Sentencing Law and Policy

"Fiscal Pressures Lead Some States to Free Inmates Early"

The title of this post is the title of this front-page Washington Post article in today's edition.  Here is how the article starts:

Reversing decades of tough-on-crime policies, including mandatory minimum prison sentences for some drug offenders, many cash-strapped states are embracing a view once dismissed as dangerously naive: It costs far less to let some felons go free than to keep them locked up.

It is a theory that has long been pushed by criminal justice advocates and liberal politicians -- that some felons, particularly those convicted of minor drug offenses, would be better served by treatment, parole or early release for good behavior. But the states' conversion to that view has less to do with a change of heart on crime than with stark fiscal realities. At a time of shrinking resources, prisons are eating up an increasing share of many state budgets.

"It's the fiscal stuff that's driving it," said Marc Mauer, executive director of the Sentencing Project, a Washington-based group that advocates for more lenient sentencing. "Do you want to build prisons or do you want to build colleges? If you're a governor, it's kind of come to that choice right now." Mauer and other observers point to a number of recent actions, some from states facing huge budget shortfalls, some not, but still worried about exploding costs.

Examining prison costs in Michigan

This story from the Detroit News, headlined "Prison costs on agenda: Experts to discuss reforms to help state handle Corrections spending," highlights why Michigan and so many other states have to think seriously about prison costs (even if courts aren't supposed to give these issues any thought).  Here are snippets:

Policymakers say continued growth of Michigan's sprawling, $2-billion-a-year prison system is unsustainable when the state is struggling to pay for such priorities as education, health care and police.  Some of the top thinkers regarding Corrections strategies are convening in the capital today to discuss reforms that could help the state get a handle on prison spending without compromising public safety....

The conference comes on the heels of a Detroit News series that outlined the dramatic growth of the prison system and its impact on other government services. The two-part series, which ran April 14-15 found:

• The 50,200 inmates in Michigan prisons represent a four-fold increase in the number of prisoners over a quarter-century.
• It costs an average of $200 a year for each Michigan resident to support the prisons.
• The cost to house each inmate drains $31,325 annually from the state treasury.
• Michigan is one of four states that spend more on corrections than on higher education.
• One of every three state employees works in the Corrections Department, up from one in 10, 25 years ago.
• While prison costs soar, revenue sharing to local units of government has been slashed by $3 billion over the last six state budget years, resulting in 1,800 fewer police officers and 2,500 fewer firefighters.
• Without corrective action, the prison population will swell by another 12 percent and top 56,000 within five years.

"Our efforts to grow Michigan's economy and keep our state competitive are threatened by the rising costs in the Department of Corrections," Gov. Jennifer Granholm told The Detroit News for its series.

"Fixing our criminal sentencing system"

The title of this post is the title of this op-ed from the Boston Globe today.  Here are some excerpts:

A number of news stories this spring have shown us that the criminal sentencing system is out of line - both in Massachusetts and in the nation as a whole. The United States has not just the highest rate of incarceration in the world, but also one-fourth of all of the prisoners in the world.

What has led us to this? And what is it about our priorities that has us spending more on incarceration than higher education?...

When you look across the vast spectrum of crimes committed each year, so many of them can be traced back to drug and alcohol abuse and addiction. This is no secret, nor is the fact that more than 20 years of get-tough policies have not made a difference in drug-related crimes....

So what can we do this year, while the budget and the laws are still being written, and before our legislators recess for a season of campaigning?

This is a simple, cost-saving, and effective wish list:

• Eliminate mandatory minimums for drug crimes to allow for parole eligibility.
• Ensure meaningful post-incarceration supervision through parole or probation.
• Resist calls for new mandatory minimum sentences that tie the hands of prosecutors, judges, and corrections officials.
• Support policies that provide and promote drug treatment instead of incarceration.
• Fully fund prison programs for treatment of mental illness, substance abuse, and training.

None of these ideas suggest that we should be soft on crime.  Rather, they represent measures that are smart on crime in ways that Massachusetts can afford — and will be more effective in reducing future crime than the status quo.

Examining America's affinity for incarceration

Adam Liptak has this new piece in the New York Times, headlined "Inmate Count in U.S. Dwarfs Other Nations’."  Here are excerpts:

The United States has less than 5 percent of the world’s population. But it has almost a quarter of the world’s prisoners.

Indeed, the United States leads the world in producing prisoners, a reflection of a relatively recent and now entirely distinctive American approach to crime and punishment. Americans are locked up for crimes — from writing bad checks to using drugs — that would rarely produce prison sentences in other countries.  And in particular they are kept incarcerated far longer than prisoners in other nations.

Criminologists and legal scholars in other industrialized nations say they are mystified and appalled by the number and length of American prison sentences....

There is little question that the high incarceration rate here has helped drive down crime, though there is debate about how much.

Criminologists and legal experts here and abroad point to a tangle of factors to explain America’s extraordinary incarceration rate: higher levels of violent crime, harsher sentencing laws, a legacy of racial turmoil, a special fervor in combating illegal drugs, the American temperament, and the lack of a social safety net. Even democracy plays a role, as judges — many of whom are elected, another American anomaly — yield to populist demands for tough justice.

Whatever the reason, the gap between American justice and that of the rest of the world is enormous and growing.....

