Sorry for the Paris reference..

I apologize in advance for referring to Paris Hilton in anyway, but this article brought to mind some interesting thoughts.

I am outraged that she would get out of jail so quickly, but that is not my point. The thing that is interesting to me is how people are surprised that she would get out early. Why are they surprised? Are they surprised because of her celebrity and wealth or is there a disconnect between the people we elect and policies that they advocate and how the policies affect the criminal justice system. I suspect that most people assume she is getting special treatment and maybe she is, but from what I have read it is not unusual for people to only be incarcerated for 10 to 15 % of their sentence. California's system is overcrowded and she is not a signficant danger to anyone except maybe paparazzi.

What I am getting at, is that there is a big disconnect between ideology and reality. Everybody wants to be tough on crime (except criminals, I suspect), but what does that really mean from a policy perspective. There is a constant tension between mandatory minimum sentences, tougher sentencing guidelines, increases in the number of non-violent drug offenders in jail and finite funding for prisons.

Here is the problem, we cannot put everyone in jail because we cannot afford it. I am frustrated that voters and politicians don't think through the consequences of specific policy prescriptions. I used to think politicians knew better and were avoiding complexity for soundbites and getting relected, but increasingly I think that most politicians are ignorant of the true affects of their policies.

How many people know what percentage of our taxes dollars go to prison building? How does spending on prisons compare to educational spending? Would people rather keep a non-violent drug offender in jail or have more money per student for education (or a bigger tax cut for you supply siders out there).

As I always talk about, policies have consequences and there are always winners and losers. How do we install in the electorate the concept that many problems are intractable, like fighting terrorism or a war on drugs or poverty? We still must address these problems, but they cannot be solved, only managed. How do we bring realism to our policies? Is it even possible? Wow, this is a long way from Paris... Have a fun time in jail BTW...