he Legislature is considering a "three strikes" law that would impose a mandatory sentence of 30 years to life for habitual violent felons.

Proponents claim that this law will protect Hawai'i residents, but would it? Or would it bankrupt Hawai'i, morally and economically?

Contrary to claims of broad support, numerous organizations and members of our community strongly oppose this bill, although we recognize that more must be done to deter violent crimes in our community.

But this bill would not deter violent crimes in Hawai'i.

First, it fails to address the conditions that cause so many individuals to turn to crime and violence. And research has demonstrated that three-strikes and mandatory sentencing laws do not deter violent crimes.

The bill also removes sentencing discretion from judges and imposes the high cost of lengthy imprisonment on taxpayers.

Finally, the bill would adversely affect the Native Hawaiian community, given the disproportionate rate of Native Hawaiians already entangled in the criminal justice system.

This bill rests upon the false assumption that those convicted of violent crimes are incapable of rehabilitation, and that imposing mandatory 30-year sentences is our only option. In reality, social reintegration programs such as the nationally recognized Delancey Street program in San Francisco and Maui Economic Opportunity's BEST (Being Empowered and Safe Together) program prove that even repeat violent felons can turn their lives around and become law-abiding citizens with education, training and support.

Programs like BEST that work in collaboration with the Department of Public Safety and other community agencies provide comprehensive support services in the areas of case management, employment, housing, family reunification, cognitive skills, mentoring, cultural renewal and referrals for substance abuse, mental health and other counseling services to individuals convicted of class-A and -B felonies.

Recent data on the BEST program from September 2005 show a substantially lower recidivism rate of 19 percent for its clients, compared to Hawai'i's overall recidivism rate of 51 percent to 80 percent.

In contrast to claims that a three-strikes law will decrease violent crimes, a RAND study found that three-strikes and truth-in-sentencing laws have had little impact on crime and arrest rates. According to the Uniform Crime Reports, states with neither a three-strikes nor a truth-in-sentencing law had the lowest rates of index crimes, whereas index crime rates were highest in states with both types of get-tough laws.

In California, where the largest numbers of offenders were convicted under a three-strikes law, violent crime rates in 1996 remained far higher than in states without such laws. These policies also had little effect on property crime.

No one wants predators threatening the community. While in some cases a 30-year-to-life sentence may be just and appropriate, criminal justice experts agree that a one-size-fits-all approach to sentencing produces unjust results.

Judges will tell you that every crime has a story, and a different set of circumstances. The facts and circumstances of each case need to be closely examined, with an appropriate sentence imposed on each offender based on the facts of the particular case — not by a mandatory process that leaves no room for judicial discretion.

That is why many federal judges and the American Bar Association oppose mandatory sentencing.

The mandatory sentencing scheme under the proposed three-strikes bill would have the effect of increasing prosecutorial power. That's why such bills appeal to prosecutors: they increase the prosecutor's almost unfettered power in deciding whom to charge for what offense. And prosecutors are accountable to no one for these decisions — no judicial review and no public accountability.

Mandatory sentencing has greatly contributed to prison overcrowding nationwide. According to U.S. Department of Justice statistics, more than 80 percent of the increase in the federal prison population from 1985 to 1995 is due to drug convictions.

Sadly, mandatory minimum sentencing in Hawai'i has more than doubled Hawai'i's prison population. Hawai'i's prison system is bursting at the seams, resulting in 47 percent of our inmates serving their sentences in private prisons on the Mainland, away from their 'ohana and support networks, which are significant factors in rehabilitation. And some 41 percent of these exiled inmates are of Native Hawaiian ancestry.

Why is this punitive law being proposed now, when crime rates are dropping and when Hawai'i already has repeat offender and enhanced sentencing statutes? According to the 2004 Crime in Hawai'i Report released in December 2005, the violent index crime rate in Hawai'i decreased 4.1 percent in 2004, and the violent index crime rate fell 12.8 percent over the course of the decade.

Despite the rhetoric that says enacting this law would have no significant effect on the state budget or on the prison population, one need only look at the budget of the state Department of Public Safety over the past 10 years to see the devastating effect that mandatory sentencing has had on our state budget and our prison population. And these numbers do not take into account the rising costs of medical care, which will be necessary for an aging prison population serving sentences of 30 years to life.

Rather than spending an enormous amount of taxpayer dollars to provide more prison beds to accommodate an increased number of prisoners, we should invest those funds in alternatives to prison and provide more rehabilitation opportunities within our prisons.

Delancey Street and MEO's BEST Reintegration Program demonstrate that most prisoners are capable of rebuilding their lives and transforming into responsible, law-abiding and healthy members of their families and our communities.

There are far more effective ways to promote public safety and stop the cycle of repeat violent felonies than enacting a three-strikes law in Hawai'i. But we must have the courage and the will to embrace a restorative approach to criminal justice and corrections that will focus on healing the victim, the offender and our entire community.

This transformation is based on the recognition that our humanity is dependent on recognizing the humanity in others, even those who have committed crimes.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy has denounced mandatory sentencing practices as immoral and unfair, and cautioned that they "lead us into moral blindness." Because Hawai'i already has sentencing laws regarding repeat offenders and enhanced terms in our statutes, the three-strikes bill is unnecessary.

We urge our elected leaders and the people of Hawai'i to not lead us down the path of moral blindness. Instead, let us stand in opposition to the three-strikes bill and focus on redemption and healing.

Contributors to this commentary include: the Rev. John Heidel, president of The Interfaith Alliance of Hawai'i; the Rev. Kekapa Lee, pastor of Lili'uokalani Church and member of The Interfaith Alliance of Hawai'i; the Rev. Joris Watland, chairman of the ACLU of Hawai'i's Legislative Committee; Ka'iana Haili, director of Ke Kahua Pa'a, a Hawaiian culture-based organization working with at-risk youth and adults who are adjudicated and incarcerated; Lynette Cruz, president of Ka Lei Maile Ali'i Hawaiian Civic Club; Pilialoha Johnson, of the board of directors of Na Maka Haloa, a nonprofit focused on providing holistic Native Hawaiian culture programs; Hinaleimoana Wong, president of Kulia Na Mamo; Lela Hubbard, of Na Koa Ikaika; Alice and Charles Bratton, of A Women's Voice International; Carrie Ann Shirota, director of the Maui Economic Opportunity Inc.'s BEST Reintegration Program; Pam Lichty, president of the Drug Policy Forum of Hawai'i; Kat Brady, coordinator of Community Alliance on Prisons; Marilyn Brown, University of Hawai'i-Hilo; Katherine Irwin, University of Hawai'i-Manoa Department of Sociology; RaeDeen M. Keahiolalo Karasuda, doctoral candidate in the UH Department of Political Science; Michael James Loscalzo, pastor of The Pentecostals of Wai'anae; Robert Perkinson, assistant professor, American Studies, UH-Manoa; Meda Chesney-Lind, UH-Manoa Women's Studies Program; and Joe Allen, former researcher, Sentencing Simulation Modeling Project.