Although, it was good to read this article that US has started to look into reforming its prison system, I don't have much hope of something actually happening. Reason being that US prison system, similar to its medical system, is becoming profit-driven.
Some states have contracted out the prison system to private contractors. Those private contractors benefit from prison population's almost-free / "slave" labour & they also get subsidies / tax breaks from the government (similar to several other companies / industries). Of course, if the contractors are profiting from the labour, they need more of that "free" labour. So, of course, they lobby hard & get the judiciary (judges, attorney generals etc.) on their side of the table.
Result is harsh sentencing laws, e.g. minimum mandatory sentence, are then passed. By the way, there was a good crime drama 2013 movie on this issue, "Snitch," starring Dwayne Johnson, & based on a real story. Anyway, so contractors need to keep a certain level of beds fill in their prisons. They may even be getting tax breaks or subsidies based on prison fill-rate (sort of like how hotels operate their business). On top of that, attorneys' successes are measured based on their conviction rate. So the more they put people behind bars, the more they are considered as making the public safe. That perception comes in very handy if those attorneys are dreaming of getting into government one day.
So who suffers in all of this self-serving agendas, fiasco & corruption? The Public.
1. Taxpayers: As the article states, millions of taxpayer $$$ are spent in housing these prisoners. Those same millions which could have been spent on improving infrastructure, putting food on the poor family's table (by increasing the budget of food stamp program, instead of cutting it), improving schools in poor, urban areas so kids of disadvantaged families also get the same quality of education as the kid from an elite family.
2. People: Those people who get snared in this prison system. As recent incidents have widely shown how much racism is still existent in the American society; African-Americans, who are usually on the disadvantaged spectrum of the general population, face the brunt of these harsh laws. They get locked up for minor offences, assuming they did commit an offence in the first place.
Once they caught up in that cycle, there is no exit out of that maze. Even when they do get out, they have a hard time securing employment and/or housing. Result is they may not have enough money to pay alimony or provide a suitable place to live for their kids or live in a safe & secure place just by themselves.
So, if, due to unemployment, that person, who was not a violent offender in the first place, but has an "ex-con" label now, doesn't pay child support, then he is put into prison. If that person, due to unemployment, can't secure housing, & starts living on the streets, where he/she can easily become a drug addict, & if he gets caught with a drug, he/she visits the prison, again. What happens with all these prison visits? That person is labelled a multiple offender, & has much longer sentences.
Essentially, that person, who was wrongly / perhaps, harshly convicted of a minor offense, becomes a hardened criminal. Who gets the blame then? That person him/herself.
My solution:
1. Be extra careful in sentencing a person in the first place. Don't make stupid harsh laws, which, in effect, make the net bigger, so more "fish" are caught.
Try to make laws which focus on catching violent criminals in the first place, rather than, making one out of a non-violent offender.
2. I'm a proponent of capital punishment. That's why, I said in point one above, that try to make laws to catch violent criminals in the first place.
Once those hardened criminals are caught, the hopes of those criminals ever becoming good guys again are slim to none. So, execute them swiftly.
What these two points will do in tandem?
1. Improve relations between the public & law enforcement, since the law enforcement is focusing more on violent criminals & not catching any & all people. Arresting violent criminals will be looked at appreciatively by the general public, since then, the perception would be of a just society.
2. Law enforcement will also become more efficient & their efforts more effective, since their conviction rates will go up, since they are focusing on violent criminals, who will, most likely, get convicted, & since, they are focusing more on few people, they will get more efficient.
3. Law enforcement agencies will focus more on less people, so they may also need fewer cops, which in turn, will result in decreasing the tax burden on the public.
4. Decreasing tax burdens from keeping few people, if any, in prison, fewer cops, fewer prisons, & a less clogged judicial system, where cases are moving faster.
5. Seeing the end result of what happens to a violent criminal, other people, e.g. misguided youths in the public, will also avoid pursuing that lifestyle. Currently, they see that the worst happening to them, if they do pursue that lifestyle, is going to jail & perhaps, staying in there, & in return do some work & get free housing & food, & make friends with life-minded individuals. Life is sweet.
