And Even Worse IDOC News!!!!
Posted by tennesseetree on February 25, 2010
This is important! Everbody, please call your legislators, because these idiots will go ahead and approve this bill without a moment to consider these ramifications! All in the name of “public safety”!!
You can find contact phone numbers and addresses for our local reps at: http://www.rockfordlink.com/government.htm#Area%20Legislators
Posted February 22, 2010, by user DowntownChicago, on website, ILLINOISPRISONTALK.COM, at http://www.prisontalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5247871#post5247871
HB5019 removes ALL 180 days of meritorious good time !!!The bill is HB5019. It just made it through a small judicial committee (only one person voted no) and now it will be read to the entire house and probably voted on soon. You know most reps would simply vote yes because of the early release debacle that just occurred.
YOU NEED TO CONTACT YOUR STATE REP!!!
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/Bill…4&SessionID=76
This bill is awful for several reasons:
1) Cost. The extra 3 or 6 months an inmate will spend in prison will cost Illinois taxpayers A LOT of money. The vast majority of inmates are eligible for all 6 months of MGT. The average yearly cost to house an inmate is $36,000. There are approximately 45,000 inmates. You do the math.
2) Safety of IDOC staff. What incentive will inmates have to behave well if MGT is taken away?
3) Unfairness. By the bill stating “effective immediately”, the inmates will keep what good time they got. MGT is doled out differently at each IDOC facility. A lucky inmate who is in a facility that doles it out early might get most or all of the MGT he/she is eligible for. An unlucky inmate who is in a facility that doles out MGT in tiny bits or makes the inmate wait til he/she is very short will end up with little or none.
4) Possibility of lawsuits by inmates who plead, thus costing Illinois taxpayers even more $$$. An inmate who had a plea deal might have been well aware that he/she would be eligible for 3 or 6 months of MGT. Removing the MGT is effectively adding that 3 or 6 months to their sentence, not what they agreed to. Yes, MGT is discretionary, but the vast majority of inmates get all of the MGT they are eligible for, only those who committ notable offenses during their incarceration lose good time. A lawsuit that I feel is similar to this situation was already decided by the Illinois Supreme Court, an inmate who had a plea deal was not told during plea negotiations or at sentencing that he had to do 3 years of MSR (mandatory supervised release) after getting out of prison. He complained that the MSR was effectively extra time that he would have to do. The state supreme court AGREED with him. A person who agrees to a plea deal must understand ALL of the parameters of the deal.
5) Impact on loved ones. This will be the least important to the reps, but I would state it anyway.
Regarding #3 and #4 … if they really want to get rid of MGT, it should be implemented the way other changed laws are, the new law applies to inmates who committed their crimes on or after the date the bill became law. By implementing it “effective immediately”, it applies retroactively, and this could be challenged in court.
Marlene said
Some one please contact me on this issue. I want to know what I can do to help. My daughter is caught up in this web and I want to know what to do.