What might 2009 have in store for . . . punishment theory and incarceration rates?

I have combined theory and outcomes in this installment of the 2009 "what's in store" series primarily because new theoretical approaches to punishment and sentencing may be essential to changing modern incarceration rates.  Notably, this recent New York Times editorial, headlined "Sen. Webb’s Call for Prison Reform," documents that at least one prominent newspaper and one prominent politician are eager for action in 2009: 

This country puts too many people behind bars for too long. Most elected officials, afraid of being tarred as soft on crime, ignore these problems.  Sen. Jim Webb, a Democrat of Virginia, is now courageously stepping into the void, calling for a national commission to re-assess criminal justice policy.  Other members of Congress should show the same courage and rally to the cause....

In his two years in the Senate, Mr. Webb has held hearings on the cost of mass incarceration and on the criminal justice system’s response to the problems of illegal drugs. He also has called attention to the challenges of prisoner re-entry and of the need to provide released inmates, who have paid their debts to society, more help getting jobs and resuming productive lives.

Mr. Webb says he intends to introduce legislation to create a national commission to investigate these issues.  With Barack Obama in the White House, and strong Democratic majorities in Congress, the political climate should be more favorable than it has been in years.  And the economic downturn should make both federal and state lawmakers receptive to the idea of reforming a prison system that is as wasteful as it is inhumane.

Usefully, many informed state officials are also speaking up in this arena.  For example, Missouri Supreme Court Judge Michael Wolff and Oregon Chief Justice Paul DeMuniz recently sent this notable letter to the Obama transition team regarding sentencing theories and practices.  Here excerpts from an important letter that should be read in full:

We write to urge major change in state and federal sentencing practices. The United States has become the world leader in incarceration, ironically imprisoning a higher percentage of its citizens than any other country while hoping to regain respect as leader of the free world.  Minorities make up a disproportionately large share of our prison populations.  Minorities also account for a disproportionately large share of the victimizations our archaic sentencing approaches fail to prevent.  Disparity in sentencing extends far beyond cocaine sentences....

Evidence-based practices hold much promise for improving sentencing, but they have failed to influence sentencing culture outside the “treatment” courts.... State and federal sentencing guidelines were designed to reduce disparities, to provide some measure of “truth in sentencing,” and to slow prison growth.  But guidelines have failed to end disparity or prison growth.  Though they may achieve “truth in sentencing” by bringing time actually served within reach of the sentence imposed, they utterly conceal the truth that federal and most state guidelines have nothing whatever to do with public safety, and result in misallocation of prison resources as measured by public safety outcomes.  The failure of guidelines to serve public safety has fueled pressure for more prisons.

Notable signs of hope include efforts in Missouri, Wisconsin, Oregon and Virginia to infuse risk and need assessment into sentencing. Virginia, by legislative directive, used risk assessment to reduce inflow into its prison population by 25% with no increase in crime. Meaningful change requires that we insist upon data-driven sentencing throughout the spectrum of criminal behavior. We must use programs that demonstrably work on those they work on – without prison if the risk level permits, otherwise in custody and during reintegration and post-prison supervision.

Because crime was not a hot-button political issue in 2008 and because few states can now afford to sustain modern increases in incarceration rates, I am very hopeful that 2009 will be a turning-point year in this arena.  But I am also fearful that an array of political and practical forces will preserve many of the most troubling status-quo structures and processes that has helped make a nation conceived in liberty so reliant on locking so many people in cages.

Some related posts: 

• My latest (academic?) musings about progressive punishment perspectives
• How many states are being forced by economic realities to consider releasing prisoners?
• Will we invest in classrooms or cells in these tough times?
• Making an economic case for cost-oriented sentencing and prison reforms
• Important (though incomplete) op-ed on mass incarceration and mercy
• FSR publishes issue on "American Criminal Justice Policy in a 'Change' Election"
• Senator Jim Webb continues his important campaign for serious sentencing and prison reforms