December 23, 2007
Previewing forthcoming FSR issue on reentry issues
FSR editor Michael O'Hear is putting the finishing touches on the next issue of Federal Sentencing Reporter, which is focused on re-entry issues. Michael's introductory essay for this issue (FSR Volume 20, No. 2) is now available at SSRN here. This piece is entitled "The Second Chance Act and the Future of the Reentry Movement," and here is the abstract:
Recently passed by the House of Representatives with strong bipartisan support and currently awaiting action in the Senate, the Second Chance Act of 2007 (H.R. 1593) would authorize about $340 million in new spending on programs that support the reintegration of returning prisoners to their communities. If enacted, the SCA would represent a new milestone in the growing influence of the prisoner reentry movement, which has focused public attention on the daunting obstacles facing returning prisoners who seek to rebuild their lives as productive citizens. This essay, which introduces a forthcoming issue of the Federal Sentencing Reporter devoted to the SCA and the challenges of reentry, critiques aspects of the SCA, considers the implications of the reentry movement for sentencing, and argues that reentry-based reforms should not be conceptualized primarily as recidivism reduction measures, but as opportunities to fulfill ethical obligations to some of the most marginalized and disadvantaged members of society.
Other recent FSR issues:
- FSR Issue 20.1: Learning from Libby
- FSR Issue 19.5: Assessing Crack-Cocaine and Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Provisions
- FSR Issue 19.4: Information-based Sentencing Analysis
- FSR Issue 19.3: Claiborne & Rita: Reasonableness Review in the Supreme Court
- FSR Issue 19.2: Victims and Sentencing II: Beyond the CVRA
- FSR Issue 19.1: Victims and Sentencing I: Victim Impact Evidence, the Crime Victims' Rights Act and Kenna
December 23, 2007 at 09:53 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Previewing forthcoming FSR issue on reentry issues:
» Previewing forthcoming FSR issue on reentry issues from society
Nice, bookmarked it! [Read More]
Tracked on Dec 24, 2007 3:15:49 AM
Determinate sentencing must really mess up reentry. So much better if the inmate has an incentive to better themselves while in prison in hopes of winning early release.
Posted by: William Jockusch | Dec 23, 2007 11:26:43 PM
FedCURE Action Alert:
S. 1060 ~ The Second Chance Act
Please Contact your U.S. Senators and particularly the lead sponsors of S. 1060 (Senators: Biden, Spector, Brownback and Leahy) and strongly urge them to make these two very critical changes to The Second Chance Act:
1. The definition for crime of violence must be changed, so that it reflects only those involved in a crime where violence actually took place will be denied access to relief.
2. The definition for sexual offenses must be changed, so that only sexual predators are denied access to relief.
Contact Lead Sponsors, Senators Biden, Spector, Brownback and Leahy at:
To find your U.S. Senator go to:
CORRECTING THE ENROLLMENT OF H.R. 1593, SECOND CHANCE ACT OF 2007
Despite our best efforts to have H.R. 1593 amended to reflect the original Section 231- FEDERAL PRISONER REENTRY PROGRAM and Section 237-ELDERLY NONVIOLENT OFFENDER PILOT PROGRAM, that would restore sentencing incentives and sentence reductions, that the people supported in the original bill, the U.S. House of Representatives adopted a concurrent resolution on Monday evening, 17 December 2007, that makes minor technical changes to the Second Chance Act of 2007 (H.R.1593), which passed the House on 13 November 2007 by a vote of 347-62. The Senate is expected to vote on the bill later this week.
The resolution was made to satisfy Senate concerns and includes new language to change the match for state and local government reentry grants: the resolution modifies sections 111 and 112 to require that States pay no less than 50 percent of grant funds to establish reentry courts and the Prosecution Drug Treatment Alternative program; and clarifies the eligibility requirements for the ELDERLY NONVIOLENT OFFENDER PILOT PROGRAM. However, our efforts were successful on one key point: The resolution eliminates in section 231(g) the technical requirement that eligible elderly prisoners who qualify for early release also satisfy the existing law for the compassionate release program (18 USC 3582). See below.
