In Hawaii, prison reform is more difficult than anticipated

In 2012, the state passed a law aiming to make their system more efficient and promote rehabilitation to reduce recidivism. Called the Justice Reinvestment Initiative, hopes were high for a new approach to crime, prisons, and criminals.

Those hopes, as Honolulu Civil Beat reports, have not turned into sweeping change.

JRI hoped to reduce inmate population by more than 900 by 2015, for instance, but the inmate population at the end of May only declined by 62 inmates since June 2012.

The drive for change grew from a seeming contradiction. As the crime level in Hawaii fell by 31 percent, the inmate population increased by 18 percent and spending increased by 71 percent from 2000 to 2011.

The basis for the JRI wasn’t without empirical evidence: Texas tried similar policies that saved the state almost $700 million.

But the difficulty lies in how the state has executed the program; which services get funded and where, the political will to push through reforms, and a certain dissonance between JRI and reality on the ground.

Criminal justice reform has gained bipartisan support and seen the alliance of some unlikely groups. Though the turn to punitive approaches to crime, and an expansion in the incarceration rate in America, had bipartisanship driving it, the decline in crime, increase in prison costs, and murky evidence that more incarceration leads to less crime has led to the backlash.

The Hawaii experiment illustrates that, even with growing support for reform, success is difficult.

The details of reform plans matter more than the intentions of the reformers. While criticism and disappoint for the JRI is rife, hope for improvement remains.

Much of the work to be done remains on the state level, and it’s heartening to see different approaches. The golden policy would be one that lowers costs, has a positive impact on crime, and encourages economic integration of former inmates. Whether that is possible is unclear.