That mindset will get a jolt that no, if you commit a serious crime, you will get the lethal injection. No free lunches & friend with a gang leader.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since 1990, Missouri’s Hedy Harden has been lobbying for criminal justice reforms in the Midwestern state. On March 11, the 70-year-old chair of the Missouri branch of CURE—a national criminal-justice-reform organization founded in 1972—joined other like-minded activists for a lobby day in the state capital of Jefferson City to pressure lawmakers to pass a handful of bills aimed at reducing the state’s mandatory-minimum laws & other reforms.
Missouri’s prison system cost state taxpayers some $680 million in 2014—up from $220 million in 1994 after the state brought in harsh sentencing legislation that curbed early prison release. Its prison population has since increased nearly 9 times over the past 3 decades, mirroring similar trends across the US.
And while Harden has 25 years under her belt advocating for changes to Missouri’s justice laws—& is growing increasingly skeptical that proposed legislation will ever make it into law—the case for criminal-justice reform is riding a wave of support across the US.
That support has been spurred by a combination of budgetary constraints, prison overcrowding, shifts in public attitudes & a media spotlight trained on events such as the shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown in August in Ferguson, Mo., by police officer Darren Wilson, & the subsequent nationwide protests & scrutiny of policing & the criminal justice system. “Definitely, we all had some really high hopes because of Ferguson,” Harden says, “& we know the legislature has to deal with the whole issue of Ferguson.”
The results of the federal justice department’s investigation into the Ferguson police force in the wake of the shooting ... uncovered a municipal justice system rife with racial bias & geared more toward generating revenue for the St. Louis suburb than any concern for public safety. The federal probe found that, according to the police department’s own statistics, between 2012 & 2014, blacks accounted for 85% of traffic stops, 90% of citations, & 93% of arrests made by Ferguson police, despite making up 67% of the city’s population. They also faced significantly more citations for minor offences & bore the brunt of documented force by police. The municipal court, meanwhile, routinely ordered arrest warrants for residents who failed to pay fines for minor infractions such as traffic tickets & parking violations.
President Barack Obama cited Ferguson—as well as other recent high-profile police-related deaths in New York & Cleveland—in his March 7 speech in Alabama on the 50th anniversary of the Selma-to-Montgomery civil rights marches. “We can make sure our criminal justice system serves all, & not just some,” he said. “Together, we can address unfair sentencing & overcrowded prisons, & the stunted circumstances that rob too many boys of the chance to become men, & rob the nation of too many men who could be good dads, & good workers, & good neighbours.”
In Washington, Obama isn’t alone in calling for change in how America handles matters of crime & punishment. Criminal-justice reform has turned into a rare point of bipartisan consensus in a Congress that’s become synonymous with partisanship, gridlock & division.
The US is currently the world’s largest jailer, with roughly 2.2 million people behind bars. According to data compiled by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), maintaining that prison system cost American taxpayers $80 billion in 2012. In 2013, the US had an incarceration rate of 716 prisoners for every 100,000 Americans. (By comparison, according to stats from the Sentencing Project, Canada’s incarceration rate is 118 per 100,000.) And, since 1980, the federal prison system grew nearly 800%, with some 219,000 people behind bars.
Policy-makers such as outgoing Attorney General Eric Holder are now increasingly likely to talk about being “smart on crime” instead of “tough on crime,” & there is a raft of proposed legislation meant to fix the system. The Smarter Sentencing Act, introduced in February in the Senate by Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee & Illinois Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin, & in the House by Republican Raul Labrador & Democrat Bobby Scott, would reduce the mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent drug offenders, along with other measures.