CORRECTING THE ENROLLMENT OF H.R. 1593, SECOND CHANCE ACT OF 2007 -- (House of Representatives - December 17, 2007)
--- Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 270) to make corrections in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 1593.
The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
The text of the concurrent resolution is as follows:
H. Con. Res. 270
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring) That, in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 1593, the Clerk of the House of Representatives shall make the following corrections (with page and line numbers referring to the page and line numbers of the bill as engrossed in the House):
(1) Page 17, strike line 21 through page 18, line 23 and insert the following:
``(1) FEDERAL SHARE.--
``(A) IN GENERAL.--The Federal share of a grant received under this section may not exceed 50 percent of the project funded under such grant.
``(B) IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS.--
``(i) IN GENERAL.--Subject to clause (ii), the recipient of a grant under this section may meet the matching requirement under subparagraph (A) by making in-kind contributions of goods or services that are directly related to the purpose for which such grant was awarded.
``(ii) MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE.--Not more than 50 percent of the amount provided by a recipient of a grant under this section to meet the matching requirement under subparagraph (A) may be provided through in-kind contributions under clause (i).
[Page: H15490] (2) Page 37, strike line 22 through page 38, line 4 and insert the following:
``(e) Federal Share.--
``(1) MATCHING REQUIREMENT.--The Federal share of a grant under this section may not exceed 50 percent of the program funded under such grant.
``(2) IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS.--
``(A) IN GENERAL.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the recipient of a grant under this section may meet the matching requirement under paragraph (1) by making in-kind contributions of goods or services that are directly related to the purpose for which such grant was awarded.
``(B) MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE.--Not more than 50 percent of the amount provided by a recipient of a grant under this section to meet the matching requirement under paragraph (1) may be provided through in-kind contributions under subparagraph (A).
``(3) SUPPLEMENT NOT SUPPLANT.--Federal funds received under this section shall be used to supplement, not supplant, non-Federal funds that would otherwise be available for the activities funded under this section.
(3) Page 43, strike lines 19 through 24 and insert the following:
``SEC. 2904. FEDERAL SHARE.
``(a) Matching Requirement.--The Federal share of a grant under this part may not exceed 50 percent of the total costs of the qualified drug treatment program funded under such grant.
``(b) In-Kind Contributions.--
``(1) IN GENERAL.--Subject to paragraph (2), the recipient of a grant under this part may meet the matching requirement under subsection (a) by making in-kind contributions of goods or services that are directly related to the purpose for which such grant was awarded.
``(2) MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE.--Not more than 50 percent of the amount provided by a recipient of a grant under this part to meet the matching requirement under subsection (a) may be provided through in-kind contributions under paragraph (1).
(4) Page 80, after line 4 insert the following:
(C) WAIVER.--The Attorney General is authorized to waive the requirements of section 3624 of title 18, United States Code, as necessary to provide for the release of some or all eligible elderly offenders from the Bureau of Prisons facility to home detention for the purposes of the pilot program under this subsection.
(5) Page 80, line 18, strike ``a Bureau of Prisons facility'' and insert ``at least one Bureau of Prisons facility''.
(6) Page 81, strike line 11 through page 83, line 12 and insert the following:
(A) ELIGIBLE ELDERLY OFFENDER.--The term ``eligible elderly offender'' means an offender in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons--
(i) who is not less than 65 years of age;
(ii) who is serving a term of imprisonment that is not life imprisonment based on conviction for an offense or offenses that do not include any crime of violence (as defined in section 16 of title 18, United States Code), sex offense (as defined in section 111(5) of the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act), offense described in section 2332b(g)(5)(B) of title 18, United States Code, or offense under chapter 37 of title 18, United States Code, and has served the greater of 10 years or 75 percent of the term of imprisonment to which the offender was sentenced;
(iii) who has not been convicted in the past of any Federal or State crime of violence, sex offense, or other offense described in clause (ii);
(iv) who has not been determined by the Bureau of Prisons, on the basis of information the Bureau uses to make custody classifications, and in the sole discretion of the Bureau, to have a history of violence, or of engaging in conduct constituting a sex offense or other offense described in clause (ii);
(v) who has not escaped, or attempted to escape, from a Bureau of Prisons institution;
(vi) with respect to whom the Bureau of Prisons has determined that release to home detention under this section will result in a substantial net reduction of costs to the Federal Government; and
(vii) who has been determined by the Bureau of Prisons to be at no substantial risk of engaging in criminal conduct or of endangering any person or the public if released to home detention.
