Comparing Cost of Crime to Cost of Incarceration

 Comparing the cost of corrections to the cost of crime had not occurred to me, so I found this to be an interesting challenge that would cause me to do some digging. 

According to the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections website, at http://www.drc.ohio.gov/Public/osp.htm the average cost per inmate is $164.06, with a total budget of $29.866 million for 458 prisoners.  The Franklin County budget for the office of sheriff is $99 million as submitted (see http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2012/12/02/sheriff-budget-falls-short.html ), and that article provides the statistic that the Franklin County jail maintains 1800 inmates in jail each day, a stunning number.  While I couldn't find a line item in the budget that provided a breakout of jail cost alone, the total cost for the Franklin County Sheriff function is $150.69 per prisoner they incarcerate - although that obviously includes patrol and administrative costs for law enforcement and crime prevention, as well as the strict operating costs for the jail.

From the Buckeye Institute report "Smart on Crime" issued November 2010 (see:http://buckeyeinstitute.org/uploads/files/buckeye-smart-on-crime(1).pdf ) the cost of corrections in Ohio has increased 5-fold since 1983, after adjusting for inflation.  Their number is starkly different from those posted by the department of corrections, at $1.79Billion annually for the total Ohio Department of Corrections figure, with $1.29Billion earmarked explicitly for prisons.  Ohio spends 7.3% of the state budget on corrections, more than the national average of 6.7%, with more than 50,000 inmates in the prison system.  The "Smart on Crime" report makes the assertion, one that I agree with, that the prison system in the United States has surpassed the point of diminishing returns.  The cost per resident of Ohio, using the Buckeye Institute report on crime, is $155.06 per Ohio resident.

The 2010 Rand report "Hidden in Plain Site" published at (http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/occasional_papers/2010/RAND_OP279.pdf ) provides scholarly research on the cost of crime attributable to the cost and effectivity of policing.  From the report, the forecasted cost of crime in Toledo Ohio that was associated with a 12% reduction in police force ($20.97 per capita in savings) was estimated to yield an impact of $31.76 million, for a per-capita impact from that 12% reduction of $1160 per Toledo resident, or a net increase in costs to the citizens of Ohio of $1139, which far outstrips the $155.06 per resident cost of incarceration (and remember that the $1139 is just for a 12% reduction on policing, not answering the complete question of "what would the impact of crime be if there were zero law enforcement, as that number would be catastrophic).  While the diminishing returns from the prison system are certainly of concern, the cost of crime is dramatically larger than the cost of incarceration.

I don't think that all incarceration is cost effective, as there are many crimes that are "victimless crimes", as well as the issue of juvenile offenders.  You can't ignore the fact that there is model theory at work that will actually encourage delinquency when incarcerating a juvenile with other juvenile delinquents.  They stand a good chance of becoming bitter and embracing crime, rather than true and actual rehabilitation.  Additionally, since most criminals believe they will not be caught, the threat of punishment doesn't seem a real deterrent.  I think that crimes like small amounts of drug possession, DUI, administrative offenses are best resolved through community service, probation, counseling, rehabilitation, therapy and social programs.

Insanity Defense- is it Rational?

The insanity defense continues to evolve and be shaped by our knowledge of cognition, mental health and effectivity of treatments and punishments, as well as cultural changes and response by the public to outcomes from the criminal justice system.

We have had immense gains in our understanding about mental illness since the M'Naghten Rule was established, although public sentiment continues to lag this knowledge.  If you consider the treatments that have included electric shock therapy, lobotomy and other practices considered barbaric today, how society has evolved in the understanding of mental illness, and the rights of the mentally ill, has also evolved.  Yet, when the criminal justice system has "gone too far", public outcry about guilty going unpunished results in a backlash that reverses the direction away from the rights of the accused towards authoritarian punishment. 

I have struggled with the notion of the insanity plea, as I can see both the need for protecting the mentally competent from acts they do not understand, and the need to mete out justice and protect society from violent offenders.

I find it interesting that there are three states (Utah, Montana and Utah) that do not allow the insanity defense.  This seems greatly unfair to me, as there are those who are clearly incapable of understanding their actions, or of subsequently understanding the trial.  This seems like shooting my dog unless it tells me, in flawless English, to "please don't shoot".  How can we hold persons who cannot understand their actions accountable under the law?  Still, I do understand the desire for justice and punishment, to the point of revenge, particularly for the families of victims.  The anguish of seeing someone "walk free" who has been proven guilty in the family's perspective would be a dagger in the mind that would cry out for revenge.

I've lived with the mentally ill, and that's included bipolar disorder, sensory integration disorder, autism, dementia, Altzheimer's and anorexia nervosa.  There's a big difference from being [neurotic, ADD, grumpy, getting your freak on, irrational, jerk, caffeine overdosed, drunk] and hearing voices, thinking bugs are moving under your skin or talking to your long-dead mother who you think is in the room.  You don't punish a baby for filling their diaper, or a deaf child for not responding when you talk to them.  It is a common misconception in education that "all children should be treated the same".  However, my autistic child needed more time and assistance at understanding the questions.  That's not cheating or creating a differing standard, any more than you'd hand a fill-in-the-blank quiz to a blind child, then give them an F when they failed to complete it.  When you're dealing with gaps in mental health where there is no recognition of actions, consequences and/or societal mores, to what end do you punish them?  You might as well punish a child because it rains.

The concept of not executing someone who had become insane after conviction of a capital crime had seemed wrong to me until I studied this topic more deeply.  Now I understand that their insanity would prevent them from mounting a credible defense for appeals, or at least, prevent them from understanding the appeals process.  Still, if they were found insane after being denied their final appeal, I think they should be executed.