New York should adopt reforms to prison sentences by expanding its good time and merit time statutes

New York state once pioneered laws that let people serving prison time reduce their sentences through good behavior. But over time, New York has fallen behind many states with more generous systems of merit-based sentencing reductions. A new bill would return New York to the forefront in helping provide avenues for people to shorten their prison sentences through good behavior and program participation. However, parts of the reforms, particularly surrounding early release for violent crimes, are overly generous and need modification. New York was the first state in the country to pass a “good time” law in 1817, allowing people to earn time off their criminal sentences by behaving well in custody. Other states saw the value in incentivizing good behavior, and all of them had followed suit with their own good time laws by 1940. In addition to awarding time for behaving well (referred to as “good time” statutes), many states also have adopted sentence reductions for people who complete specific rehabilitative programming (“evidence-based recidivism reduction,” referred to as “earned time” statutes). 

New York now lags behind these other states. In 2026, 19 states politically across the red-blue divide, including Oklahoma and Nebraska, offer credit systems that allow sentence reductions of more than 40%, whereas New York awards a maximum of 33% off sentences. 

The 2025-2026 Earned Time Act (A 1085/S342) is a meaningful attempt by New York legislators to expand the state’s credits to more people and allow greater sentence reductions. However, the bill allows some sentences to be reduced by overly aggressive amounts and sponsors should consider some modifications that would address some potential concerns.

The changes to New York’s law (shown in the chart below) under this act include large expansions to time credit programs. New York has two types of criminal sentences—determinate and indeterminate. Determinate sentences are imposed for more serious crimes, those classified under the statutes as violent. Indeterminate sentences are imposed as a range and are eligible for parole consideration. Under the bill, those with indeterminate sentences would receive 50% off their maximum term (versus 33% previously) for good time, and 50% off the minimum term for earned time. Those with determinate sentences similarly would have their sentences scaled down. These people could see as much as 75% off their terms if they earned the full 50% reduction through good time and the 25% reduction through earned time. 

The bill would also open eligibility for earned time to include all incarcerated people except those serving life sentences. Thus, this would bring the state from about 20% eligibility to about 80%. 

Under the proposed law, time credits would also be harder to take away for infractions. Credits could only be rescinded through an administrative process whereby correctional staff would need to show, with a preponderance of evidence, that an infraction has been committed. And, after a year, the credits would be vested, meaning correctional staff and other administrative bodies would then not be able to take these away for any infractions. 

In another massive shift, time credits would become presumptive. Practically, this means that even if incarcerated people did not have vocational or anti-recidivism programming available to them through which to qualify for earned time credits (although the act authorizes a broad array of qualifying programming offerings), the credits would still be awarded.

Comparison Chart: Current NY Law vs. The Earned Time Act (A 1085)

Policy Feature	Current New York Law	Proposed Earned Time Act
Good Time Indeterminate Sentences	Up to 33% off the maximum or aggregate maximum term	50% off the maximum term
Earned Time  Indeterminate Sentences	Up to 16.7% off the minimum term for most offenses; 33.3% off minimum term for drug offenses	50% off the minimum term
Good Time Determinate Sentences	Up to 14.3% off the total term	50% off the total term
Earned Time Determinate Sentences	Up to 14.3% off the total term, restricted mostly to specific nonviolent drug offenses	25% off the total term
Offense Exclusions	Excludes violent felony offenses, class A-I felonies (non-drug), manslaughter, and sex offenses from merit time	Expands eligibility to all except those serving life without parole
Vesting and Rights	Good time is conditional and can be stripped by prison officials	Time credits vest on an annual basis.  Revoking unvested time requires formal hearings with a burden of a preponderance of evidence

The Earned Time Act has key merits 

New York statutes currently provide no opportunities for those serving sentences for violent offenses to earn merit time. It effectively considers 80% of its incarcerated population incapable of benefiting from anti-recidivism programming. It is sensible of the sponsors of the Earned Time Act to open eligibility to this wider population. In fact, those serving life without parole should also be encouraged to participate in these programs with in-prison incentives, even if they are not eligible for time off their sentences. 

