Public Policy Alternatives to Improve

Public Policy Alternatives to Improve the Nation's Prison Overcrowding Dilemma

There are more individuals per capita incarcerated in the United States than in any comparative democracy that is an industrialized nation anywhere in the world. The sentences imposed on offenders in the U.S. are longer and the U.S. is one of the last nations on earth to practice capital punishment or what is commonly known as "the death penalty." Increasingly individuals are being locked up male and female and both adult and child. Collateral impacts from incarcerations of this enormity are costly to society both in monetary as well as in social terms. The findings of this study are simply that there exists alternative measures of punishment that are more cost efficient and more conducive to the offenders reintegration back into society after incarceration than the prison system which is run by the government and furthermore case studies examining the efficiency of privately operated prison institutions show that the private prison is better ran than the government owned prison and for less cost to the taxpayer.

Public Policy Alternatives to Improve the Nation's Prison Overcrowding Dilemma

Objective

The purpose of this work is to research and review the problem of overcrowding in United States prisons and to provide evidence-based information in relation to public policy administration in analysis of the policy problem that contributes to the overcrowding issue in prisons.

Methodology

The method of research will be through a review of available literature relating to public policy administration in the United States penitentiary system. The research will be both qualitative and quantitative in nature.

Findings of the Study

The findings of this study are simply that there exists alternative measures of punishment that are more cost efficient and more conducive to the offenders reintegration back into society after incarceration than the prison system which is run by the government.

Introduction

There are more individuals per capita incarcerated in the United States than in any comparative democracy that is an industrialized nation anywhere in the world. The sentences imposed on offenders in the U.S. are longer and the U.S. is one of the last nations on earth to practice capital punishment or what is commonly known as "the death penalty." Increasingly individuals are being locked up both male and female and both adult and child. Collateral impacts from incarcerations of this enormity are costly to society both in monetary as well as in social terms. Of the more than 2 million incarcerated there are many who have children that are now without either a father or mother which decreases the level of living as well as the guidance and other provisions of a parent when they are present in the child's life.

While it is true that perhaps that individual should have given that some thought before commission of the offense for which they have been incarcerated it is the child and society that suffers along with the individual who is in prison for the effects and impact are far and wide on a societal level when so many are imprisoned in a country. Many suggestions and recommendations have been put forth over the history of the United States of America as to precisely what the optimal prison system should resemble however, the specific solution has not yet been officially found or much less implemented. Public policy plays a great role in the sentencing and incarceration of individuals who have committed offenses. For example it is common knowledge that to commit a drug related offense will likely result in more time in the penitentiary than committing a heinous crime such as rape or murder. There is something imbalanced in the meting out of punishment when viewed in the light of real balance and in this instance the scales of justice are tipped out of balance extremely.

Literature Review

In a February 14, 2005 report concerning the decision of the Senate Judiciary Committee in relation to the steps that have been taken toward providing relief in the overcrowding being experienced in the U.S. prison system. A bill that was approved is one that provides encouragement in the use of other means of punishment other than that of incarceration in the prison system, which ultimately serves to empower judges in offering of alternatives such as, deferred status to offenders. (Fratini, 2005) Testimony was heard from both sides of the issue and was heard as well in relation to proposed reforms and as to issues related to 'good-time' or the reduction of time rewarded for good behavior. The deferred sentencing bill was passed in a committee vote that was 5 to 1 in the initiative. Deferred sentences are only available in the form of a plea bargain agreement. In a deferred sentence the offender is placed under the Department of Corrections' supervision for a set period of time. In the new bill stated is that:

This bill would allow judges to order a deferred sentence without an agreement if the defendant is under the age of 22 and has not been charged with a 'listed crime' or a crime that is among a group of 26 different felonies and misdeameanors." (Fratini, 2005)

