State doesn’t need new class of felonies

In the classic comedy Animal House, the dean of Faber College is informed of the latest outrage perpetrated by the problem Delta fraternity house, and he declares he has had enough. When informed that the fraternity is already on probation, he hesitates, and then thunders: “Well, as of this moment, they’re on double secret probation!”

At this moment, double secret probation is about to become law in Ohio, courtesy of the state’s two-year budget bill, now being debated in the Ohio Senate. The proposal, known formally as TCAP, or the Targeted Community Alternatives to Prison, creates an entire class of fifth-degree felonies for which there is no prison term. The only possible sentences judges would be able to consider involve local sanctions — more probation or a few days in the county jail (for which the state proposes to pay less than half the actual cost of incarceration). The proposal has its roots in Ohio’s bulging prison population.

Its author, who runs the Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections, unabashedly admits it is a way to divert nonviolent, low-level short-timers out of prison beds, saving an estimated $20 million at a time when Ohio faces a large projected shortfall. But this is no way to balance a budget.

The very reason for the existence of government is public safety. The people who ought to be in prison should be in prison, and the associated costs are the first part of the government’s cost of doing business. Now there are people who are sent to state prison who ought not be there, people who commit minor crimes that ought to be subject to local sanctions. We have a term for them: misdemeanants. If there are minor crimes that do not warrant prison, the General Assembly should be honest with the public and reclassify those offenses as misdemeanors.

A person convicted of a felony needs to face the possibility of a prison sentence — if not as an initial sentence, at least as a possible sanction for violation of initial terms of probation. The proposed budget takes that tool out of the hands of judges for these criminals. Worse, it softens punishment while pretending that nothing has changed.

“Truth in sentencing” was the watchword when the current criminal code was passed. This proposal turns the clock to the bad old days when there was little truth in sentencing and “7 to 25 years” actually meant maybe five years once all the credits and “good time” were calculated.

What sort of felonies would be prison-free under this plan? How about aggravated trafficking in heroin in small amounts? Yes, actual dealing in heroin, not just possession. How about forgery or identity theft — even if the paper merchant is supplying false documents for people illegally in this country? Or a drunken driver who seriously injures his own child in a car wreck?

Granted, TCAP includes some drug-possession offenses that perhaps should be dealt with by means other than with prison. But there are other tools already in place to deal with such cases — diversion, treatment in lieu of conviction, community control sanctions. My experience as a former county prosecutor tells me that by the time an F5 drug offender lands in prison, it’s generally not a first offense.

Faber College’s Dean Wormer unwittingly and humorously pointed out the problem with probation: Eventually, continued bad conduct demands a more serious sanction than more probation, double-secret or otherwise. The members of the Ohio Senate are neither unwitting nor without a sense of humor, and I am confident that they will find other means to address the deficit.