There was a sigh of political realism from Gov. Linda Lingle recently when she said she has just about given up on the idea of building a new prison in Hawai'i.

Instead, she says, the state will step up its effort to move inmates into private Mainland prisons eager for the business.

That's a rational approach — but only if one assumes we have no choice but to continue incarcerating increasing numbers of people and that our communities will not accept the reality of the prison construction such a policy implies.

In fact, there are other choices if we have the courage and foresight to make them.

It's clear we cannot build our way out of our crime problem. No number of prison beds will be enough to eliminate the crime that plagues our community.

It seems equally obvious, as the Lingle administration acknowledges, that moving our inmates out of state is far from an ideal solution. It keeps people behind bars, but also isolates them from their families and their community. In some cases, having a support system of family and friends nearby can make a huge difference in recidivism.

It is tough enough to make the transition from prison back to society. If that transition involves moving back from the isolation of a private Mainland facility, it becomes that much more difficult.

Lingle finds herself in much the same situation that has faced several governors before her: The Legislature continues to pass laws demanding the incarceration of criminals but lacks the political will to build the facilities needed to hold those people.

A recent study concluded the state would have to spend as much as $1 billion over the next decade to improve and expand our jail and prison system to the point we no longer have to ship inmates out of state.

Political and financial realities suggest that's not going to happen.

What we can do is find a way to divert greater numbers of nonviolent offenders from prison. This requires rethinking sentencing policies as well as a much broader commitment to drug-treatment options that fall short of outright incarceration.

Many authorities (including many judges) believe swift and sure — even if short — sentencing is preferable to long periods behind bars. And we must accept that little good is accomplished when people are sent to prison for drug use, usually when they are on probation or parole.

But rather than moving to shorter and swifter sentencing, our lawmakers are moving in the opposite direction. They recently passed a "three strikes" law that mandates extremely long sentences (up to life) for persons convicted of three violent felonies.

Treatment, while expensive and not always successful, is usually a better bet than incarceration. The failure rate of those sent to prison is generally higher than those who go through treatment.

Sending increasing numbers of people to the Mainland for lengthy prison terms puts them out of sight, but it is to our enduring shame if it puts them also out of mind.