Think restitution for non-violent crimes

Regarding the recent pardon of former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, the following are some general comments on championing restitution over imprisonment for non-violent crimes. Restitution is the model where the focus is primarily on compensation for victims.

For instance, someone steals $1,000 from another person and is made to restore that $1,000 plus compensation for the trouble and inconvenience it brought to the victim. For those unable to pay back the $1,000, perhaps a form of a day labor camp may be arranged, whereby one works normal hours and is then allowed to return to their home.

First, restitution is better than incarceration because it is far less costly to taxpayers.

Second, restitution does not make the spouses and children of imprisoned felons become functional widows and functional orphans, as does incarceration.

Third, restitution retains the dignity of the offender in ways incarceration could not. Currently, a significant motive for incarcerating criminal politicians is how they can best serve as a deterrent for the rest of society. However, this falsely elevates an effect, deterrence, over compensation as a primary goal.

Fourth, because restitution focuses on restoration, that is, making the situation perhaps even better than before the crime occurred, the victim is not forgotten and actually becomes part of the equation on how to best rectify a given situation. Moreover, the victim is properly perceived as the one who was robbed/wronged, not "society" in general.

Fifth, restitution lends itself to creativity in ways imprisonment could never emulate. For instance, in the case of Mr. Blagojevich, perhaps he could have paid off his debts through the sale of his house or other items, by working to defend low-income clients, or through other public acts of service, in addition to not being allowed to hold future political offices.

Norman Suire

Elgin