A series of changes in the law tied to Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s “Second-Chance Society” initiative barely made it out of the Judiciary Committee, passing on a 22-20 vote, which is unfortunate because this is a proposal that deserves broad and bipartisan support.

The overall philosophy of the bill is to refocus the attention of the criminal-justice system on violent crime and on those who market drugs, while reducing incarceration for lower-level crime and minor drug violations.

The bill would eliminate mandatory sentencing, giving judges discretion to consider the circumstances surrounding a crime. Simple possession of illegal drugs would become a misdemeanor in many cases, rather than a felony. Attention would turn to addressing mental health and substance abuse issues driving the behavior.

Recently the state introduced its first re-entry facility in Enfield, aimed at giving prisoners soon to be discharged the tools necessary for a successful transition back into the community.

If enacted, the second-chance bill would simplify the process of gaining administrative pardons, effectively clearing a criminal record, after an individual has served his time and demonstrated progress in becoming a contributing member of society. A criminal record can greatly hinder the ability to progress in the workforce and support a family.

Rather than being soft on crime, these alternative approaches can lower crime and the cost of government, which is why nationally it is receiving support within both major political parties. Imprisonment is the most expensive option and should be reserved for those who by their violent actions, or their repeat offenses, demonstrate they are unworthy to remain part of free society.

Undermining support for the proposal has been the bid to end automatically increased penalties for drug crimes that happen within 1,500 feet of schools, day care centers or public housing. In urban communities such as Norwich and New London, that means most everyone arrested for a drug crime is exposed to the higher penalties, even absent evidence they had any intent to target students or go near a school.

Yet the motivation among many legislators to offer special protection for children from drug merchants is understandable. A compromise would retain stiffer, felony penalties for drug crimes that occur on school grounds. That is reasonable.

Given that compromise, the Connecticut legislature should approve Second Chance and join the growing number of states undertaking this new approach.