« Senator Rand Paul criticizes new Sessions Memo while promising to reintroduce Justice Safety Valve Act | Main | Brennan Center releases "A Federal Agenda to Reduce Mass Incarceration" »
May 15, 2017
Reviewing some historical data on the federal prison population, total sentences imposed, and drug cases
Some of the copious commentary critical of the new Sessions Memo complains that he is "bringing back" the War on Drugs. See, for example, Salon here, "Jeff Sessions is bringing back the drug war — and making it worse"; New York here, "Sessions Takes First Big Step Toward Bringing Back the War on Drugs." I find this charge a bit curious because I do not think the drug war or its footprint on human lives ever really went away notwithstanding some recent efforts at the federal and state level to temper a bit its reach and impact.
In an effort to try to see if the federal drug war at some point went away, and also driven by a desire to try to gauge the impact of federal charging policies before the Sessions Memo (as discussed here), I decided it might be useful to take a dive into US Sentencing Commission data over the past two decades to see what we could see. The USSC has great yearly data assembled here going back to 1996, and basic federal prison population numbers are accessible here going back all the way to 1980. Though my weak empirical skills and this imperfect blogging space will surely limit my ability to tell detailed data stories here effectively, I hope a few posts reviewing federal case processing and sentencing basics might be of some use and interest. Here I will start with just the most basic of basics, historical data on the federal prison population, total sentences imposed, and drug cases:
Year Federal Prison Population Federal Sentences Imposed Drug Sentences Imposed
1996 105,443 42,436 17,267
1998 122,316 50,754 20,368
2000 145,125 59,846 23,542
2002 163,436 64,366 25,920
2004 179,895 70,068 24,532
2006 192,584 72,585 26,122
2008 201,668 76,478 25,500
2010 210,227 83,946 24,713
2012 218,687 84,173 25,712
2014 214,149 75,836 22,193
2016 192,170 67,742 19,945
May 15, 2017 at 07:07 PM | Permalink
Comments
I wonder about this emphasis on convictions. As the following link shows, immigration actually makes up 52% of all federal prosecutions.
http://trac.syr.edu/tracreports/crim/446/
In certain ways prosecutions are a more robust metric of federal priorities than convictions. The reason why is because from a defendant's POV a prosecution carries huge costs regardless of whether the prosecution results in their conviction or not. Indeed, in an important and often ignored way the prosecution is a sentence. It is a sentence in that it interferes with a person's liberty, their mental health, and their interpersonal relationships. In some cases (like sex crimes) being arrested alone is enough to destroy a reputation.
So in my view it is wrong to think of sentencing, and sentencing policy, as that which happens after a conviction. That's too formal for me.
Posted by: Daniel | May 15, 2017 7:41:14 PM
I largely agree with you, Daniel, that prosecutions are "a more robust metric" of federal priorities/actions than convictions and can be in a way a better mechanism for assessing the impact of charging policies. But especially if a driving concern for many activists is mass incarceration, convictions/sentences are a bit more tailored to that piece of the puzzle. And, practically speaking, TRAC hide a lot of its data behind a pay wall and thus its data is not as accessible as the US Sentencing Commission data.
That all said, you raise a good important point.
Posted by: Doug B | May 15, 2017 9:09:47 PM
"Though my weak empirical skills and this imperfect blogging space will surely limit my ability to tell detailed data stories here effectively, ..."
To keep it simple, you do not feel a difference smaller than a third at the gut level. No statistical calculation is needed. Differences can be highly statistically significant, but totally meaningless at the gut level. Worry about your gut feeling, and not any math.
****************
That being said, the above is disgusting. The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) was enacted decades ago. These assholes are going after dealers who benefit society by spreading thousands of overdose deaths to criminals. Yet, they allow millions of hacking crimes. The next war will be fought on that battleground and not between $10 billion submarines.
I can't stand the stupidity of your profession. What will it take to wake you assholes up?
Posted by: David Behar | May 16, 2017 12:33:59 AM
I have to agree with David that overdose deaths are a benefit to society rather than cost.
Posted by: Soronel Haetir | May 16, 2017 1:07:03 AM
