Measure to cut inmates’ prison sentences killed

BOISE – A House committee killed a bill to allow Idaho inmates to reduce their prison sentences in exchange for good behavior, amid concern it would undermine efforts of a prison commission appointed by Gov. Dirk Kempthorne and would reintroduce something akin to “good time” that the state abandoned in 1986.

Members of the Judiciary, Rules and Administration Committee voted 7-5 against the proposal of Rep. Steve Smylie, R-Boise. It was a response to a state prison population that’s risen to 6,300 inmates, and Smylie argued it would have generated $4.2 million dollars in savings by 2007 and give inmates an incentive to behave themselves behind bars.

“An inmate will receive a personalized plan for the inmate to follow,” according to the bill, including education, drug treatment or work requirements. Those who complied could receive reductions of up to a third of their sentences.

Objections came from two fronts.

Megan Ronk, a Kempthorne policy adviser, said pushing Smylie’s bill through the Legislature now would have promoted piecemeal legislation without allowing Kempthorne’s criminal justice commission — announced Jan. 10 during his State of the State speech — to come up with broad recommendations to slash growing prison costs.

“Moving forward with such significant legislation could undermine that process,” Ronk told the committee.

Some prosecuting attorneys were also against the measure.

They said it was tantamount to a return to pre-1986 days, when Idaho inmates, including recently released killer Claude Dallas, automatically earned “good time” for each year they served.

That system created concerns among victims, who were often unpleasantly surprised to learn that those who had committed crimes against them were on the street before the end of their official sentences, said Heather Reilly of the Idaho Prosecuting Attorneys Association.

The state’s existing “unified sentencing” system requires convicted criminals’ sentences to include fixed and discretionary components.

That’s easier for victims to predict, Reilly said.

“We think it’s a ‘truth-in-sentencing’ issue,” she said. “Any push to allow for an inmate to get a reduction that doesn’t take into account input from prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges and victims is unacceptable.”

Members of the committee did support forwarding Smylie’s proposal, based on Nebraska law, to the panel appointed by Kempthorne, which includes judges, attorneys and corrections officials.