Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's prison reform record is a tragic tale of forgotten hopes and fateful mistakes. Nearly five years ago, the California governor stood outside San Quentin State Prison and announced an ambitious plan that would solve the prison overcrowding crisis. 

The plan literally added "Rehabilitation" to the name California Department of Corrections and, more importantly, promised to reduce overcrowding by putting more emphasis on rehabilitative programs.

Now the state is abandoning such promising prison reform ambitions. In the midst of a dire budget crisis, California is forced to cut $1.2 billion from its $10 billion corrections budget, this year alone.

As the state cuts $250 million from inmate programs, it only leaves rehabilitation in the department name. Although overall corrections budget cuts might be necessary today, the effects of slashing rehabilitation programs could prove detrimental to public safety and lead to increased corrections costs in the future.

Removing rehabilitative programs will exacerbate the state's already monumental problems of prison overcrowding and inmate recidivism -- about 70 percent of parolees end up back in prison within three years. If the state lays off 1,443 prison program staff, and removes 80 percent of drug rehabilitation programs, inmates will be less prepared for post-release challenges. 

The plan recently presented by the CDCR will reduce the inmate population by 40,000. It includes a mixed bag of quasi-reforms, such as reshuffling 11,000 inmates to already overburdened county jails and another 2,300 to private prisons in other states. The plan might reduce overcrowding temporarily, but it represents another missed opportunity for prison reform and demonstrates Sacramento's political unwillingness to rethink its failing prison policies.

This year's budget crisis presented a perfect opportunity for California to rethink how it punishes criminals. Lawmakers and citizens alike need to decide if the $49,000 spent annually per inmate is really the wisest way to spend taxpayer money.

But surely this monumental corrections budget reflects the actual cost of keeping California communities safe, right? Wrong. The national average incarceration cost is about $24,000 per inmate per year. California's inflated costs per inmate reflect systemic dysfunction -- mainly from prison overcrowding (170,000 inmates housed in 33 facilities designed to hold 88,000), but also from the undue political influence of the state's prison guard union. 

Prisons are not isolated from society. What happens inside of them affects people on the outside. Every year, tens of thousands of inmates are released on parole and bring with them whatever good or bad experiences they had in prison. By eliminating rehabilitative programs, the state is removing valuable opportunities for inmates to acquire the skills and mindset needed to succeed in society. This poses a real threat to public safety.

Governor Schwarzenegger said that it is outrageous how the state spends more money on prison than on higher education. Yet, he is unable to present a strategy that does not involve prison expansion.

Whereas corrections spending cuts are necessary to close the budget gap, the ways in which the current plan attempts to do so are far from the best alternatives. Outsourcing prison beds to Corrections Corporation of America, reshuffling thousands of inmates to overcrowded county jails, and building three more state prisons are all measures that fail to mitigate the crisis in the long term. And eliminating nearly half of inmate educational and vocational programs and 80 percent of drug treatment programs will more quickly inflame the crisis.

California can soon add "least access to inmate rehabilitation in the country" to its already disgraceful distinction of having the highest recidivism rates, costliest prison system, largest inmate population and the most overcrowded prisons.

There are several other sensible ways in which the state can reduce its spending and overcrowding. For years, expert commissions and studies have all come up with roughly the same reform proposals: focus on reducing recidivism by refunding academic, vocational and drug rehabilitation programs in prisons and in our communities; reform sentencing laws; handle petty drug offenses locally through community-based treatment programs; and repeal the Three Strikes Law.

We must realize that California cannot build itself out of its prison crisis, nor can we expect prisoners to redeem themselves when there are no programs offering alternatives to a life of crime.

Emphasizing rehabilitation in the criminal justice system is not just smart policy in terms of public safety, it is the fiscally responsible thing to do.

_____________________________________________________________________________