Corrections: Release Inmates to Save Money

I had the following letter published in the Birmingham News.

Corrections: Release inmates to save money

Much has been written recently about the dire financial circumstances of the Alabama Department of Corrections. According to a story in The Birmingham News, Commissioner Richard Allen said there will be a $15 million shortfall in 2010, which could lead to early releases and layoffs. The state’s General Fund is ailing, and it isn’t likely the $15 million will come from there. However, I have a simple plan that would provide the $15 million with gobs of money left over.

According to the department’s Web site, there are currently 8,641 prisoners serving time for drug violations at a cost of $15,223 a year each. That costs Alabama taxpayers around $132 million a year. If the nonviolent drug offenders were released, that $15 million would be readily available, plus an additional $117 million left over. It’s really a no-brainer.

Locking people up in our prison system because we disagree with their intoxicant of choice is responsible for the financial crises. What it hasn’t done — and never will do — is stop people from using drugs, reduce violence associated with the drug trade or keep drugs out of the hands of children. Think of all the other worthy programs that $132 million could be used for.

Loretta Nall
Alexander City

The letter was also published in the Mobile Press-Register and the Tuscaloosa News.

A funny thing about the title of the letter in the Press-Register…..even though neither of the words “legalize” or “marijuana” appear anywhere in the letter the Press-Register titled it ‘Save money by legalizing marijuana’.

Comments

10 Comments

  1. Covey69 on

    Maybe we are the way we are becasue of how we have shaped the reality of our society and I see a lot of responses with the same thoughts, we are to corrupt as a people to make it work.

    I beleive we have tricked ourselves into believing that and should we fill ourselves with true guidance, with love and patience and all the goodness we are endowed with we all could be much more.

    All the greatest people in history could see all of us in it’s true potential given the opportunity to shed our selfishness and see each other as the same.

    In my lifetime I only have precious time to see what my beliefs effects have on the people around me, my children and grandchildren, my only regret is I didn’t have this knowledge sooner for my childrens sake but even now in the last year I have seen greatness and beauty.

    Is it to soon, maybe but someone has to try and get the ball rolling, I want legalization but I keep seeing it useless if they just eventually take it away later.

    http://www.youtube.com/Covey69

  2. Anonymous on

    I might be able to find sympatie for your positivism Alpha, since thats a part of evolution too and adds to the process of making it inpredicteble to some extend.

    Right now ‘and as far as I can see into human evolution, I’m affraid they will turn the thumbscrews even more on us.

    As soon as we attempt fucking them, they’ll be fucking us even worse, its as simple as that.

    I keep an eye on you Alpha, cuzz you are able to place intelligent posts, so unfortunatly I also know that you even don’t believe in it yourselves. :(

    I remember you stated some of the above in a longer and better detailled version some time ago, and to my honest opinion it’s still one of the most realistic views.

    We are on an evolutionary ride that involves many different kinds of spirits
    ( = interacting matter, thoughts, energies, whatever.)

    But it doesn’t look too bright, most likely this is unavoideble and as a matter of fact even neccesary to bring us to the next level.

    It’s just a ride, and since we are all strapped in “safely” by our insurance and banking spirits, there is no option left as to eventually arrive where we need to be :)

    By G.G.

  3. one12alpha on

    I know you addressed Loretta and Marc, but I have some ideas, on the subject, I’d like to throw to scrutiny.

    Firstly I am speaking in terms of the US, but I think they may apply to Canada as well.

    My thought is on the process from the beginning. While we have the ability to affect laws at our local level, when it comes to national matters, its up to congress. Supposedly our elected officials are to vote for or against in reflection to their constituents demands…I feel this is rarely the case. The problem being the process of becoming an elected official. How much does a campaign cost? Millions? I know they aren’t getting that money from donations we make from our meager paychecks. I believe it comes from conglomerate corporations, and its no free ride…result- mandatory vaccinations, mandatory insurance, PROHIBITION. Solution? I think there should be a cap on how much a campaign can spend. This gives everyone a fair chance, and as a bonus candidates will be forced to deal with a budget or lose early. Also I think their should be a cap on how much a person/company can donate including the candidate. This aids in stopping special favors. This forces candidates to actually have supporters from the beginning…rather than forcing their name in our faces hoping we’ll vote for the last sign we saw.