Deferred sentencing is generally used only in the situation of "acquittals due to factors such as lack of physical evidence, inconsistent statements, or incredible witnesses." (Fratini, 2005) in a 'Justice Policy Institute' report entitled "America's One Million Nonviolent Prisoners" it is stated that, "Over the past two decades, no area of state government expenditures have increased as rapidly as prisons and jails. Justice Department data released on March, 1999, who that the number of prisoners in American has more than tripled over the last two decades from 500,000 to 1.8 million." The group 'FAMM', Families Against Mandatory Minimums is a national nonpartisan, nonprofit organization founded in 1991 in response to inflexible and excessive penalties required by mandatory sentencing laws. Promotion of sentencing policies that grant judges the discretion to distinguish between defendants and to then sentence them depending on their part in commission of the offense, which is considered against the serious or non-serious nature of the offense and as well whether the judge thinks the offender has potential for rehabilitation. Incarceration rates have climbed continually higher and the budgets in relation to incarceration in the U.S. is stressed more so than since the late part of the 1970's and early 1980's. Driving these problems is the mandatory minimum sentencing laws passed by the U.S. Congress and more than a few state legislatures that literally force the sentencing of offenders by judges to lengthy prison sentences that are fixed by law. According to the 1996 Bureau of Justice Statistics report there were 5.5 million U.S. adults under correctional supervision in 1996. The percentages according to classification of parole, probation or prison status are illustrated in the pie chart below labeled Chart 1.0.

Chart 1.0

Source: 1996 U.S. Bureau Justice Statistics Report

Of these 5.5 million individuals there were 1.6 million in local jails or prison with 1,512,200 of them being male and 125,700 of them being female; 821,900 were white and 773,900 were black; 3.9 million on probation or parole with 3,151,400 of those being male and 733,700 of them being female; and 2,496,600 were white and 1,325,600 of those individuals were black. According to a report from the Bureau of Justice Statistics there were approximately 5.5 million adults in the United States under some form of correctional supervision in 1996, which represents 2.8% of the total adult population of the United States. Approximately 9.0% of black adults and 2.0% of white adults as well as 1.3% of adults of other races make up that 2.8%. Prisons held an estimated 1.1 million individuals in State and Federal prisons alone with 94% being men. 48% of these prison inmates were white and 49% were black while 3% were American Indian, Alaska Native, Asian or Pacific Islander. Jails held approximately 510,000 adults which equals one in every 378 U.S. residents and men prisoners in jail equaled 89% of all prisoners. 42% of the inmates in jails in 1996 were white, 41% of the inmates were black and the remaining 16% were Hispanic individuals. There were approximately 3.2 million adults on probation as of December 31, 1996 with probationers being 57% of all adults under correctional supervision. Women comprised 21% of the probationers with 66% of the women being white and 32% being black.

Chart 2.0

Source: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics Report, 1996

In the early 1970's the total number of individuals who were incarcerated in the United States began a rate of growth that is astronomical and is said to the "due mainly to an increased likelihood or a prison sentence for nearly all types of crime." (ASAM Criminal Justice System, 2005) the number of individuals incarcerated has "tripled from 1973 to 1989" (ASAM Criminal Justice System, 2005) and those numbers continue to grow with the war on drugs "increasingly contributing to a prison inmate problem that already overwhelms the correctional system." (ASAM Criminal Justice System, 2005) Although there is no absolute figure for the proportion of those incarcerated that have experienced drug and alcohol problems the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) estimates' in 1991 stated that nearly 30% of those incarcerated had used drugs daily in the month before committing the offense for which they were in prison. By the year 2003 there were approximately 6.9 million individuals either on probation, in mail, or in prison which equals 32% of all U.S. adults residents or 1 out of every 32 adults. (U.S. Bureau of Justice Corrections Statistics, 2003) There were a total of 1,470,045 inmates under State and Federal jurisdiction on the last day of the year of 2003 and 1,296,986 under controls of State jurisdiction and 173,059 under Federal jurisdiction. During the period of 1995 to 2003 the rate of growth of those incarcerated was 3.4% annually with population growth during the 12-moth period to end December 31, 3002 lower in state prisons than in local jails with the rise in state prisons being 1.4% and the rise in local jails being 3.9% while Federal prison populations rose 6.6%. (U.S. Bureau of Justice Corrections Statistics, 2003)

The United States "holds the dubious distinction of having the world's highest prison population" in the world. The rate of incarceration in U.S. prisons and jails was 1.86 million or 682 per 100,000 U.S. residents incarcerated in 1999. (Ruikar, 2001) the increasing tough public policy greatly contributes to the problem of overcrowding in prisons with such laws as" the three strikes and you're out." There is a great need for either the construction of more facilities to house prisoners or for a change in present public policies mandating incarceration on certain offenses. Furthermore, the need in separating men from women; juveniles from adults and those who are mentally or physically handicapped from the general population in prisons also highlights the vital need for additional facilities to house prisoners in. (Ruikar, 2001)

According to one report the state and federal prisons in the United States are presently experiencing rate of 33% than they are officially certified to house within their facilities. By June 2003 the total of prisoners in the United States was near the total of 2.1 million. (Montaldo, 2004) This increase was stated to be the largest increase in over four years. The inmates that are 18 years of age or younger is one the decline. By June 2003 there were 3,006 state prisoners, and 6,869 city jail detainees, which were under 18 years of age. (Montaldo, 2004) There were a total of 90,700 non-citizens being held in State and Federal correctional facilities at midyear of 2003, which was a 2.3% growth from the year prior to 2003.

