Pennsylvania residents need to give serious thought to state Auditor General Jack Wagner’s suggestions regarding the state’s prison system. What he is saying makes sense, contrary to the many state residents who are convinced that the only way to fight crime is through long prison sentences, even for minor crimes or nonviolent drug offenses.

The commonwealth must deal with a $4 billion to $5 billion budget deficit between now and June 30, and the troubling fiscal situation is rightly focusing the attention of Wagner and others on the prison system’s contribution to that deficit.

A bill before the Senate Judiciary Committee would, if enacted, overhaul sentencing practices for some nonviolent crimes, shifting punishment to alternative sentencing programs.

A report by Wagner notes that states such as New York, Michigan, California, Texas and Maryland have reduced inmate populations and cut costs by renovating existing prisons rather than building new ones, and scaling back mandatory sentences, especially for drug offenses.

Legalizing drugs — making it legal for people to destroy their health and lives, if they so choose — would be a quick resolution to the overcrowding in the state prison system, as well as in prisons across the country. That step also could be a means for capturing tax revenue from the legal sale of what now is illegal. But such a move remains controversial and is unlikely to happen anytime soon.

Wagner is targeting approximately 19,000 inmates, or 39 percent, who are imprisoned for nonviolent crimes. He’d like to see that inmate number reduced by half through overhauled sentencing practices.

According to Wagner, the important facts in the issue surrounding the state prison system are these:

• The state’s inmate population has grown more than sixfold — from 8,200 in 1980 to about 51,500 last year.

• Spending per inmate over the same period has increased from roughly $11,400 annually to more than $32,000.

“The statistics are overwhelming and you have to look at them to appreciate the problem,” Wagner said.

He stressed that the state must “draw a line in the sand going forward regarding building new prisons.”

People of this state can’t be criticized for wanting to take a tough stand against crime. Even with relatively minor crimes there are victims — and those victims often are traumatized for years after the incidents.

Some never fully recover. But the public must also look at what works, what doesn’t work — and the costs of different approaches.

Still, the public interest and the interests of victims can be served by alternative sentences that don’t make life easy for convicted individuals, instead providing productive options for treating their behavioral issues.

Some options, properly implemented, could achieve much more than having nonviolent inmates confined to cells, where they are of no productive consequence and not benefiting society in any way.

Wagner is on the right track. What’s important is that the people with the power to make the kind of changes to the prison system that the auditor general seeks are open-minded about weighing the various possibilities. Costs, both in dollars and in lives, must be considered.

The auditor general deserves bipartisan support on this issue. His suggestions would help the state budget while reserving the prisons for people whose crimes really demand time behind bars.