This article is from the source 'washpo' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/landmark-criminal-justice-bill-in-jeopardy-as-its-impact-is-questioned/2016/03/21/042e86cc-ef76-11e5-a61f-e9c95c06edca_story.html
The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| ‘Landmark’ criminal justice bill delayed as its impact is questioned | |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| Maryland Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. (D-Calvert) delayed action Monday morning on what was supposed to be a landmark criminal justice bill amid questions about whether amendments had essentially gutted the legislation. | Maryland Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr. (D-Calvert) delayed action Monday morning on what was supposed to be a landmark criminal justice bill amid questions about whether amendments had essentially gutted the legislation. |
| The amendments were adopted by the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee late Thursday night and early Friday morning. Miller said an analysis released over the weekend showed that under the new version of the bill, the state would save only $34 million over the next 10 years, instead of the nearly $250 million that was initially projected. Instead of dropping by about 14 percent, the prison population would grow slightly. | The amendments were adopted by the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee late Thursday night and early Friday morning. Miller said an analysis released over the weekend showed that under the new version of the bill, the state would save only $34 million over the next 10 years, instead of the nearly $250 million that was initially projected. Instead of dropping by about 14 percent, the prison population would grow slightly. |
| . | . |
| “We’re going to have to look at this very carefully,” Miller said on the Senate floor. “If we don’t have savings, what are we doing?” | “We’re going to have to look at this very carefully,” Miller said on the Senate floor. “If we don’t have savings, what are we doing?” |
| Miller said the Senate will likely take up the measure Monday afternoon or during the evening session. | Miller said the Senate will likely take up the measure Monday afternoon or during the evening session. |
| The questions over the measure come as the General Assembly works its way through a backlog of bills on “crossover” day, the date by which most bills must have passed out of at least one chamber of the legislature to have the best chance of becoming law during the 90-day legislative session. | The questions over the measure come as the General Assembly works its way through a backlog of bills on “crossover” day, the date by which most bills must have passed out of at least one chamber of the legislature to have the best chance of becoming law during the 90-day legislative session. |
| [Bill to ease sentencing for drug offenders advances in Md. Senate] | [Bill to ease sentencing for drug offenders advances in Md. Senate] |
| The criminal justice legislation would send people charged with drug possession to treatment instead of prison; eliminate disparities in penalties for offenses involving crack and powder cocaine; make it easier for people convicted of drug possession to have those convictions expunged from their records; and offer drug offenders the same number of credits to reduce their sentences as are given to other nonviolent offenders. | The criminal justice legislation would send people charged with drug possession to treatment instead of prison; eliminate disparities in penalties for offenses involving crack and powder cocaine; make it easier for people convicted of drug possession to have those convictions expunged from their records; and offer drug offenders the same number of credits to reduce their sentences as are given to other nonviolent offenders. |
| On Friday, Sen. Bobby Zirkin (D-Baltimore County), the chairman of the Senate committee, hailed the bill as “landmark” legislation. | On Friday, Sen. Bobby Zirkin (D-Baltimore County), the chairman of the Senate committee, hailed the bill as “landmark” legislation. |
| One change that has been criticized by advocates and several lawmakers is an amendment that deals with technical parole violations. The original bill called for violators to receive up to 15 days for the first revocation of parole and up to 45 days for the third revocation under the recommendations. The Senate committee voted to do away with the caps, allowing judges to decide on sentencing for parole violations. | One change that has been criticized by advocates and several lawmakers is an amendment that deals with technical parole violations. The original bill called for violators to receive up to 15 days for the first revocation of parole and up to 45 days for the third revocation under the recommendations. The Senate committee voted to do away with the caps, allowing judges to decide on sentencing for parole violations. |
| Pew Charitable Trust, which worked with the state on collecting and analyzing data, last year found that the parole-revocation provision made up at least one-third of the overall projected cost savings from the bill. | Pew Charitable Trust, which worked with the state on collecting and analyzing data, last year found that the parole-revocation provision made up at least one-third of the overall projected cost savings from the bill. |
| Marc Schindler, the executive director of the Justice Policy Institute, said the revised bill is “a significant step backwards.” | Marc Schindler, the executive director of the Justice Policy Institute, said the revised bill is “a significant step backwards.” |
| “It is very, very disappointing,” Schindler said, arguing that the committee seemed to simply throw away the work of the Justice Reinvestment Coordinating Council, a group appointed last year to study ways to reduce the state’s prison population, save money and reduce recidivism. “This really does a disservice to Maryland taxpayers and to people who interact with the justice system every day,” Schindler said. | “It is very, very disappointing,” Schindler said, arguing that the committee seemed to simply throw away the work of the Justice Reinvestment Coordinating Council, a group appointed last year to study ways to reduce the state’s prison population, save money and reduce recidivism. “This really does a disservice to Maryland taxpayers and to people who interact with the justice system every day,” Schindler said. |
| Zirkin questioned the findings of the analysis, telling lawmakers on Monday morning that he did not think that the changes made in committee would drastically affect the impact of the legislation. “I disagree vehemently that that took $200 million off the savings,” he said. | Zirkin questioned the findings of the analysis, telling lawmakers on Monday morning that he did not think that the changes made in committee would drastically affect the impact of the legislation. “I disagree vehemently that that took $200 million off the savings,” he said. |
| [Panel: How Md. could save nearly $250 million with prison reform] | [Panel: How Md. could save nearly $250 million with prison reform] |
| Zirkin also said that the committee’s amendments were an attempt to mitigate possible risks to public safety. | Zirkin also said that the committee’s amendments were an attempt to mitigate possible risks to public safety. |
| The analysis, by a researcher working for Pew, said the revised bill would have little impact on the number of state prisoners over the next 10 years. | The analysis, by a researcher working for Pew, said the revised bill would have little impact on the number of state prisoners over the next 10 years. |
| There are currently slightly more than 20,000 prisoners in Maryland. The Justice Reinvestment Coordinating Council recommended changes in sentencing and other policies that would have reduced that populated to a projected 17,600 by fiscal 2026. As a result of the amendments to the legislation, the analysis says, the prison population instead would grow to 20,921 during that period. | There are currently slightly more than 20,000 prisoners in Maryland. The Justice Reinvestment Coordinating Council recommended changes in sentencing and other policies that would have reduced that populated to a projected 17,600 by fiscal 2026. As a result of the amendments to the legislation, the analysis says, the prison population instead would grow to 20,921 during that period. |