Of course, sentencing policies within the United States are not monolithic, and national comparisons can be misleading. “Minnesota looks more like Sweden than like Texas,” said Mr. Mauer of the Sentencing Project.  (Sweden imprisons about 80 people per 100,000 of population; Minnesota, about 300; and Texas, almost 1,000. Maine has the lowest incarceration rate in the United States, at 273; and Louisiana the highest, at 1,138.)

Some related posts:

• Potent new Pew report documents 1 in 100 prison reality
• "One nation, behind bars"
• Another strong editorial on mass incarceration
• The latest BJS stats on prisoners, probation and parole in the land of the free
• Congressional hearing on mass incarceration
• More on the JEC hearing on mass incarceration
• Could prison nation be approaching a tipping point?
• "Why Are So Many Americans in Prison?"
• Another strong piece examining incarceration nation

SCOTUS denies cert in long juve sentence case

On Monday, as detailed in reports from SCOTUSblog and CNN and the New York Times, the Supreme Court denied cert in Pittman v. South Carolina, the juve sentencing case raising constitutional questions about a 30-year mandatory sentence for a 12-year-old killer.  Here is the start of the NYT report:

The Supreme Court declined on Monday to hear an appeal from a South Carolina teenager who was sentenced to 30 years in prison for killing his grandparents with a shotgun when he was 12 years old.

Without comment, the justices refused to review the sentence imposed on Christopher Pittman, whose case attracted wide attention not only because of his age and the sentence he received, but because his lawyers blamed the antidepressant Zoloft for his violent behavior.

Defense lawyers asked the Supreme Court to consider whether the 30-year term violated the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment in light of the defendant’s age at the time of the crime.  The South Carolina Supreme Court ruled last June that the boy’s trial had been fair and the punishment was just.

This case will now likely head to a federal district court through a habeas action; it will be very interesting to see if any lower federal court might find merit in the constitutional claims made in Pittman.

UPDATE:  A commentor rightly notes that this case will have to go through the state post-conviction review process before heading into federal habeas.

Michigan's struggles with bulging prisons

The Detroit News has this extended article on Michigan's over-crowded prisons, headlined "Bulging prisons drain Michigan's budget: State faces hard choices as get-tough laws put more behind bars."  Here is how it starts:

Michigan runs one of the nation's largest and most costly prison systems, a $2 billion-a-year expense that is crowding out other spending priorities at a rate many officials fear the state can no longer afford.  Yet despite near-unanimous agreement that Michigan can't pay ever-rising corrections bills during a period of economic decline, politicians and law enforcement professionals remain hesitant to spend less by changing sentencing guidelines or paroling more prisoners.

"Our efforts to grow Michigan's economy and keep our state competitive are threatened by the rising costs in the Department of Corrections," Gov. Jennifer Granholm told The Detroit News.  "We spend more on prisons than we do on higher education, and that has got to change."

The problem is reaching a crisis: Michigan's system is already the nation's sixth-largest overall, and ranks 15th among the states in the cost per inmate.  It could exceed capacity within two months, said Chief Deputy Corrections Director Dennis Schrantz, unless lawmakers approve stop-gap measures, such as doubling the number of inmates in the state boot camp program.

If the inmate population, now about 50,000, exceeds 51,800, the department will have to ask the Legislature for more money to house, feed, clothe, educate and guard the inmates.  "We could be in pretty dire shape for funded beds in May or June of this year," unless changes are made, Schrantz said.

The Corrections Department already devours 20 cents of every tax dollar in the state's general fund and employs nearly one in every three state government workers, compared with 9 percent of the work force 25 years ago.  "Because we're spending more state dollars in areas such as prisons, we're taking funding away from areas that are real priorities for citizens and for economic growth," said Dan Gilmartin, executive director of the Michigan Municipal League.

Pew publication on incarceration's impact on crime

I just received this news of the latest publication from the Pew Public Safety Performance Project, titled “The Impact of Incarceration on Crime: Two National Experts Weigh In.”  The short document can be accessed at this link, and here is Pew's description of the document:

This Question & Answer brief features Dr. Alfred Blumstein and Dr. James Q. Wilson, two of the nation’s most respected experts on incarceration and crime.  Professors Blumstein and Wilson spoke recently with the Public Safety Performance Project, an initiative of the Pew Center on the States (PCS), about the degree to which increased incarceration deserves credit for the drop in crime across the nation, the likely outcomes of continued prison expansion, and some policies and programs that offer better public safety results for taxpayer dollars.

NYT Magazine notices web-based prison culture (and economics) version 2.0

Today's New York Times Magazine has this interesting piece, headlined "Soft Cell," that notices how a website has created a community for the family and friends of incarcerated persons.  Here are snippets from the piece:

Prison Talk, a big board with nearly 150,000 members and 2,500 regular readers a day ...caters to what turns out to be an underserved consumer niche: family and friends of the incarcerated. Prison inmates, whose Internet access is extremely limited, also turn up periodically, usually seeking pen pals through a third party.  The site, which costs nothing to join, was founded seven years ago and has drawn around 3.5 million messages, including poetry, small talk, business deals, memoirs, sermons, laments, photo albums and ideological screeds. Like the sprawling American prison system itself, the board has come to constitute a robust social reality — albeit one whose contents can’t be searched with Google or other engines, since Prison Talk is closed to the unregistered.

