August 30, 2018
Prison chief explains his "non-political approach" to sentencing and prison reforms
John Wetzel, who serves as chair of The Council of State Governments Justice Center, president of the Association of State Correctional Administrators and Secretary of Pennsylvania’s Department of Corrections, has this new Hill commentary under the headline "A non-political approach focused on what works is key to solving prison crisis." I recommend the piece in full, and here are excerpts:
[W]hile criminal justice reform currently occupies the rarified airspace of being mutually appealing to both sides of the political spectrum at the macro level, there remains a split on whether sentencing reform — the front end of the criminal justice system — should be included as a component of the First Step Act. As written, the legislation focuses solely on reforms to back end within the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
With the caveat that any improvements to the federal corrections system – even incremental improvements — should be welcomed with open arms, the factual answer is that to realize actual, quantifiable improvement, sentencing reform is essential. It’s easy and common to embrace the notion that recidivism reduction is a back end issue and one owned solely by corrections professionals like me. This notion is dead wrong.
As a Republican appointed as Secretary of Corrections by a Republican governor (Tom Corbett) and who was asked to continue in the role by a Democratic governor (Tom Wolf), I would argue that good sentencing, and by extension, prison policy, can rise above party politics.
I believe the formula for recidivism reduction is this: Incarcerate the right people for the right amount of time and provide them with the programming they need that specifically addresses the criminogenic factors that led to them committing a crime and, finally, provide the individualized reentry support to start them on a path to good citizenship....
Governor Tom Wolf, in kicking off Pennsylvania’s most recent criminal justice reform initiative, exemplifies the outcomes measure: less crime, fewer victims. Achieving that goal requires our system to make good decisions every step of the way — from who we incarcerate to how long, including what conditions we incarcerate them in through what supports we offer to restore them to society.
August 30, 2018 at 05:06 PM | Permalink
I agree with the fourth paragraph but my opinion is irrelevant. Only the legislators and governors have the authority to change things and only their opinions matter. What they base their opinions on is a mixture of facts, contradictory statements, half-truths, slogans and lies. As a consequence the outcomes of legislative alterations are disappointing.
Posted by: John Neff | Aug 30, 2018 6:07:00 PM
John you nailed it, its tough sledding to get anything changed. Current Federal sentence guidlines are horribly excessive, most people in congress have no clue how bad they really are.
Posted by: MidWestGuy | Aug 30, 2018 10:07:18 PM