A prison-reform bill also introduced last month by Texas Republican & Senate majority whip John Cornyn & Rhode Island Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse, aims to shrink the federal prison population by offering incentives to low- & medium-risk prisoners to participate in recidivism-reduction programs. And, last week, Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul (a potential presidential candidate), along with New Jersey Democrat Cory Booker, introduced the Redeem Act. That sweeping legislation would reduce the collateral problems former prisoners face when voting & seeking housing & employment. It would also make it easier for juveniles & adults convicted of non-violent offences to seal their criminal records, among other provisions. These & similar bills have been introduced in prior sessions of Congress in the past few years, but failed to gain real traction.
Groups such as the ACLU say increasingly harsh sentencing & parole policies, the war on drugs & rising parole revocations are behind the spike in the US prison population over the past 3 decades. Recently, however, sentencing reforms at the state level have helped to spur the first drop in prison populations in decades—a modest overall decline (2.8%) between 2009 & 2012.
Those state-level successes ... mean advocates for criminal-justice reform are optimistic. “I do think something significant will happen this year. I think the stars are really aligned,” says Marc Levin, co-founder of the advocacy group Right on Crime, & a prominent voice in the conservative criminal-justice-reform movement. “[It] is such a rarity in a gridlocked system [to find] actual agreement. I think there’s a desire on the part of many Republicans, & many of the consultants to Republicans, to show they’ve got a positive agenda, that they can govern & get something done. There’s a real breakthrough, where there’s something in it for everyone.”
Levin also has prominent conservatives lined up behind him: Big-name Republicans such as Newt Gingrich, presumptive 2016 frontrunner Jeb Bush, & Arkansas governor & former US Drug Enforcement Administration head Asa Hutchinson have all signed on to his organization’s statement of principles. Jesselyn McCurdy, who works with the ACLU in Washington to get members of Congress on board with criminal-justice reform, agrees the timing is right. “Any successes we have at the state level we’re hoping to translate to the federal level,” she says.
In November, the ACLU netted $50 million from liberal billionaire benefactor George Soros’s Open Society Foundations to push at the state level to reduce prison populations. Soros has also joined forces with the conservative Koch brothers & other groups (including the ACLU & Right on Crime) to form the new Coalition for Public Safety, billed as “the largest national effort working to make our criminal justice system smarter, fairer & more cost-effective at the federal, state & local level.”
... in a January op-ed in Politico magazine, Charles Koch made the case for reform, writing: “Overcriminalization has led to the mass incarceration of those ensnared by our criminal justice system, even though such imprisonment does not always enhance public safety. Indeed, more than half of federal inmates are non-violent drug offenders. Enforcing so many victimless crimes inevitably leads to conflict between our citizens & law enforcement.”
Still, while there’s broad agreement that the current prison system isn’t sustainable, not everyone agrees on the proposed blueprints for reform. In Congress, those skeptics include Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, who, as head of the Senate judiciary committee, holds sway over which reform bills end up on the legislative agenda. On the Senate floor this past week, Grassley voiced strong opposition to the Smarter Sentencing Act, saying the arguments for it “are merely a weak attempt to defend the indefensible,” & pointing to examples such as growing heroin use in states such as Vermont. He also expressed misgivings that the legislation could impede efforts to curtail major drug-trafficking operations, or that it would allow repeat offenders to avoid serious jail time.
In California, Proposition 47—a ballot initiative passed last November with nearly 60% support that reclassifies some drug & theft crimes from felonies to misdemeanours—is also facing opposition from critics who argue it’s a flawed & dangerous measure. David Bejarano, president of the California Police Chiefs Association, argues that Prop 47 has: scrapped felony charges for possession of substances such as the date-rape drug; created a loophole for handgun theft; & removed a legal tool used by law enforcement to force people into drug rehab in lieu of jail time. “Other states are watching what California does. What we’re trying to do now through our legislature is correct some of the most obvious concerns we have,” he says.
In Missouri, there’s another campaign building to pass House Bill 657, which would reduce the state’s so-called “85% law.” The Republican-sponsored bill would lower the threshold of time served before being eligible for parole for certain dangerous felonies (arson, robbery, & assault) from 85% of the sentence to 50%. Even with that push, & a slew of bills aimed at reforming everything from those mandatory minimums to juvenile justice & the death penalty, Harden called the state legislature “a tough nut to crack.”
