With its level of incarcerated criminals hovering around 150 percent of design capacity, and projected to keep climbing, Nebraska has a problem and a challenge. The overcrowding will be a matter of attention in the upcoming session of the Unicameral, which begins Jan. 8.
State law says when the prison population reaches 140 percent of capacity, the Governor has discretionary authority to address the situation as an emergency. That authority hasn’t been implemented, but as the problem escalates—Nebraska’s number is already among the worst in the nation and moving in a direction opposite that of national trends—the possibility of lawsuits and federal court intervention grows.
One approach for relieving overcrowding would be to build another prison. But with a construction cost estimated in the range of $150 million, and an additional $35 million in annual operating costs, no one in any decision-making capacity is interested in construction as a solution.  The state budget for corrections already is about $160 million per year.
The policy challenge is how to alleviate chronic overcrowding using alternatives to incarceration without compromising public safety.  The challenge is complex.
Believe it or not, initiatives and experiences in tough-minded Texas might suggest a strategy with possibilities for success.
The strategy has come to be known as justice reinvestment.  It means investing in community-based and rehabilitation-focused programs for non-violent offenders, typically those convicted of drug and property crimes. (About 58 percent of those incarcerated by the state Department of Corrections are in that situation because of crimes other than any form of homicide, first-degree assault, first-degree sexual assault and robbery.)
In August, the Omaha World Herald editorially described the strategy as follows:
“Prison alternatives are about saving money by investing instead in the treatment centers, drug courts, problem-solving courts, probation and parole officers needed to hold nonviolent criminals accountable…. It’s about giving people who might succeed a chance to do so with their support networks in tow….”
In Texas, it is estimated that the justice-reinvestment strategy is resulting in $1.5 billion of construction cost savings and $340 million in averted operating costs annually. What’s more, the crime rate has fallen.
The Nebraska Legislature’s Judiciary Committee already has enlisted assistance from the Council of State Governments’ Justice Center. Its in-depth analysis of Nebraska’s crime and corrections data is anticipated to result in recommendations for policy changes involving both administrative and legislative actions.
The up-front element of the complexity could be addressed as well.  That would involve sentencing reforms. For instance, the legislated policy of mandatory minimum sentences for some crimes could undergo re-thinking. Giving sentencing judges greater flexibility would likely affect chronic overcrowding to some extent.
And finally… from a lighter side:
A really good story about how “hitting Send” can result in an “uh oh’ moment was reported in Nebraska last month.  It’s a hoot.
A prominent attorney, himself a former president of the Nebraska State Bar Association, looked on as two of his colleagues in high levels of the association’s leadership argued a case on its behalf in front of the seven justices of the Nebraska Supreme Court.
Not long after the oral arguments were concluded, the principal in this story crafted an e-mail message in which he congratulated and praised his friends for their skillful performances. But he also went a bit further and expressed some not-so-nice thoughts about the justices; as reported, referring to some of their questions as “ill-conceived and uninformed.”
Okay; one man’s opinion; except for the fact that the “To” line didn’t include just the two attorneys who argued their case, but also others from a category of the address book. One of those others was the Chief Justice of the same Supreme Court.
Uh-oh.
Once you hit “Send”…. uh oh.
An apology was issued.