The board’s activity is propelled by the frustration and enterprise of lonelyhearts who crave contact while fighting boredom and despair. The postings, including those from former inmates, dramatize the widespread effects of imprisonment as vividly as any book since the 2000 exposé “Newjack,” Ted Conover’s chronicle of his year working as a corrections officer in Sing Sing, the maximum-security state prison in New York. And even Conover couldn’t offer the sheer volume of fine-grain logistical detail and jaw-dropping incongruities that surface on Prison Talk: topics on the site include marrying someone in prison; raising children whose parents are imprisoned; loving lifers; curing dry winter skin; preparing for executions; and having fun (jokey guards, nightly dance-offs) behind bars.

The posts themselves are by turns rueful, salacious, puzzled and pleading.... Prison Talk promises support without judgment, and in accordance with the site’s bylaws, uncooperative members are banned. (The site also counsels members to be circumspect with information that might be used against inmates or jeopardize their appeals.)

David Frisk, an aerial photographer and home-automation expert, started Prison Talk in 2001 to helped convicts’ loved ones navigate the prison system.  Frisk hatched his idea in a jail cell: he served time in the early ’90s in a medium-security federal prison for pawning a rifle while on probation for auto theft. Like anyone working online, he has since developed theories about revenue streams.  Small but constant banner ads, targeted for his audience, run along the top of Prison Talk.... Frisk, who is known on the site by his screen name, Fed-X, has been accused by detractors of exploiting a vulnerable and largely female membership by encouraging dependence; soliciting contributions as if the site were a charitable cause and not an ad-sponsored business; and promoting dodgy ventures like a print magazine that some subscribers say they never received...

Most Prison Talk members, however, seem fiercely loyal to him, and say they feel deeply beholden to Prison Talk itself. Many of them virtually live on the site, concluding their posts with tickers — countdown widgets, like the ones used on pregnancy and weight-loss boards — showing how much time is left in their chosen inmate’s sentence....

A small band of board activists, led in part by a Prison Talk member named Judy Wickliff, has recently used the site to plan a latter-day Boston Tea Party to protest the disenfranchisement of American prisoners. “No incarceration without representation” is their slogan. In July they plan to bombard legislators with mailed tea bags and a list of proposed reforms to the criminal-justice system.  It could be said that Prison Talk is steadily documenting and even galvanizing a subculture, if it weren’t for the February report from the Pew Center on the States that one in 99 people in America is now in prison. Let’s call it a culture, then.

The main website for Prison Talk is here, and I would be interested in reader reactions to both Prison Talk and to this NYTimes Magazine article about it. 

My first reaction is a bit of surprise that the Prison Talk board has "only" 150,000 members even though it has been around since 2001.  The number 150,000, which might seem pretty big, likely represents far less than 1% of the total population of Americans who have been incarcerated or have a family member or close friend who has been incarcerated since 2001.  Then again, since many criminal defendants and their friends and family are relatively poor, it is possible that only a limited percentage of the incarcerated and those around them have consistent access to a computer with an effective Internet connection.

Examining Florida's tough sentencing laws

Today's Daytona Beach News-Journal has this pair of interesting pieces exploring Florida's tough sentencing laws:

• Rigid penalties, high costs, but are we safer?
• Sharp contrast over lock 'em up efficacy

Here is an excerpt from the first of these pieces:

By the end of the year, Florida's prison population could top 100,000. The cost of keeping those prisoners behind bars runs close to $20,000 per inmate, per year, and the total correctional budget is more than $2.5 billion. Despite a prison-building spree in the 1990s, Florida's state correctional institutions are near capacity, and the state will need an estimated two new prisons a year to keep up.

When state coffers are full, prison budgets get little scrutiny. But lawmakers are staring down a $2 billion hole in next year's budget.  And some of them are coming to the realization that Florida's lock 'em up philosophy has gone too far, that it's time to rethink some of the overbearing sentencing laws that cost the state so much.  The alternative -- slashing drug treatment and education for inmates and reducing programs that help people turn away from crime -- is all but guaranteed to boomerang on the state, producing an even greater number of people locked hopelessly behind bars and an even tougher strain on taxpayers.

Another doozy dissent from Judge Merritt as Sixth Circuit affirms a long guideline sentence

A long day at the end of a long week kept me from noting earlier that the Sixth Circuit has issued another notable split sentencing opinion in United States v. Jeross, No. 06-2257 (6th Cir. Apr. 4, 2008) (available here), with Judge Merritt providing another spirited dissent about the modern state of modern sentencing.  Though I suspect Judge Merritt sometimes feels like he is tilting at windmills, I will close the work week by setting out the first two paragraphs of his dissent in Jeross so he knows that at least someone is paying attention:

This is another drug case in which our system of criminal law has imprisoned for many years two more lives and torn up two more families by grossly excessive sentences imposed in the “War on Drugs.”  There are many reasons that our federal system of punishment has turned in this direction, not the least of which is the advent during the last 20 years of our irrational set of sentencing guidelines that judges apply by rote on a daily basis.  We are constantly adding new prisoners like these defendants with long periods of incarceration to the more than two million men and women now incarcerated in the hundreds of prisons and jails around the country.

These sentencing guidelines hold that mitigating factors like family ties, mental illness, education, and the likelihood of rehabilitation are simply “not relevant” in the sentencing process.  Judges’ minds are closed down and sentences ratcheted up by applying convoluted conversion formulas like the one just recited in the majority opinion.  The recent Blakely-Booker-Cunningham line of Supreme Court cases has given judges an opportunity to rid the system of some of the worst aspects of guidelinism, but we judges soldier on by applying the old mandatory system as though nothing of significance had happened.  The cost to the taxpayers and in human lives has become enormous and shows no signs of change.