Some states have contracted out the prison system to private contractors. Those private contractors benefit from prison population's almost-free / "slave" labour & they also get subsidies / tax breaks from the government (similar to several other companies / industries). Of course, if the contractors are profiting from the labour, they need more of that "free" labour. So, of course, they lobby hard & get the judiciary (judges, attorney generals etc.) on their side of the table.
Result is harsh sentencing laws, e.g. minimum mandatory sentence, are then passed. By the way, there was a good crime drama 2013 movie on this issue, "Snitch," starring Dwayne Johnson, & based on a real story. Anyway, so contractors need to keep a certain level of beds fill in their prisons. They may even be getting tax breaks or subsidies based on prison fill-rate (sort of like how hotels operate their business). On top of that, attorneys' successes are measured based on their conviction rate. So the more they put people behind bars, the more they are considered as making the public safe. That perception comes in very handy if those attorneys are dreaming of getting into government one day.
So who suffers in all of this self-serving agendas, fiasco & corruption? The Public.
1. Taxpayers: As the article states, millions of taxpayer $$$ are spent in housing these prisoners. Those same millions which could have been spent on improving infrastructure, putting food on the poor family's table (by increasing the budget of food stamp program, instead of cutting it), improving schools in poor, urban areas so kids of disadvantaged families also get the same quality of education as the kid from an elite family.
2. People: Those people who get snared in this prison system. As recent incidents have widely shown how much racism is still existent in the American society; African-Americans, who are usually on the disadvantaged spectrum of the general population, face the brunt of these harsh laws. They get locked up for minor offences, assuming they did commit an offence in the first place.
Once they caught up in that cycle, there is no exit out of that maze. Even when they do get out, they have a hard time securing employment and/or housing. Result is they may not have enough money to pay alimony or provide a suitable place to live for their kids or live in a safe & secure place just by themselves.
So, if, due to unemployment, that person, who was not a violent offender in the first place, but has an "ex-con" label now, doesn't pay child support, then he is put into prison. If that person, due to unemployment, can't secure housing, & starts living on the streets, where he/she can easily become a drug addict, & if he gets caught with a drug, he/she visits the prison, again. What happens with all these prison visits? That person is labelled a multiple offender, & has much longer sentences.
Essentially, that person, who was wrongly / perhaps, harshly convicted of a minor offense, becomes a hardened criminal. Who gets the blame then? That person him/herself.
My solution:
1. Be extra careful in sentencing a person in the first place. Don't make stupid harsh laws, which, in effect, make the net bigger, so more "fish" are caught.
Try to make laws which focus on catching violent criminals in the first place, rather than, making one out of a non-violent offender.
2. I'm a proponent of capital punishment. That's why, I said in point one above, that try to make laws to catch violent criminals in the first place.
Once those hardened criminals are caught, the hopes of those criminals ever becoming good guys again are slim to none. So, execute them swiftly.
What these two points will do in tandem?
1. Improve relations between the public & law enforcement, since the law enforcement is focusing more on violent criminals & not catching any & all people. Arresting violent criminals will be looked at appreciatively by the general public, since then, the perception would be of a just society.
2. Law enforcement will also become more efficient & their efforts more effective, since their conviction rates will go up, since they are focusing on violent criminals, who will, most likely, get convicted, & since, they are focusing more on few people, they will get more efficient.
3. Law enforcement agencies will focus more on less people, so they may also need fewer cops, which in turn, will result in decreasing the tax burden on the public.
4. Decreasing tax burdens from keeping few people, if any, in prison, fewer cops, fewer prisons, & a less clogged judicial system, where cases are moving faster.
5. Seeing the end result of what happens to a violent criminal, other people, e.g. misguided youths in the public, will also avoid pursuing that lifestyle. Currently, they see that the worst happening to them, if they do pursue that lifestyle, is going to jail & perhaps, staying in there, & in return do some work & get free housing & food, & make friends with life-minded individuals. Life is sweet.