The federal system alone held 170, 461 prisoners on June 30, 2003, which was more than any one state held in prisoners during the same time period. The rate of growth in the federal penitentiary system has been at a rate of 8% a year compared to state averages of 2.9%. Of those incarcerated in 2003 the following percentages were stated as to the race of the individuals:

White 43.6%

Black 39.2%

Hispanic 1.8%

Source: (Montaldo, 2004)

1980: The Rise of Incarceration Rates in the U.S.

The year of 1980 saw the beginning of a steady climb in incarceration rates in the United States. The current rate of incarceration is stated to be 450 sentenced prisoners for every 100,000 individuals in the U.S. The rates for those who are African-American are that of nearly 2,000 sentenced prisoners per the figure of 100,000 population. The crime rates are high in the United States but the rate of crime has not climbed as steadily as has the prison population. If the rate of crime hasn't changed then the consideration of what it is that has changed must be addressed. According to those who have researched the subject the change has been the United States public policy concerning who is to be incarcerated or not in relation to the crimes committed. Most of this was concerned with legislative policy due to changes in prosecution and sentencing guidelines propelled by the belief that all crimes are of a violent nature and that violent criminals should be locked up. However, the statistics do not show this to be the case. The Encyclopedia of Persons and Correctional Facilities report states that the U.S. "is one of the last remaining countries to practice capital punishment and one of the only countries anywhere that executes juveniles." (Bosworth, 2004) Furthermore, sentences are longer in the United States than in any other country in the world.

Statistics of Non-Violent Prisoners

According to the Justice Policy Institute, "Most of the growth in America's prisons since 1978 is accounted for by nonviolent offenders and 1998 is the first year in which America's prisons and jails incarcerated more than 1 million nonviolent offenders." The Justice Institute report relates that the costs associated with incarceration of more than one million nonviolent offenders is an astronomical figure. The 1978 combined prison and jail budgets were $5 billion and that amount had grown to $31 billion by 1997 with states spending more to build prisons than the build colleges and the combined budgets for jails and prisons for nonviolent offenders numbering 1.2 million is stated to "exceed the welfare budget for 8.5 million poor people last year." In other words, the nonviolent offenders in prison are living better than are the poor individuals on welfare.

Drug Offenders and Incarceration

In the year of 1984 the percentage of drug offenders in state prisons totaled 7.6% and this amount had tripled to 20.7% in 1998. Drug offender incarceration was the major factor in the overall growth of incarceration rates between 1984 and 1991. There were 19,600 drug offenders admitted to state prisons in 1984 and by 1998 the number was 107,000. Drug arrests rose from 1,010,000 in 1991 to 1,559,100 in 1998, which is suggested, to possibly represent political and legal enforcement priorities. Changes to policy in relation to sentencing are that which accounts for most of the growth witnessed in incarceration in the past few years. The costs of incarceration in prison facilities costs have increased to about $40 billion a year (p.25) Furthermore, the costs in terms of 'social costs' for those incarcerated and their families and the communities in which they live grow each year. (Gainsborough & Mauer, 2000) Stated is that, "while the removal of some criminal offenders can provide positive benefits, including supervision of young people, and other elements of informal social control. As more young people grow up with parents and siblings incarcerated and a view of time in jail as a normal aspect of one's life experience, the deterrent effect of prison is diminished as well." (Gainsborough & Mauer, 2000) the report states, "One out of every fourteen black children has a parent in state or federal prison."

Lasting impacts on the individual who has served time are the negative factors of:

Difficulty in finding work when the disadvantage of a criminal record is added to low educational attainment and limited job experience.

Inability to obtain some jobs because of licensing and other employment restrictions on ex-offenders

Breakup of families through divorce and denial of parent rights.

Loss of welfare benefits and education loans.

Loss of voting rights in many states, either temporarily or permanently (Gainsborough & Mauer, 2000)

Within this work is stated certain public policy implications with the approach outlined in the following:

Moratorium on Prison Construction: Implementation of a moratorium on new construction while alternative crime prevention and control measures are pursued.