As lock-em-up costs mount, states considering letting-em-out

This AP article highlights state sentencing stories that have been percolating as prison populations grow and budget numbers shrink:

Lawmakers from California to Kentucky are trying to save money with a drastic and potentially dangerous budget-cutting proposal: releasing tens of thousands of convicts from prison, including drug addicts, thieves and even violent criminals. 

Officials acknowledge that the idea carries risks, but they say they have no choice because of huge budget gaps brought on by the slumping economy. "If we don't find a way to better manage the population at the state prison, we will be forced to spend money to expand the state's prison system - money we don't have," said Jeff Neal, a spokesman for Rhode Island Gov. Don Carcieri.

At least eight states are considering freeing inmates or sending some convicts to rehabilitation programs instead of prison, according to an Associated Press analysis of legislative proposals.

Regular readers know I have been on this state sentencing story for quite some time, and here are links to some recent blog coverage of states' struggles with the various costs of large prison populations:

• Arizona
• California
• Colorado
• Connecticut
• Idaho
• Kentucky
• Mississippi
• Michigan
• North Carolina
• Ohio
• Oklahoma
• Texas
• Virginia
• see also this post, "Costs cause states to pursue prison alternatives"

New JPI report on the impact of jails on local communities

The Justice Policy Institute released today this report, titled "Jailing Communities: The Impact of Jail Expansion and Effective Public Safety Strategies," that looks at the realities of local jails and the negative impact that jail expansion has on counties and communities.  Here is a summary of the report I received via e-mail:

Communities are bearing the cost of a massive explosion in the jail population which has nearly doubled in less than two decades, according to a new report released today by the Justice Policy Institute (JPI).  The research found that jails are now warehousing more people -- who have not been found guilty of any crime -- for longer periods of time than ever before. Jails are filled with people with drug addictions, the homeless and people charged with immigration offenses. The report concludes that jails have become the “new asylums,” with six out of 10 people in jail living with a mental illness. In 2004, local governments spent a staggering $97 billion on criminal justice, including police, the courts and jails.  Over $19 billion of county money went to financing jails alone. By way of comparison, during the same time period, local governments spent just $8.7 billion on libraries and $28 billion on higher education.

You make the call: what is a just and effective sentence for Sister Barbara Markey?

Since most judges likely have no experience sentencing nuns, I hope readers will use the comments to help out the Nebraska judge who will soon have to sentence Sister Barbara Markey.  Here is the AP story providing the background:

A Roman Catholic nun accused of stealing from the Omaha Archdiocese and gambling much of the money away has pleaded guilty to theft.  An attorney says Sister Barbara Markey pleaded Monday to theft of more than $1,500.  Defense attorney J. William Gallup says she also agreed to pay $125,000 in restitution.

Markey faces up to 20 years in prison when she is sentenced in July.

Markey is an internationally known speaker.  She was fired in 2006 as director of the archdiocese's family life office after an audit found irregularities. The audit found that Markey spent $307,545 for her own use or without documentation.  Prosecutors say Markey used the money to cover gambling forays, gifts and trips.

Regular readers will not be surprised to hear that I do not think a long prison term makes much sense for Sister Barbara Markey.  But I am still thinking about what would make sense.  Suggestions, dear readers?

A (sad? happy?) prison family values ending for the Yaegers

In this post, which generated lots of comments, I asked "Should dying child justify a federal sentencing break?".  Here is the end of the story that generated the question:

A 10-year-old girl has died, just a day after her wish to see her father was granted.  Jayci Yaeger's imprisoned father, Jason, went to her bedside Wednesday -- a visit federal authorities allowed only after being deluged with letters and phone calls from across the nation.

Sources said Yaeger did leave the girl's side to consult with hospice counselors and get some direction on how to speak with the girl about what she was going through.   Prior to Wednesday, the prison warden had allowed Jason Yaeger three visits to his daughter, but had denied requests for a longer furlough or an early transfer to a halfway house in Council Bluffs, Iowa. The warden told Yaeger it was not viewed as an extraordinary circumstance.

Letters and e-mails from across the nation have reached the Yaeger family and appealed to the prison to allow the man to see his daughter.  The family asked the media to share their story with the hope of encouraging prison officials to allow the visit.  He's scheduled to be released to a halfway house in August.

Yaeger asked President George W. Bush for clemency. Yaeger spent four years in a federal prison on methamphetamine-related charges. Officials with the Federal Bureau of Prisons would not confirm a visit took place.

Officials said they would only comment on a possible visit after a prisoner returned from a furlough.  On Thursday, Jayci's mother described Jayci's condition as minute-by-minute, saying the girl had gone into respiratory distress three times that day.

Eighth Amendment SCOTUS cert petition to watch

In a pair of posts late last year (here and here), I discussed some of the interesting facets in Pittman, a South Carolina case involving the severe sentencing of a child murderer for his crime committed at age 12.  The Supreme Court is scheduled to consider the Pittman cert petition in its private conference at the end of this week, and I will be looking eagerly for news about the case on Monday.

This page at the UT School of Law detailes the work done by a law school clinic to present this case effectively to the Supreme Court.  The page also has links to the filings (including amicus filings) in conjunction with the cert petition, all of which provide interesting reading.

Colorado's struggle with prison overcrowding

Here are excertps from another (all-too-common) story of a state struggling to figure out what to do about its growing prison population:

Colorado will be more than 4,600 prison beds short by 2014 if it does not start immediately on a nearly $800 million proposal to build or expand five correctional facilities, Department of Corrections Executive Director Ari Zavaras says....

