As you may have heard this year there is a reform on the ballot to the Three Strikes Law. A reform to the Three Strikes Law is needed, but is the reform offered to voters a good thing? In other words what would the new Three Strikes really do if passed? One of the many things that the reform will do is that people who have prior strikes for nonviolent crimes will not serve a life sentence for their third offense. Instead a person who gets convicted of a nonviolent crime will serve double their normal sentence for their second offense and three times for their third offense. This is good because there will be less people in prison serving life. Because prison will now be less populated, there will be more space for people incarcerated for violent crimes so they will not get early releases. With less people in prison for non-violent crimes, proponents argue that there would be less taxpayer’s dollars going into prison spending.

However, most of the money saved will go back into to the prison system. In the reform measure, prisoners will be moved from prisons to jails. Money will go into building new county jails to house inmates coming from these prisons. Also, money will go into building new county jails to house these inmates coming from prisons. The money will further fund jobs , such as  guards, sheriffs, and probation officers. Ultimately, the reform will make some changes for the better, but not exactly what was intended.

Another problem with the new reform is that it takes away necessary services for vulnerable populations. If passed, the reform will stop funding for long term health care for nonviolent criminals and elderly inmates serving life. This is not right because if someone needs medication they should have the right to receive them. The 3 Strikes reform currently on the ballot has been watered down and deviates from the original intension of the former reform effort to minimize the number of inmates and save tax payers dollars from funding the incarceration over education of our people, especially working-class and poor people of color. “The main objective of the reform was to reduce prison population by about thirty five percent,” said Joe Miles, of SFSU Project Rebound. 

 

M.M