It is also sensible for legislation to, as the Earned Time Act does, make it easier to expand time-eligible programming, and to protect incarcerated people against capricious or discriminatory revocations of time credit they have rightfully earned. 

There is evidence that New York expanding time credits would result in better outcomes if paired with sufficient programming to meet demand. These outcomes include lowered recidivism rates (and therefore improved public safety); better integration into the community and workforce; and a more hopeful institutional culture within prisons, which typically results in fewer violent incidents. 

We’ve also seen the opposite. When Arizona eliminated its earned time programs in the 1990s, it saw a 50% increase in prison infractions, alongside a dramatic decline in prison education enrollment, culminating in a 4.8% increase in the re-offense rate. 

Taxpayers and the economy would benefit, too. The New York comptroller estimates considerable cost savings (to the tune of roughly $5.6 billion) from having fewer incarcerated people. In addition to the 49,000 years off sentences that would come from the Earned Time Act, the comptroller estimates that 6,100 individuals returning earlier would garner an additional $494 million in wages. 

The Earned Time bill must be revised in several important ways

Taking the jarring step of bringing New York from the lower end of the spectrum in its expansiveness with time credits straight to the most expansive is out of step with other states. No other state allows those convicted of violent offenses to earn 75% off their sentences, and fewer than half allow 50% or more off altogether. Most states distinguish between violent and nonviolent offenses for the purposes of earning time credits. Some have percentage tiers for earning good time and merit time credits based on offense types; others have behavior-contingent earning tiers, where incarcerated people can increase their credit accrual rate more quickly with good behavior.

California, although it expanded its good time credits for those with violent offenses, has different tiers of good time maximums depending on violent and nonviolent status. It also gave a maximum of 33% off the sentence to those with violent offenses, with program- and merit-based opportunities to earn more time, albeit with time totals far less than 75% of the sentence. This is a more reasonable approach for New York to emulate. 

State prisons have a responsibility to provide sufficient programming for incarcerated people to accumulate earned time, such that all who wish to max out their earned time credit accumulation can. But most states provide far from the requisite needed programming. According to the Legal Action Center, “Each year, New York State spends approximately $3.4 billion on jails, prisons, and community supervision—that’s nearly 150x larger than the approximate $50 million invested in ATl [alternatives to incarceration] and reentry programming (NYC specific numbers not included).” A 2019 New York State Bar Association report cited waitlists, staffing, and transfers among the factors contributing to a shortfall in programming in the state prisons. By 2023, the Prison Journalism Project reported that “the promise of rehabilitation in prison became much less certain in 2022. Academic and vocational programs were already disappearing from prisons before COVID-19. Proliferating retirements, sickouts and leaves of absence compounded the problem — and were acutely felt.” Testimony from the Correctional Association of New York in 2025 confirmed that “[P]ersistent staffing shortages are severely undermining programming opportunities for incarcerated individuals.” 

The New York bill provides for the presumptive conferral of time off sentences even if programming is unavailable, which means that any treatment effects of programming will be lost entirely and will likely lead to poorer reentry outcomes. To exert pressure on prisons to provide programs, lawmakers could propose revising the statute such that in the absence of sufficient programming, people incarcerated in those prisons will be eligible for additional good time credits. 

With homicides at their lowest levels in New York City history, and New York Corrections Commissioner Stanley Richards calling for prison population cuts due to staffing shortages, now is a good time to pass legislation to strengthen merit-based time systems that can lead to more successful reentry. An Earned Time Act that expands eligibility and time caps, programming, and reentry planning is needed to bring New York in line with those leading on the issue. But it should exercise caution against overly expansive changes that endanger success. 

The post New York should adopt reforms to prison sentences by expanding its good time and merit time statutes appeared first on Reason Foundation.

Source: https://reason.org/commentary/new-york-should-adopt-reforms-to-prison-sentences-by-expanding-its-good-time-and-merit-time-statutes/