Why Is HB2270 Just Sentencing Needed In Arizona?
- The Current Policy Doesn’t Make Us Any Safer. The theory that harsh sentences deter crime has been thoroughly debunked. The consensus among criminologists is that longer prison sentences do not reduce criminogenic behavior or crime acts. States that have short sentences saw greater decreases in crime rates than Arizona.
- The 85% requirement is a disincentive for incarcerated people to participate in programming. With no hope of earning their way out, incarcerated individuals have little reason to take part in education, drug treatment, or other rehabilitative programming. In fact, anecdotal evidence suggests that many people are electing to stay in prison for 100% of their sentence to avoid spending any time under community supervision.
- Arizona’s sentencing requirement is outdated. Arizona is one of two remaining states that apply the 85% requirement to all offenses. Even conservative states, like Mississippi and Texas have reformed their sentencing laws. In 2014, Mississippi enacted reforms that changed their requirement from 85% to 50% for those convicted of violent offenses and 25% for those convicted of nonviolent offenses.
- Arizona’s current approach is unfair. A recent study found that people in Arizona serve significantly longer sentences for the same exact crimes compared to the national average. For property crimes, our sentences are twice as long. For drug crimes, they are 40% longer, and the majority of these (67%) are possession offenses, not major drug trafficking.
- Arizona’s level of incarceration is unsustainable. We have the 4th highest incarceration rate and spend over $1.1 billion on corrections. This is siphoning critical general funds dollars from education, child welfare, and other critical programs. And the return on this massive investment is a dismal 50% recidivism rate.
