Rep. Reinbold is right to call for repeal for criminal justice reform bill

We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.

– Ronald Reagan

Ernest Prax has written that Rep. Lora Reinbold is wrong in her criticism of Senate Bill 91, Alaska Criminal Justice Reform. However, much of his criticism is based on the assertion that because we have people in jail, we as a society are doing something wrong.

We should not manage our jail populations based on a target jail population. Rather, we place individuals in the custody of the state based on their illegal actions and their likelihood of creating more victims.

The purpose is to prevent them from injuring other people in the future.  Prax and those who backed this legislation seem to have lost sight of the purpose of prisons.

This legislation was not the result of broad-based research and support. It is the work of a special interest group, the Pew Charitable Trusts, which essentially wrote the legislation and paid lobbyist Kent Dawson to get it passed. The attorney general involved had limited or no criminal law experience. The Denali Law Group (public defenders), Anchorage Municipal Prosecutors, Anchorage Police Department and Alaska state prosecutors were not involved in  development or passage of this legislation.

Essentially, the law enforcement community was shut out of the process. Many opposed the legislation.

As to the effects of this legislation, Prax is wrong again. From prosecutors I learned that although someone can still be arrested for failure to appear and theft under $250, they are now violations like a traffic ticket with no jail time (with an exception for failure to appear after 30 days).  The prosecutor must now prove that they intended to evade prosecution for a crime in order to prove the crime of failure to appear. They have changed the law such that these offenses are still technically criminal but removed the prospect of jail as a consequence.

The real consequences of this legislation can be seen in the case of Jose Delgado, who is in sentencing in  Juneau right now as reported by the Juneau Empire. He has pleaded guilty to firing a gun from a moving car at someone last February. He has 21 prior convictions including a felony conviction in the fourth degree, misconduct involving a controlled substance and seven convictions for misdemeanor assault. Delgado's defense attorneys are arguing that now under SB 91 his prior convictions should not influence his sentence. That is after SB 91 reduced the sentencing range for this Class B felony from one to three years down to zero to two years.

The intent of this legislation is to move toward decriminalization of drug abuse. Prax views the bill's reduced  penalties for controlled substance violations as a societal good. I disagree. Reduced penalties and eventual decriminalization will create a society in which drug use is tolerated. This will expose more people to drug use and create more victims and addicts, especially among the young. Drug addiction is destructive to individuals and tragic for families. A society that creates an environment that condones or accepts drug addiction is culpable for its damages.

It is curious to me that people who argue that liberalization and decriminalization of drug use leads toward less abuse do not see the same in other antisocial behaviors. Could the same be said for driving under the influence? Child abuse? Rape? Murder?

We need to hold the line to protect more families from the tragedy of drug abuse. Ask any recovering addict whether or not readily available drugs contribute to their recidivism.

Prax is concerned about the growth of prison populations in our state. That growth is certainly disconcerting. However, Alaska's prison population growth is well below the national average.

Prax claims Rep. Reinbold oversimplifies a complex problem. Prax oversimplifies the complexity of a life that leads to prison. It just doesn't seem reasonable to say that we have too many people in prison because penalties for antisocial behavior are too severe.

Contrary to Prax's claim, we do not generally imprison people for drug use. Only 4 percent of the prison population is there for mere drug possession. Those generally represent plea bargains to prevent prosecution for other crimes. Prison is not an effective cure for drug addiction but neither is returning drug addicts to the street without even the time to sober up. Nothing in  this legislation establishes a program proven to combat drug addiction. Instead, it carves out a new role in the Department of Corrections, funded by the savings gained by releasing criminals on the streets of Alaska.

The worst part of Prax's rebuttal is his ad hominem attack on Reinbold in characterizing her view as authoritarian and violating personal liberty. Nowhere did she insist or request that someone, "obey her." Instead, she maintains that people should obey the law. Her view is not authoritarian and her view doesn't violate anyone's personal liberty. Quite the contrary — it is the rule of law that promotes individual liberty for the greatest number of people. It is the government's role to prevent individuals from infringing on the rights and liberties of others through criminal behavior.

Prax refers to F.A. Hayek's "The Constitution of Liberty."  Hayek defines freedom as "The state in which a man is not subject to coercion by the arbitrary will of another or others." The law that was changed by SB 91 is hardly arbitrary. What is an arbitrary infringement on the freedom of an individual is when criminals steal to support a drug habit or coerce through violence.

Hayek also insists that "Liberty and responsibility cannot be separated. Liberty requires that the individual must bear the consequences of his actions." Furthermore, Hayek allows the state to "Infringe a person's protected private sphere only as punishment for breaking an announced general rule" (emphasis added).

Hayek understood the rule of law is necessary to maintain individual rights and freedoms for the greatest number of people and accounted for the government's role in maintaining the rule of law.

Alaskans should not suffer the consequences, intended or unintended, of policy dictated by outside special interests. Alaskans should stand up and demand repeal of SB 91.

Tom Blackley is a legislative aide to Rep. Lora Reinbold, R-Eagle River.

The views expressed here are the writer's and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary@alaskadispatch.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@alaskadispatch.com or click here to submit via any web browser.