Projections show the state getting by with existing facilities for two years. The system will add 1,010 beds in two projects in 2009, providing a projected 125-bed surplus. But because officials project a 4.6 percent annual growth in prisoners, the system could be short 900 beds by 2011....

[Governor] Ritter wants the state to build beds to meet the projected need.  Said spokesman Evan Dreyer: "I would think that our need is immediate, so we do need to address today's prison-bed demand in an immediate fashion."

Assistant Senate Majority Leader Brandon Shaffer, D-Longmont, is more cautious, however. He said it would be preferable to save the $341 million needed to build a 2,500-bed facility and put it to health care reform or to higher education instead.  And Shaffer, like others, suggested the state's greatest ally in this could be a group with which it recently has been feuding: private prisons.

Roughly 22 percent of the state's inmates are contracted to be in private prisons, a figure that Zavaras predicts could rise to 40 percent in the next few years if the state does not build more beds.  But Corrections Corporation of America, which holds 90 percent of the state's private prisoners in its facilities, has requested at least a 4.25 percent increase in its per-day prisoner fees, while the state wants to give no more than 3 percent....

There also is the issue of sentencing reform, a concept pushed largely by Democrats as a way of reduce some nonviolent offenders' sentences and clear room in state facilities.  No recommendations have come forward on that front, however. The matter is urgent and should be addressed in the coming months, legislators say.

Media continues to cover juve lifers ... will reforms follow?

The Christian Science Monitor has this new article, headlined "States reconsider life behind bars for youth; With nearly 2,400 inmates sentenced to life as juveniles, the U.S. is the only nation imposing the mandate on children."  Here are excerpts:

Here in Illinois, proposed legislation would give 103 people – most convicted of unusually brutal crimes – a chance at parole hearings, while outlawing the sentence for future young perpetrators. The proposal has victims' families up in arms, angry that killers they had been told were in prison for life might be given a shot at release and that they'd need to regularly attend hearings in the future, reliving old traumas, to try to ensure that these criminals remain behind bars.

Advocates of legislation, meanwhile, both in Illinois and elsewhere, note that the US is the only country in the world with anyone – nearly 2,400 across the nation – serving such a severe sentence for a crime committed as a juvenile. They criticize the fact that the sentence is often mandatory, part of a system devoid of leniency for a teenager's lack of judgment, or hope that youth can be reformed....

The current legislation in Illinois is unlikely to go anywhere, with its key sponsor backing away last week and saying more time is needed to dialogue with victims. Reform advocates hope to have new legislation introduced in the near future. Colorado outlawed juvenile life without parole in 2006, and legislation is pending in Michigan, Florida, Nebraska, and California, while a few other states are experiencing grass-roots efforts.

Some activists against the sentence say they hope they can work with victims' families to take their concerns into account even as they do away with the sentence. In Michigan, where a set of bills is before both the Senate and the House, activists have had some success building dialogue with victims, says Deborah LaBelle, a human rights attorney based in Ann Arbor and director of the ACLU's Juvenile Life Without Parole Initiative.

"We need to allow both voices to be heard," says Ms. LaBelle. But she feels strongly that the sentence is inappropriate for youth. "As every parent knows and as every social scientist understands, this is a time of ill-thought-out, impulsive lack of judgment, problematic years… To throw them away and say you're irredeemable as a child is a disturbing social concept."

New York Times editorial on "Prison Nation"

Joining the chorus of papers commenting on the recent Pew Center report, "One in 100: Behind Bars in America 2008" (discussed here), today the New York Times has this editorial titled "Prison Nation."  Here are excerpts:

After three decades of explosive growth, the nation’s prison population has reached some grim milestones: More than 1 in 100 American adults are behind bars. One in nine black men, ages 20 to 34, are serving time, as are 1 in 36 adult Hispanic men.

Nationwide, the prison population hovers at almost 1.6 million, which surpasses all other countries for which there are reliable figures. The 50 states last year spent about $44 billion in tax dollars on corrections, up from nearly $11 billion in 1987.  Vermont, Connecticut, Delaware, Michigan and Oregon devote as much money or more to corrections as they do to higher education.

These statistics, contained in a new report from the Pew Center on the States, point to a terrible waste of money and lives. They underscore the urgent challenge facing the federal government and cash-strapped states to reduce their overreliance on incarceration without sacrificing public safety. The key, as some states are learning, is getting smarter about distinguishing between violent criminals and dangerous repeat offenders, who need a prison cell, and low-risk offenders, who can be handled with effective community supervision, electronic monitoring and mandatory drug treatment programs, combined in some cases with shorter sentences.

Persuading public officials to adopt a more rational, cost-effective approach to prison policy is a daunting prospect, however, not least because building and running jailhouses has become a major industry.... A rising number of states are broadening their criminal sanctions with new options for low-risk offenders that are a lot cheaper than incarceration but still protect the public and hold offenders accountable....  These are signs that the country may finally be waking up to the fiscal and moral costs of bulging prisons.

Though hitting a lot of important points, I was a bit diappointed that this editorial fails to assail the presidential candidates (and member of the media) for ignoring these issues during the 2008 campaign.  Though there indeed are "signs that the country may finally be waking up to the fiscal and moral costs of bulging prisons," it is long overdue that prominent national politicians take more of a leadership role in trying to educate voters as to the "terrible waste of money and lives" that mass incarceration can involve.

