But if Mr. Sessions’s appointment has dampened the hopes of those wishing for congressional action to reduce incarceration, advocates say it has had little effect on state efforts.
“There was a lot of speculation that with the rhetoric from the presidential campaign, there would be a drop in momentum, but we haven’t seen that,” said Marc A. Levin, the policy director for Right on Crime, a group at the fore of conservative efforts to reduce incarceration rates.
“There have been so many successes in the last several years, particularly in conservative states, that it continues to fuel other states to act,” Mr. Levin said.
The consensus began with a cold, objective judgment that taxpayers were not getting a good return on investment for money spent on prisons. Bloated corrections budgets took money that could be spent on schools, roads or tax breaks, while many of those who went through the prison system went on to offend again.
Among Republicans and Democrats alike, concern also grew that too many nonviolent criminals who were no threat were being imprisoned and given little chance to reform and re-enter mainstream society.
. . .
While Mr. Sessions has warned of what he says is a coming surge in crime, supporters of reducing incarceration say they are frustrated by how their goals are often cast as adverse to public safety.
“The states that have most significantly reduced their prison population have also seen the biggest drops in their crime and recidivism rates,” said Holly Harris, a former general counsel of the Kentucky Republican Party who is now executive director of the U.S. Justice Action Network.
“Reform makes us safer,” Ms. Harris said. “There’s a misperception with prosecutors that somehow reform is anti-law enforcement, and that couldn’t be further from the truth.”
