities. Is California a precursor or an aberration?

xxxx

The following fields overflowed: CREDIT = Peter Callaghan McClatchy News Service