Some recent related posts:

• Potent new Pew report documents 1 in 100 prison reality
• "One nation, behind bars"
• Another strong editorial on mass incarceration

Another strong editorial on mass incarceration

The Newark Star-Ledger has this editorial expressing concerns with the practicalities and politics of modern mass incarceration.  Here is how it starts:

For the first time in history, more than one in every 100 adults in the nation is in jail or prison, giving the U.S. the grim distinction of leading the world in incarcerating its people.

Alarming is the only way to describe the numbers. At the start of 2008, a record-breaking 2.31 million U.S. residents were behind bars.  No other nation — not China, not Iran, not Russia — has so many prisoners either in sheer numbers or per capita.  Even as the crime rate has gone down, the prison population has gone up.

Though the number of offenders decreased slightly last year in New Jersey, the state stands out because it leads the nation in locking up nonviolent drug offenders.  Most frightening about these numbers is the failure of politicians to seriously consider the wisdom of mandatory sentencing laws and other policies that have got ten New Jersey and so many other states into this fix.  Reflexively, politicians support legislation because they want to be tough on crime even if the result is sending a lot of people to prison who should not be there.

Gov. Jon Corzine, who claims to be sensitive to these issues, nevertheless has signed more bills imposing mandatory sentences in two years than any governor be fore in such a short period.

Some recent related posts:

• Potent new Pew report documents 1 in 100 prison reality
• "One nation, behind bars"

"One nation, behind bars"

The Detroit Free Press has this potent editorial with this same title as this post.  Here are excerpts:

The U.S. prison population, the world's largest, has grown nearly eightfold over the past 35 years and now costs taxpayers at least $60 billion a year.  An eye-popping report released last week by the Pew Center on the States found that, for the first time, more than one in every 100 American adults is in jail or prison. And that figure doesn't count the hundreds of thousands of people who are on probation and parole.

What is the goal here?  Is there a smarter way to get there?  What are we as a society getting in return for all this money?  What is this massive and growing penal system accomplishing?  Before the nation hits two in 100 behind bars, which seems inevitable, it's time for a national debate on corrections and criminal justice policies that will lead to a more rational, humane and cost-effective system.

The nation has gotten far too little for its enormous investment in locking people up. Violent crime rates are higher than they were more than three decades ago, when tough-on-crime policies, including mandatory sentencing laws, created a prison-building boom.  States can no longer afford to divert so many resources from education, health care and other pressing needs....

Nor can the nation ignore the human costs of mass incarceration.  Nearly half of the 2.3 million adults locked up are African Americans, who make up less than 13% of the U.S. population.  A stunning one in nine black males between the ages of 20-34 is behind bars....

Unacceptably high incarceration rates tear at the nation's social fabric and take public money from education, health care, transportation and other vital needs.  Nor have they significantly reduced crime. It's time to re-examine the policies that have made us the incarceration nation.

Regular readers know that I have been regularly calling upon the Presidential candidates and the media to get started on "a national debate on corrections and criminal justice policies that will lead to a more rational, humane and cost-effective system." 

Needless to say, I am not surprised that Hillary Clinton has not started a healthy crime-and-punishment dialogue given that she and her husband have both played a major role in the modern Democratic Party's apparent affinity for an irrational, inhumane and ineffective set of corrections and criminal justice policies.  But I am still hoping that supposed maverick John McCain or claimed change agent Barack Obama will start using their bully pulpits to help shake this country out of its very harmful incarceration addiction.  Or maybe they, too, are taking to Incarcerex.

Still more concerns about juve LWOP

One of the most clear impacts of the Supreme Court's decision to make juveniles ineligible for the death penalty has been greater public policy and public attention given to juveniles sentenced to very long prison terms.  The latest example of this attention comes in the form of this new Washington Post article, headlined "Illinois Weighs Second Chances: Some See Juvenile Sentencing Laws As Overly Harsh."  Here is a snippet:

Illinois's mandatory life sentence law, with its tough provision for people whose role in a crime may have been small, was passed in the late 1970s at a time of concern over rising youth crime rates. Now, however, it is now being challenged.

A coalition of human rights groups, defense lawyers and lawmakers is backing legislation to do away with mandatory life sentences for juveniles and to reconsider the cases of those who were sentenced as juveniles and are serving now....

In Illinois as in other states, the combination of mandatory transfers to adult court and mandatory life sentences for certain crimes means a teenager could end up with a life sentence for serving as an unarmed, perhaps unwitting, accomplice -- a lookout or driver -- during a murder. State Rep. Robert Molaro (D-Chicago) has introduced legislation that would end life sentences without parole for juveniles. Colorado banned such sentences in 2006, and similar legislation has been introduced in Nebraska, Florida, Michigan and California.

Israel is the only other country that sentences juveniles to life without parole. It has seven in detention, compared with more than 2,300 in the United States, according to a report by a coalition led by Northwestern University Law School's Children and Family Justice Center and the John Howard Association.

Some recent related posts on juve life sentences:

• New HRW report assailing juve LWOP in California
• NYTimes coverage of very young lifers
• Juves serving life terms
• Does Roper suggest young juve LWOP is unconstitutional?
• Life without parole for juvenile may be cruel, but it is not unusual
• The next issue in sentencing of juveniles?
• Nebraska working to reform juve LWOP sentences
• California considering eliminating LWOP for juveniles
• Forthcoming PBS program "When Kids Get Life"

Interesting paper gives another perspective on Pew data

Providing a fitting follow-up to this week's Pew Center report, "One in 100: Behind Bars in America 2008" (discussed here), is this new article on SSRN titled "Years of Life Lost to Prison: Racial and Gender Gradients in the United States of America."  The piece is authored by an interestingly diverse group of experts, and here is the abstract:

Background: The United States has the highest rate of imprisonment of any country in the world. African Americans and Hispanics comprise a disproportionately large share of the prison population. We applied a "prison life expectancy" to specify differences in exposure to imprisonment by gender and race at the population level.

