Jesse Ventura on Crime Former Independent MN Governor; possible Presidential Challenger

Whistleblowers perform a public service; Snowden is a hero

Watch out for DNA Fingerprint Act's biometrics

Opposes death penalty because DNA proves too many mistakes

Presidential pardons: if you don't like it change the system

VENTURA: I think you need to look at the system. The president didn't really do anything wrong because our system allows him to pardon anybody. He could pardon Charles Manson if he so chose to do so. The president is given that much leeway to do it. President Clinton isn't the first one to pardon a controversial figure. Many, many presidents have done it. If you don't like the system, change the system.

Q: Would you change it?

VENTURA: Yes, I probably would. I think that it should go to more than one person to have that ability. You know, maybe possibly you would look at bringing in the chief justice of the Supreme Court and maybe the attorney general or whatever. I think maybe if you had three elected people or three different people, it might work a little better. But then again, I'm not at the federal level, so I might be out of line, too, in saying that.

Opposes “Three Strikes”; leave discretion to judges

Three Strikes would work fine if it put people away for three violent felonies. But it’s a stupid waste of taxpayers’ money otherwise. Plus, it causes a backup in our court system, because nobody who gets caught a third time wants to plead guilty and face certain life in prison. Legislators love tough-sounding programs like Three Strikes; unfortunately, it makes them look good at campaign time, but it causes us more problems afterwards.

Crime statistics are distorted to encourage racism

No role for governor in crime; it’s for local police

As governor, there isn’t a lot I can do beyond that to crack down on crime. Law enforcement is really a local issue. It’s the cops’ job to tighten down on criminals.

Politicians always like to say “I’m gonna fight crime!” because it makes them sound great and gets them votes. But what can a politician do to fight crime?

Why, for example, do we let criminals out for good behavior? I think they should set it up so that if your sentence is three years and you misbehave, you’ll do five! That’s the mind-set we need.

Put up with death penalty until life sentences mean life

We don’t have it here in Minnesota, thank God, and I won’t advocate to get it. But I will advocate to make life in prison mean life. I don’t think I would want the responsibility for enforcing the death penalties. There’s always the inevitable question of whether someone you gave the order to execute might truly have been innocent.

Supported death penalty, but now as Governor opposes it

Note: After taking office, Gov. Ventura changed his mind on the death penalty. Extradition orders are frequently signed by the Governor. As he began signing these orders, Gov. Ventura began to think about how he could just as easily be signing orders to commute the death penalty. Then he noted how often it seems to occur that a person originally found guilty is later proven to be innocent, especially with DNA evidence. He noted that you cannot undo the mistake if an innocent person is put to death. He now opposes the death penalty. He continues to believe that a life sentence should mean that the convict will spend the rest of his or her life in prison with no possibility of parole.

Find compromise between rehabilitation and punishment

A: Yes. We need to find a happy medium between rehabilitation and punishment. Our prisons should not be a place where anyone is happy to go to. No one should feel there is a reward for criminal behavior. On the other hand, if an inmate truly wants to be rehabilitated and change their ways, we should make it possible for that to happen.

Supports flexible federal block grants for crime programs.

The Issue

The major crime issues for the 107th Congress will be:
• reauthorization of the juvenile justice program, which established a block grant to states for prevention and delinquency intervention programs;
• reauthorization of programs in the 1994 crime bill, including the state criminal alien assistance program (SCAAP), a reimbursement program to state and local governments for housing illegal alien prisoners;
• the state prison grants program, formally known as the Violent Offender Incarceration/Truth-in-Sentencing (VOI/TIS) grant program, [where states receive funds based on increasing the percentage of prison sentences actually served]; and
• the Byrne block grant program, a flexible block grant that states use for innovative crime and illegal drug fighting programs.

NGA’s Position

• NGA policy calls for reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 (JJDPA) and supports the underlying principles of the act. However, NGA wants some flexibility in the core requirements, e.g., allowing some accidental contact between adults and juveniles; expanding the hours before removal from 24 hours to 48 hours; holding certain incorrigible juveniles in detention; and relaxing the disproportionate minority confinement record keeping process. The Governors urge maximum flexibility to implement the spirit and purpose of the act.
• The Governors support authorization of the juvenile accountability incentive block grant (JAIBG) program.
• The Governors also support reauthorization of SCAAP and seek to raise the reimbursement ratio.
• For the Byrne block grant program, NGA seeks to continue the current program with flexibility.
• For the state prison grants program, NGA seeks to abolish all requirements and have more flexibility, with the state designating the offender population to be served.