Note: published in the Orlando Sentinel, April 27, 2011
The Orlando Sentinel editorial "Punishing taxpayers" on Saturday was not only condescending to small business owners, but misleading.
House Bill 1379 and Senate Bill 372 simply state that criminals who can afford their own release should pay and not put the burden on taxpayers. The Florida Association of Counties, which derives its money from membership fees using tax dollars, has estimated the impact to counties, if the bills pass, to be between $10 million and $55 million.
FAC and advocates of government-funded release want to hoodwink citizens into thinking these are bad bills because they don't want to downsize the huge bureaucracies they have created. And they have no impact on jail populations.
The Orlando Sentinel should commend, not deride, lawmakers who are trying to remedy this situation. The bills will not only save limited tax dollars but protect public safety as well. The private surety bail industry has a long partnership in the criminal justice system and has proved to be the most effective form of release.
Why? Because defendants who have a financial stake in the game, along with family and friends, tend to think twice about losing their money or collateral. And, they know bail agents will supervise them and re-arrest them if necessary for failing to appear in court or committing a new crime. All on the bail agent's own dime.
Florida legislators should reject the gross inaccuracies being told by advocates of pretrial release programs and protect the taxpayers from further losses.
Melanie Ledgerwood
Orlando
Accredited Surety and Casualty Company, Inc.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/os-ed-florida-voters-rights-letters-020110426,0,4592157,full.story
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Public to Pay for Bail
The Colorado Springs Gazette published an editorial on April 18, 2011 entitled, "Politicians want public to pay for bail." While the editorial focused on bills being sponsored in the Colorado Legislature, the message is applicable to any state wanting to pass bail bond legislation that would put the the burden on taxpayers to fund the release of criminals from jail.
We applaud Mr. Laugesen for his editorial in showing the shortfalls of a government-funded release system vs. the private surety bail industry.
Below is the article and the link to the Gazette.com so you can cast your vote on this measure:
It's among the worst ideas of the year
April 18, 2011 7:28 PM
Wayne Laugesen
For the editorial board
We do not need another government takeover of another private industry.
In the midst of recession and general public uncertainty, SB186 would put our local courthouses in the bail-bonding business. It could easily put taxpaying bond agents, who employ thousands of taxpayers throughout Colorado, right out of business. Even worse, suspects who are free on bond would also be free from a bonding agent with a financial incentive to bring them to justice. (Read the bill, read the fiscal note)
SB186 may be the worst bill to emerge from the 2011 General Assembly, and The Gazette hopes it won’t survive the Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday.
“It is a government solution to a system that’s not broken,” said Sen. Kent Lambert, R-Colorado Springs, who serves on the appropriations committee and plans to oppose the bill. “I’m concerned about conflicts of interest this would create. Judges and prosecutors should not also run the bail system.”
The bill would allow a judicial district to post the bond for a suspect, with the defendant paying interest to the courts instead of a bonding agent. At a bond rate of 15 percent, a suspect with a $10,000 bond would pay the court $1,500 in return for freedom. Half the money would pay for pretrial services, such as drug tests and monitoring services, and half could be returned to the suspect upon completion of the case. If convicted, the remaining money would pay fines, fees, costs, surcharges and restitution.
The Gazette spoke with a variety of the bill’s supporters, who each believe it would create an additional option for suspects to get out of jail. We think they are mistaken. The Gazette believes SB186 would quickly establish a state monopoly, leaving suspects at the mercy of a system that sets bail, posts bail and profits from bail.
“This puts us out of business,” said Bobby Brown, an El Paso County resident who may be the country’s best-known bail bondsman.
The Gazette spoke with Rep. Mark Waller, R-Colorado Springs, who sponsors a House version of the Bill. We spoke with El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa, who supports SB186. We also spoke with Christie Donner, of the Colorado Criminal Justice Reform Coalition, who supports it. All are trusted sources respected by The Gazette. None could assure us the proposed system would reduce jail populations. None convinced us it would not destroy a private system that serves Colorado effectively. None convinced us the new system would work better than what we have. They just kinda-sorta think it’s a good idea.
Under the current system, suspects go through the yellow pages and find an array of lenders eager to post bond for a fee. Bonding agents routinely make creative deals that result in lower rates, because most suspects cannot come up with 10 percent or 15 percent of a bond. They allow suspects to use collateral in lieu of cash. They assume the risk, and have every incentive to make sure suspects show up in court on time. They travel coast-to-coast to rein in suspects who skip court dates, protecting their reputations and investments.
If SB186 puts private agents out of business, the burden of bailed-out suspects becomes the public’s. We will be left with 9-to-5 public employees to ensure that suspects appear in court. These employees will have nothing to lose when suspects skip court, because they will have nothing invested.
We will likely have more suspects who cannot make bail in the first place. By state law, the courts will be able to charge defendants up to 15 percent of a bond and it’s unlikely our judicial employees will jump through hoops — as agents in the hyper-competitive private market do — to free defendants from jail. Public employees will make no more, no less if a suspect sits behind bars or goes free. Private agents, by contrast, profit from the release of suspects. That means they work hard to make it happen.
Colorado cannot afford a risky foray into government bail-bonding, especially
one that’s likely to kill a private industry that protects our interests and feeds thousands of taxpaying Colorado families. The system is not broken. Do not take chances with a flaky bill that attempts to fix it, with the potential of dire consequences.
The article can be found at http://www.gazette.com/opinion/bail-116477-put-free.html
Read more: http://www.gazette.com/articles/bail-116477-put-free.html#ixzz1JzC6By8Q
We applaud Mr. Laugesen for his editorial in showing the shortfalls of a government-funded release system vs. the private surety bail industry.