Methods: The impact of imprisonment on life expectancy in the United States was measured for each year from 2000 to 2004, and then averaged. Using the Sullivan method, prison and prison-free life expectancies were estimated by dividing the years lived in each age range of the life table into these two states using prevalence of imprisonment by gender and race.

Results: African American males can expect to spend on average 3.09 years in prison or jail over their lifetime and Hispanic and Caucasian males can spend on average 1.06 and 0.50 years, respectively. African American females, on the other hand, can expect to spend on average 0.23 years in these institutions and Hispanic and Caucasian females can expect to spend on average 0.09 and 0.05 years, respectively.  Overall, African American males, the highest risk group, can expect to spend on average 61.80 times longer in prison or jail as compared to Caucasian women, the lowest risk group.

Conclusion: There are clear gender and racial gradients in life expectancy spent in prison in the United States. Future research needs to examine how current imprisonment practice in the United States may influence population health and health disparities.

Potent new Pew report documents 1 in 100 prison reality

As detailed in this press release, "[a]ccording to a new report released today by the Pew Center on the States’ Public Safety Performance Project, at the start of 2008, 2,319,258 adults were held in American prisons or jails, or one in every 99.1 men and women."  Here are more details from the release:

During 2007, the prison population rose by more than 25,000 inmates.  In addition to detailing state and regional prison growth rates, Pew’s report, One in 100: Behind Bars in America 2008, identifies how corrections spending compares to other state investments, why it has increased, and what some states are doing to limit growth in both prison populations and costs while maintaining public safety....

According to the report, 36 states and the Federal Bureau of Prisons saw their prison populations increase in 2007.  Among the seven states with the largest number of prisoners — those with more than 50,000 inmates — three grew (Ohio, Florida and Georgia), while four (New York, Michigan, Texas and California) saw their populations dip.  Texas surpassed California as the nation’s prison leader following a decline in both states’ inmate populations — Texas decreased by 326 inmates and California by 4,068. Ten states, meanwhile, experienced a jump in inmate population growth of 5 percent or greater, a list topped by Kentucky with a surge of 12 percent.

A close examination of the most recent U.S. Department of Justice data (2006) found that while one in 30 men between the ages of 20 and 34 is behind bars, the figure is one in nine for black males in that age group.  Men are still roughly 13 times more likely to be incarcerated, but the female population is expanding at a far brisker pace. For black women in their mid- to late-30s, the incarceration rate also has hit the one-in-100 mark. In addition, one in every 53 adults in their 20s is behind bars; the rate for those over 55 is one in 837....

Twenty years ago, the states collectively spent $10.6 billion of their general funds — their primary discretionary dollars — on corrections.  Last year, they spent more than $44 billion in general funds, a 315 percent jump, and more than $49 billion in total funds from all sources. Coupled with tightening state budgets, the greater prison expenditures may force states to make tough choices about where to spend their money.   For example, Pew found that over the same 20-year period, inflation-adjusted general fund spending on corrections rose 127 percent while higher education expenditures rose just 21 percent....

The full report can be found here, and the graphic on page 6 of the report highlights why I am always so concerned about the racial skew in our sentencing policies and practices regarding imprisonment.  Also, the report usefully (though somewhat summarily) addresses modern political realities:

The politics of crime fighting have made most lawmakers understandably wary of advocating a diverse punishment strategy.  There are politicians who have seen their careers torpedoed by opponents who used a lone vote, or even a comment, to create a dreaded “soft-on- crime” image at election time. Still, in some states, policy makers on both sides of the aisle are finding a safe path through this minefield. In some cases, the soaring costs of imprisonment have hindered spending on other vital programs to a degree that many find unacceptable.  At the same time, polls show a shift in public attitudes toward crime, which has dropped down the list of issues of most concern to voters.  Taken together, these factors — coupled with new strategies that can cut recidivism rates — are fueling a bipartisan appetite for new approaches.

Add North Carolina to the list of states strugging with prison population problems

This AP story highlights yet another state dealing with the economic and policy challenges of an ever-expanding prison population.  Here are details:

The rapid growth in North Carolina's prison population may force lawmakers to spend more tens of millions of dollars to expand the state prison system, according to recent population projections. The growth has cooled but not enough to ward off the need for new construction, said Susan Katzenelson, executive director of the state Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission. The commission has suggested shortening some prison sentences to address the problem, but lawmakers haven't acted on the advice.

Last year, prison expansion projects cost more than $32 million. Those projects included adding 504 beds at Scotland Correctional Institution, a 1,000-bed high security facility in Laurinburg, and 252 beds at Alexander Correctional Institution, a 1,000-cell close custody prison in Taylorsville. Despite the construction, the state's prison population is expected to outstrip capacity this year. Projections show a 6,000-bed shortfall by 2017....

Sen. Ellie Kinnaird, co-chairwoman of a committee that helps set the Department of Correction budget, said her colleagues must consider alternatives. The Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission has suggested subtle changes be made to sentencing laws to shorten some prison sentences that Kinnaird, a Carrboro Democrat, said could reduce the prison population by up to 1,000 inmates.