That mindset will get a jolt that no, if you commit a serious crime, you will get the lethal injection. No free lunches & friend with a gang leader.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since 1990, Missouri’s Hedy Harden has been lobbying for criminal justice reforms in the Midwestern state. On March 11, the 70-year-old chair of the Missouri branch of CURE—a national criminal-justice-reform organization founded in 1972—joined other like-minded activists for a lobby day in the state capital of Jefferson City to pressure lawmakers to pass a handful of bills aimed at reducing the state’s mandatory-minimum laws & other reforms.
Missouri’s prison system cost state taxpayers some $680 million in 2014—up from $220 million in 1994 after the state brought in harsh sentencing legislation that curbed early prison release. Its prison population has since increased nearly 9 times over the past 3 decades, mirroring similar trends across the US.
And while Harden has 25 years under her belt advocating for changes to Missouri’s justice laws—& is growing increasingly skeptical that proposed legislation will ever make it into law—the case for criminal-justice reform is riding a wave of support across the US.
That support has been spurred by a combination of budgetary constraints, prison overcrowding, shifts in public attitudes & a media spotlight trained on events such as the shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown in August in Ferguson, Mo., by police officer Darren Wilson, & the subsequent nationwide protests & scrutiny of policing & the criminal justice system. “Definitely, we all had some really high hopes because of Ferguson,” Harden says, “& we know the legislature has to deal with the whole issue of Ferguson.”
The results of the federal justice department’s investigation into the Ferguson police force in the wake of the shooting ... uncovered a municipal justice system rife with racial bias & geared more toward generating revenue for the St. Louis suburb than any concern for public safety. The federal probe found that, according to the police department’s own statistics, between 2012 & 2014, blacks accounted for 85% of traffic stops, 90% of citations, & 93% of arrests made by Ferguson police, despite making up 67% of the city’s population. They also faced significantly more citations for minor offences & bore the brunt of documented force by police. The municipal court, meanwhile, routinely ordered arrest warrants for residents who failed to pay fines for minor infractions such as traffic tickets & parking violations.
President Barack Obama cited Ferguson—as well as other recent high-profile police-related deaths in New York & Cleveland—in his March 7 speech in Alabama on the 50th anniversary of the Selma-to-Montgomery civil rights marches. “We can make sure our criminal justice system serves all, & not just some,” he said. “Together, we can address unfair sentencing & overcrowded prisons, & the stunted circumstances that rob too many boys of the chance to become men, & rob the nation of too many men who could be good dads, & good workers, & good neighbours.”
In Washington, Obama isn’t alone in calling for change in how America handles matters of crime & punishment. Criminal-justice reform has turned into a rare point of bipartisan consensus in a Congress that’s become synonymous with partisanship, gridlock & division.
The US is currently the world’s largest jailer, with roughly 2.2 million people behind bars. According to data compiled by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), maintaining that prison system cost American taxpayers $80 billion in 2012. In 2013, the US had an incarceration rate of 716 prisoners for every 100,000 Americans. (By comparison, according to stats from the Sentencing Project, Canada’s incarceration rate is 118 per 100,000.) And, since 1980, the federal prison system grew nearly 800%, with some 219,000 people behind bars.
Policy-makers such as outgoing Attorney General Eric Holder are now increasingly likely to talk about being “smart on crime” instead of “tough on crime,” & there is a raft of proposed legislation meant to fix the system. The Smarter Sentencing Act, introduced in February in the Senate by Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee & Illinois Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin, & in the House by Republican Raul Labrador & Democrat Bobby Scott, would reduce the mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent drug offenders, along with other measures.
A prison-reform bill also introduced last month by Texas Republican & Senate majority whip John Cornyn & Rhode Island Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse, aims to shrink the federal prison population by offering incentives to low- & medium-risk prisoners to participate in recidivism-reduction programs. And, last week, Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul (a potential presidential candidate), along with New Jersey Democrat Cory Booker, introduced the Redeem Act. That sweeping legislation would reduce the collateral problems former prisoners face when voting & seeking housing & employment. It would also make it easier for juveniles & adults convicted of non-violent offences to seal their criminal records, among other provisions. These & similar bills have been introduced in prior sessions of Congress in the past few years, but failed to gain real traction.