Below is the article and the link to the Gazette.com so you can cast your vote on this measure:
It's among the worst ideas of the year
April 18, 2011 7:28 PM
Wayne Laugesen
For the editorial board
We do not need another government takeover of another private industry.
In the midst of recession and general public uncertainty, SB186 would put our local courthouses in the bail-bonding business. It could easily put taxpaying bond agents, who employ thousands of taxpayers throughout Colorado, right out of business. Even worse, suspects who are free on bond would also be free from a bonding agent with a financial incentive to bring them to justice. (Read the bill, read the fiscal note)
SB186 may be the worst bill to emerge from the 2011 General Assembly, and The Gazette hopes it won’t survive the Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday.
“It is a government solution to a system that’s not broken,” said Sen. Kent Lambert, R-Colorado Springs, who serves on the appropriations committee and plans to oppose the bill. “I’m concerned about conflicts of interest this would create. Judges and prosecutors should not also run the bail system.”
The bill would allow a judicial district to post the bond for a suspect, with the defendant paying interest to the courts instead of a bonding agent. At a bond rate of 15 percent, a suspect with a $10,000 bond would pay the court $1,500 in return for freedom. Half the money would pay for pretrial services, such as drug tests and monitoring services, and half could be returned to the suspect upon completion of the case. If convicted, the remaining money would pay fines, fees, costs, surcharges and restitution.
The Gazette spoke with a variety of the bill’s supporters, who each believe it would create an additional option for suspects to get out of jail. We think they are mistaken. The Gazette believes SB186 would quickly establish a state monopoly, leaving suspects at the mercy of a system that sets bail, posts bail and profits from bail.
“This puts us out of business,” said Bobby Brown, an El Paso County resident who may be the country’s best-known bail bondsman.
The Gazette spoke with Rep. Mark Waller, R-Colorado Springs, who sponsors a House version of the Bill. We spoke with El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa, who supports SB186. We also spoke with Christie Donner, of the Colorado Criminal Justice Reform Coalition, who supports it. All are trusted sources respected by The Gazette. None could assure us the proposed system would reduce jail populations. None convinced us it would not destroy a private system that serves Colorado effectively. None convinced us the new system would work better than what we have. They just kinda-sorta think it’s a good idea.
Under the current system, suspects go through the yellow pages and find an array of lenders eager to post bond for a fee. Bonding agents routinely make creative deals that result in lower rates, because most suspects cannot come up with 10 percent or 15 percent of a bond. They allow suspects to use collateral in lieu of cash. They assume the risk, and have every incentive to make sure suspects show up in court on time. They travel coast-to-coast to rein in suspects who skip court dates, protecting their reputations and investments.
If SB186 puts private agents out of business, the burden of bailed-out suspects becomes the public’s. We will be left with 9-to-5 public employees to ensure that suspects appear in court. These employees will have nothing to lose when suspects skip court, because they will have nothing invested.
We will likely have more suspects who cannot make bail in the first place. By state law, the courts will be able to charge defendants up to 15 percent of a bond and it’s unlikely our judicial employees will jump through hoops — as agents in the hyper-competitive private market do — to free defendants from jail. Public employees will make no more, no less if a suspect sits behind bars or goes free. Private agents, by contrast, profit from the release of suspects. That means they work hard to make it happen.
Colorado cannot afford a risky foray into government bail-bonding, especially
one that’s likely to kill a private industry that protects our interests and feeds thousands of taxpaying Colorado families. The system is not broken. Do not take chances with a flaky bill that attempts to fix it, with the potential of dire consequences.
The article can be found at http://www.gazette.com/opinion/bail-116477-put-free.html
Read more: http://www.gazette.com/articles/bail-116477-put-free.html#ixzz1JzC6By8Q
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Florida Criminal Justice Reform Measures
Today the Florida Senate Judiciary Committee passed out a sweeping criminal justice reform bill on a voice vote with the strong leadership of Senator Ellyn Bogdanoff.
Included in the bill is a provision that the private surety bail industry has worked hard for during the 2011 Florida Legislative session . . . a measure to restrict the eligibility for defendants released into government-funded pretrial services programs.
The reform bill is restricted to only counties with populations larger than 350,000 and would give defendants 48 hours to find an bail agent or post a cash bond. The reform bill also stipulates that defendants are only eligible for government-funded release if their income is below 300 percent of the poverty level.
This measure will slow the encroachment of government-funded pretrial release and re-focus efforts on the truly indigent, nonviolent offender. The measure will also improve public safety by ensuring the defendant is financially accountable for appearance in court and refraining from further criminal activity.
The reform bill has now passed through a substantive committee in each chamber and is now eligible for floor action in each.
Public policy affects public safety!
Included in the bill is a provision that the private surety bail industry has worked hard for during the 2011 Florida Legislative session . . . a measure to restrict the eligibility for defendants released into government-funded pretrial services programs.
The reform bill is restricted to only counties with populations larger than 350,000 and would give defendants 48 hours to find an bail agent or post a cash bond. The reform bill also stipulates that defendants are only eligible for government-funded release if their income is below 300 percent of the poverty level.
This measure will slow the encroachment of government-funded pretrial release and re-focus efforts on the truly indigent, nonviolent offender. The measure will also improve public safety by ensuring the defendant is financially accountable for appearance in court and refraining from further criminal activity.
The reform bill has now passed through a substantive committee in each chamber and is now eligible for floor action in each.
Public policy affects public safety!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
