The New Politics of Sentencing

Abstract

With this Issue, the Federal Sentencing Reporter concludes its two-issue survey of recent sentencing reform developments at the state level. The previous Issue focused on drug reforms, particularly a series of ballot initiatives in four states mandating treatment in lieu of incarceration for lowlevel drug offenders. The present Issue places those developments in a broader context. Within the past two years, more than a dozen states have adopted important sentencing reforms. Surprisingly, given the general trajectory of sentencing law over the past three decades, most of the current state-level reforms are calculated to reduce sentence lengths (albeit sometimes rather obliquely). Perhaps most notably, legislatures have scaled back mandatory minimums in Connecticut, Indiana, Louisiana, and North Dakota. Thus, one can now ask with a straight face the question posed by Marc Mauer in this Issue: OIs the get-tough era in sentencing coming to a close?O Recent state reforms may indeed suggest a fundamental change in sentencing politics. Not coincidentally, however, they have occurred during a period of economic stress. Shrinking tax revenues put pressure on all aspects of a stateOs budget. Corrections spending is no exception. Thus, successful reform efforts across the country, from California to Louisiana to Virginia, have focused on the cost-savings that can be achieved by reducing the size of prison populations. Yet, as the contributions to this Issue emphasize, Þscal pressures cannot by themselves explain the current move away from long mandatory prison terms. Rather, recent state reforms must also be understood as a resection of social justice concerns and a willingness to employ rehabilitative, instead of purely punitive, approaches to criminal justice problems. Sentence-reducing reforms may thus hold appeal for both Þscal conservatives and social liberals. Not surprisingly, then, reform in many states has been a bipartisan affair. What remains to be seen is whether short-term economic pressures will provide an impetus for far-sighted reform in other states, or, alternatively, promote the adoption of ill-advised quick Þxes. Contributions to this Issue consider recent state developments from three perspectives. First, Marc Mauer, Daniel Wilhelm, and Nicholas Turner offer a national perspective, summarizing recent developments and identifying important patterns across states. Second, Michael Lawlor and Thomas Hammer provide more detailed accounts of recent developments in Connecticut and Wisconsin, respectively. Their articles are complemented by a recent report from the Kansas Sentencing Commission, which also offers an in-depth, state-speciÞc perspective on current reforms. Finally, two recent reports from the Department of JusticeOs Bureau of Justice Statistics provide a statistical perspective on state-level trends and experiences.