Lawmakers have been unwilling to consider the recommendations. Committee member Rep. Carolyn Justus, a Hendersonville Republican, doesn't like the idea of shortening prison terms, though she said she may consider looking at sentencing alternatives for nonviolent criminals.

Recent coverage of other states' struggles with the various costs of large prison populations:

• California
• Colorado
• Connecticut
• Idaho
• Kentucky
• Mississippi
• Ohio
• Oklahoma
• Texas
• Virginia
• see also this post, "Costs cause states to pursue prison alternatives"

Eighth Circuit rejects constitutional challenges to long bargained justice

The Eighth Circuit issued a bloodless ruling on Valentine's Day in a case with notable facts in US v. Kling, No. 07-1303 (8th Cir. Feb. 14, 2008) (available here).  Here is how the opinion begins:

Larry Raymond Kling pleaded guilty to one count of child exploitation, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a). Prior to pleading guilty, Kling entered into a plea agreement with the government pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C). In his plea agreement, Kling agreed to a sentencing range of 324 to 360 months' imprisonment.  The district court accepted the plea agreement and sentenced Kling to 324 months' imprisonment.  Kling appeals, arguing that a sentence imposed pursuant to a Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement is illegal and that his sentence is a violation of the Eighth Amendment.  We affirm.

It appears that the defendant, whose age is not mentioned in this opinion, made videotapes and took pictures of himself "engaging in sexual acts with a 15-year-old girl."  The defendant claims he agreed to plead guilty only to avoid a possible life term, and the district judge at sentencing noted "the severity of the sentence recommended by the agreement and expressed an opinion that 'this is the most unjust sentence that I have ever imposed.'"  Unfortunately for Kling, even on Valentine's Day, he gets not love from the circuit court when he complains about his sentence for taking pictures of his forbidden love.

I clearly have been visiting the wrong prisons

In various trips to prisons, I have never seen a drunken orgy.  But this new CNN piece suggests that this just means I have not been visiting the right prisons:

Softball, drunken orgies and a prison system run like the mafia. That's what Florida's former prison secretary says he inherited when he took over one of the nation's largest prison systems two years ago....

In fact, on his first day on the job, James McDonough says he walked into his office -- the same one his predecessor used -- and there was crime scene tape preventing anyone from entering. "That was an indication we had a problem in the department," McDonough told CNN in an exclusive interview before he stepped down last Thursday.

McDonough revealed a startling list of alleged abuses and crimes going on inside Florida's prisons:

• Top prison officials admitting to kickbacks;
• Guards importing and selling steroids in an effort to give them an edge on the softball field;
• Taxpayer funds to pay for booze and women;
• Guards who punished other guards who threatened to report them.

"Corruption had gone to an extreme," McDonough said, saying it all began at the top. "They seemed to be drunk half the time and had orgies the other half, when they weren't taking money and beating each other up." Watch a corrupted prison system » He added, "Women were treated like chattel in this department." McDonough described a bizarre prison culture among those that ran the system -- one that he says seemed obsessed with inter-department softball games and the orgies after games.

And some people are getting all worked up about faith-based prisons?  Yeesh.

Idaho joins states struggling with prison overcrowding

As TalkLeft spotlights here, the Idaho legislature is looking to ease the application of its mandatory minimum drug sentencing laws.  Here are excerpts from this AP report:

A bill that would give Idaho judges greater discretion to keep drug addicts out of prison even if they've been convicted of drug-dealing crimes will get a full hearing before the House Judiciary, Rules and Administration Committee. It's a modest effort to loosen Idaho's mandatory sentences for drug offenses and ease overcrowding in the state's prisons....

Idaho now has 7,400 people behind bars. More than half of them are there due to drug-related offenses. The state has shipped about 500 people to other states because there's no more room in prisons in Idaho.  Under the bill, judges could opt for shorter, treatment-focused sentences for addicts convicted of drug-dealing crimes, on the presumption that if they get clean they're less likely to re-offend. 

Currently, Idaho has mandatory sentences for a range of drug-trafficking offenses that give judges little or no discretion. Many sentences entail at least three to five years in prison. The bill "ain't a bad idea," Rep. Dick Harwood, R-St. Maries, told The Associated Press. "Our prisons are pumped full.  It would be nice to give judges discretion about whether to send somebody to prison or to some other treatment program. In reality, they're the ones that are sitting on the front lines, not the legislators who are making the laws."

Idaho lawmakers have been focusing more and more on trying to address drug problems among those entering the criminal justice system. In addition to LeFavour's bill this year, Rep. Jim Clark, R-Hayden, has introduced another sentencing reform measure that would expand misdemeanor drug courts to help stop minor offenders from sliding into more serious substance abuse-related crimes.

This story provides just another example of how states are having to consider sentencing reforms as they deal with the economic hangover from the tough-on-crime, war-on-drugs, lock-em-all-up mentality that has dominated the political landscape over the last two decades.  Only now are the bills coming due for this politically popular but very expensive approach to non-violent drug crimes.  And, as detailed in the links below, state legislatures from coast-to-coast can no longer afford to ignore these problems:

Recent coverage of other states' struggles with the various costs of large prison populations:

• California
• Colorado
• Connecticut
• Kentucky
• Mississippi
• Ohio
• Oklahoma
• Texas
• Virginia
• see also this post, "Costs cause states to pursue prison alternatives"