In addition, a state seeking to retain its federal funding by complying with the three conditions of this amendment would incur much greater expense than any loss of funds it would sustain if it were not to comply with the conditions. In addition to construction costs, there will be additional costs of personnel and other operating expenses. Such long sentences will also mean that the states will incur huge medical expenses for older prisoners, for fear of losing federal funds if they were released and committed new offenses. If a state wanted to incur these costs without this amendment, it could do so, but this bill will for all practical purposes force states to do so without funding any of the resulting costs. In addition, states sentencing for such a long duration may not be sentencing wisely.
Some offenders deserve parole.
Not all offenders are incorrigible. Some offenders can be helped by religion or counseling to lead law abiding lives, returning to their families, safely living among the community, avoiding the need for states to incur costly prison expenses, and actually becoming productive, taxpaying citizens. This amendment essentially deprives a state of that choice, and may result in the unjustified continuation of imprisonment of certain persons, harming that person, his family, the community, and taxpayers generally. That will mean that most states will not be able to avoid the risk of losing their federal funds, no matter how hard they try to comply with the amendment s conditions. As a result, the amendment would result in states continuously increasing their sentences in what will probably be a vain effort to be one of the above average states.