Groups such as the ACLU say increasingly harsh sentencing & parole policies, the war on drugs & rising parole revocations are behind the spike in the US prison population over the past 3 decades. Recently, however, sentencing reforms at the state level have helped to spur the first drop in prison populations in decades—a modest overall decline (2.8%) between 2009 & 2012.
Those state-level successes ... mean advocates for criminal-justice reform are optimistic. “I do think something significant will happen this year. I think the stars are really aligned,” says Marc Levin, co-founder of the advocacy group Right on Crime, & a prominent voice in the conservative criminal-justice-reform movement. “[It] is such a rarity in a gridlocked system [to find] actual agreement. I think there’s a desire on the part of many Republicans, & many of the consultants to Republicans, to show they’ve got a positive agenda, that they can govern & get something done. There’s a real breakthrough, where there’s something in it for everyone.”
Levin also has prominent conservatives lined up behind him: Big-name Republicans such as Newt Gingrich, presumptive 2016 frontrunner Jeb Bush, & Arkansas governor & former US Drug Enforcement Administration head Asa Hutchinson have all signed on to his organization’s statement of principles. Jesselyn McCurdy, who works with the ACLU in Washington to get members of Congress on board with criminal-justice reform, agrees the timing is right. “Any successes we have at the state level we’re hoping to translate to the federal level,” she says.
In November, the ACLU netted $50 million from liberal billionaire benefactor George Soros’s Open Society Foundations to push at the state level to reduce prison populations. Soros has also joined forces with the conservative Koch brothers & other groups (including the ACLU & Right on Crime) to form the new Coalition for Public Safety, billed as “the largest national effort working to make our criminal justice system smarter, fairer & more cost-effective at the federal, state & local level.”
... in a January op-ed in Politico magazine, Charles Koch made the case for reform, writing: “Overcriminalization has led to the mass incarceration of those ensnared by our criminal justice system, even though such imprisonment does not always enhance public safety. Indeed, more than half of federal inmates are non-violent drug offenders. Enforcing so many victimless crimes inevitably leads to conflict between our citizens & law enforcement.”
Still, while there’s broad agreement that the current prison system isn’t sustainable, not everyone agrees on the proposed blueprints for reform. In Congress, those skeptics include Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, who, as head of the Senate judiciary committee, holds sway over which reform bills end up on the legislative agenda. On the Senate floor this past week, Grassley voiced strong opposition to the Smarter Sentencing Act, saying the arguments for it “are merely a weak attempt to defend the indefensible,” & pointing to examples such as growing heroin use in states such as Vermont. He also expressed misgivings that the legislation could impede efforts to curtail major drug-trafficking operations, or that it would allow repeat offenders to avoid serious jail time.
In California, Proposition 47—a ballot initiative passed last November with nearly 60% support that reclassifies some drug & theft crimes from felonies to misdemeanours—is also facing opposition from critics who argue it’s a flawed & dangerous measure. David Bejarano, president of the California Police Chiefs Association, argues that Prop 47 has: scrapped felony charges for possession of substances such as the date-rape drug; created a loophole for handgun theft; & removed a legal tool used by law enforcement to force people into drug rehab in lieu of jail time. “Other states are watching what California does. What we’re trying to do now through our legislature is correct some of the most obvious concerns we have,” he says.
In Missouri, there’s another campaign building to pass House Bill 657, which would reduce the state’s so-called “85% law.” The Republican-sponsored bill would lower the threshold of time served before being eligible for parole for certain dangerous felonies (arson, robbery, & assault) from 85% of the sentence to 50%. Even with that push, & a slew of bills aimed at reforming everything from those mandatory minimums to juvenile justice & the death penalty, Harden called the state legislature “a tough nut to crack.”