    Also, lobbyists. Who are they? Who do they work for? And why is their voice more important than any other citizen? These are the questions that should be in the minds of legislators who give audience to them. Corporate lobbying should be a crime… Businesses have no business in my business.

    I think these two small changes would make a major impact in how our laws are influenced. I think it would promote some honesty in future legislators. I think it would not only promote, but encourage more people to run for office…not just those with money.

    And lastly, we need to encourage people to GET INVOLVED. I know Marc is with me on this. Its easy to say “I support this” or “I disagree with that.” But why is it so hard to put your vote where your mouth is? Cannabis would probably be legal if everyone who smoked it, also voted for it. We need to shed this attitude of apathy towards politics and legislation. And lose the idea that politics is a taboo topic of discussion. Isn’t that the point of politics; to refute, argue, and debate what ever topic until we come to a reasonable middle ground or solution?

    Any thoughts on these ideas?

  4. one12alpha on

    I know you addressed Loretta and Marc, but I have some ideas, on the subject, I’d like to throw to scrutiny.

    Firstly I am speaking in terms of the US, but I think they may apply to Canada as well.

    My thought is on the process from the beginning. While we have the ability to affect laws at our local level, when it comes to national matters, its up to congress. Supposedly our elected officials are to vote for or against in reflection to their constituents demands…I feel this is rarely the case. The problem being the process of becoming an elected official. How much does a campaign cost? Millions? I know they aren’t getting that money from donations we make from our meager paychecks. I believe it comes from conglomerate corporations, and its no free ride…result- mandatory vaccinations, mandatory insurance, PROHIBITION. Solution? I think there should be a cap on how much a campaign can spend. This gives everyone a fair chance, and as a bonus candidates will be forced to deal with a budget or lose early. Also I think their should be a cap on how much a person/company can donate including the candidate. This aids in stopping special favors. This forces candidates to actually have supporters from the begining…rather than forcing their name in our faces hoping we’ll vote for the last sign we saw.

    Also, lobbyists. Who are they? Who do they work for? And why is their voice more important than any other citizen? These are the questions that should be in the minds of legislators who give audience to them. Corporate lobbying should be a crime… Businesses have no business in my business.

    I think these two small changes would make a major impact in how our laws are influenced. I think it would promote some honesty in future legislators. I think it would not only promote, but encourage more people to run for office…not just those with money.

    And lastly, we need to encourage people to GET INVOLVED. I know Marc is with me on this. Its easy to say “I support this” or “I disagree with that.” But why is it so hard to put your vote where your mouth is? Cannabis would probably be legal if everyone who smoked it, also voted for it. We need to shed this attitude of apathy towards politics and legislation. And lose the idea that politics is a taboo topic of discussion. Isn’t that the point of politics; to refute, argue, and debate what ever topic until we come to a reasonable middle ground or solution?

    Any thoughts on these ideas?

  5. Anonymous on

    Who would want a direct democracy with all the idiots surrounding us? Think about it, 51% majority on EVERY issue is all you’d need to pass any legislation. Now walk into any average inner city school and think about what you see. Do you really want those people making decisions that could affect every facet of your life?
    Besides, you’d have to start by repealing the Constitution and if ya start fucking with that you’ll see some VERY angry people knockin at the door. Angry enough to make you wish it were only the DEA.

  6. Anonymous on

    If you d add up all of human personal profiles and devide them into avarage profile… the every one of us…d be way to poorly capable of bringing things to a higher level im affraid Covey69

    Can’t help but see the bad spirits growing everywhere.

    But the idea is great though, pls give us a link for if some serious aproach is on it’s way!!