(7) Page 84, line 25, strike ``section 231'' and insert ``this section''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Cannon) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this concurrent resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Michigan?
There was no objection.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker and Members of the House, this concurrent resolution makes technical and conforming changes to the Second Chance Act, H.R. 1593, to expedite its proper enrollment. The House passed the Second Chance Act in November on suspension by a vote of 347-62. May I note for the Record that this is the 10th year during three Congresses that this legislation has been worked on, debated, had witnesses, been voted on; and now we come here today to make some technical changes and, with our holiday wishes, send this measure on its way.
The Second Chance Act strengthens overall crime-fighting efforts by helping give ex-offenders tools for staying out of trouble, support for job skills, stable living arrangements, substance abuse treatment, health services, and other very basic resources to successfully rejoin society and lead productive and law-abiding lives. It enjoys, clearly, wide bipartisan support.
This concurrent resolution expedites the process of finalizing the bill and sending it to the President in this session of Congress by making a few corrections brought to our attention after the bill passed the House last month, such as standardizing certain criteria in the process for three different kinds of grants and clarifying eligibility for a prison pilot program.
It is a good measure. The corrections here are technical only. And I am proud to bring it to the attention of my colleagues for passage as urgently as possible.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would like to start out by thanking Chairman Conyers, who has worked extraordinarily hard for a very long period of time, as he pointed out, on this bill; and also Mr. Danny Davis, who has been a real brick and worked very hard on this.
I rise in support of this concurrent resolution making corrections to H.R. 1593, the Second Chance Act of 2007.
On November 13, 2007, the House passed the Second Chance Act of 2007. This resolution makes technical changes in three sections of the bill.
First, the resolution modifies sections 111 and 112 to require that States pay no less than 50 percent of grant funds to establish reentry courts and the Prosecution Drug Treatment Alternative program.
Second, the resolution eliminates in section 231(g) the technical requirement that eligible elderly prisoners who qualify for early release also satisfy the existing law for the compassionate release program.
I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. I thank my good friend, a ranking member in the Judiciary Committee, for his important work on this measure.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) that the House suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 270.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the concurrent resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Source URL: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?r110:./temp/~r110IFgFhj
The Second Chance Act of 2007 was introduced earlier this year by Congressmen Danny Davis (D-IL) and Chris Cannon (R-UT) and Senators Joseph Biden (D-DE) and Arlen Specter (R-PA). The legislation, which enjoys broad bipartisan support from both chambers of Congress, authorizes a number of reentry grant programs including a grant program for state and local governments to develop reentry initiatives and a reentry program for community and faith-based organizations to deliver mentoring and transitional services.
Thank You for Your Support:
P.O. Box 15667
Plantation, Florida 33318-5667
Web Site: http://www.FedCURE.org
E-fax: (408) 549-8935
"Using Technology to Bring About Federal Criminal Justice Reform" tm
WWW.FEDCURE.ORG 2002-2007. All rights reserved.
Please Donate and Join Now: http://www.fedcure.org/join.shtml
Subscribe to our free discussion group e-mail: FedCUREemail@example.com
Posted by: Mark A, Varce, J.D., Executive Director | Dec 24, 2007 2:53:39 PM
hopefully you can help me figure this out my spouse is incarcerated in england at a foreign national prison. H e phoned yesterday and mentioned of FSR approving him to be released early he didnt know what fsr means so i am using google.. The issue is he said his sentence isn't reducing but he is receiving approval information..I hope i am not inquiring on the wrong site if so SORRRRYYYY
Posted by: SHARON RANDLE | Jun 17, 2009 10:41:52 AM
Hi. Nice to see an honest attempt at presenting some well researched information. Had a nice time reading. Keep up the good work,
Posted by: adipex diet pills | Mar 22, 2010 3:00:13 PM