Repeal Mandatory Sentencing: Mandatory sentencing laws should be reviewed and reconsidered as to whether the goals stated within them can be justified.

Diversion of Non-Violent offenders: Greater use of community supervision and resources could be employed to divert many of these offenders from prison.

Strengthen Juvenile Court: Provide the necessary resources to juvenile courts to handle all but exceptional cases within their jurisdiction.

Strengthen Probation and Parole: Probation and parole services require sufficient support and redesign so that they constitute effective alternatives to long-term incarceration and provide for offender transition to the community.

Reverse National Drug Policy: Laws that currently emphasize law enforcement over prevention and treatment should be reversed so that drug abuse is permanently addressed as a public health problem.

Build Strong Families and Communities: Policymakers should provide support for mental health services, education, job placement and other services and initiatives that strengthen community life and reduce crime. (Gainsborough & Mauer, 2000)

Alternatives to Incarceration

There have been suggested several alternatives to incarceration some of which are:

Privatization of Prisons.

Rehabilitation

Electronic monitoring.

Public policy changes in relation to sentencing and incarceration overall.

Public Policy

Privatization of governmental services has risen over the past ten years as agencies within the federal, local and state look for methods to save money and still adhere to the mandated rules for the provision of different services. According to one the Washington Policy Center (2004)

The practice of privatization has been extended to basic public works and infrastructure such as garbage collection, water and sewer, electric power, and building and highway construction. (Samson, 1994)

Further stated is that:

Privatization has also moved into the arena of human services and social policy, with growing privatization of the health care industry, pension plan management, and most recently, the public welfare system." (Carroll, Conant & Easton, 1987; Dehoog, 1994)

Finally the Washington Policy Center (2004) states that:

The adult correctional population in the United States has grown by an average of 7.8% per year from 1985 to 1996, to a current population of over 1.6 million prisoners since 1990 the rate of incarceration has grown from 461 per 100,000 U.S. residents to 615 per 100,000."

There exists report after report that states that public policy in relation to sentencing and prisons are in desperate needs of a change. However, there are those who are against private institutions running prisons and there are grave considerations to this proposal as explained by Geis (1987):

In part, this is because privatization calls for giving the private sector enormous direct control over the lives of a captive human population. Prisoners cannot walk away, cannot resign, from a situation they find abhorrent. They did not elect to be where they are (unless we presume that by their behavior they asked for it) and they certainly cannot elect to go elsewhere because they want to. (Geis, 1987)

Arguments for Privatization

Those who support privatization are basically elected officials. According to the Washington Policy Center the "call for privatization was adopted by all three national committees (the RNC, the DNC, and the LNC)." (Washington Policy Center, 2004)

Arguments Against Privatization

The American Civil Liberties Union stands against privatization on the "assumption that prisoner rights will be compromised in the drive to make money." (Washington Policy Center, 2004) the areas that are targeted in this opposition movement are three reform issues in relation to prisons which are 1) Prisoner's Rights Litigation 2) the Prison Industrial Complex; and 3) Prison Labor.

Electronic Monitoring

Electronic monitoring would most likely be the most plausible use of tracking devices that have been suggested to date in that the convicted offender could live at home, participate in a work release program and while still be taking care of familial obligations at the same time adhere to restrictions of punishment in completing a sentence handed down by a judge.

Rehabilitation

Rehabilitation of those convicted of criminal offenses may be through training or furthering of education, classes in parenting or citizenship or possibly counseling, drug and alcohol abuse counseling and even detoxification.

Effects of Long-Term Incarceration and Overcrowding

The environment in the aspects of the physical, emotional and psychological is decided by the beliefs and attitudes that prevail from the perspective of the criminal justice system as well as the general public as to what is held to be "appropriate" punishment. "Beliefs and attitudes about punishment can be complex and inconsistent." (John Howard Society, 1999) Inmates, just as in archaic times "remain a disadvantaged group socially, legally and politically." (John Howard Society, 1999) Based on systematic observations of behavior theories in relation to the effects of imprisonment as deterioration, deprivation and prisonization "have been challenged and found lacking in reliable evidence." (John Howard Society, 1999) the initial stages of incarceration are complete with anxiety and depression but as the inmate adjusts there is a numbing of the senses that seems to be experienced. For a non-violent and non-habitual offender this seems somewhat unnecessary and counterproductive. Stated by the John Howard Society report on the effects of incarceration is that:

We must also ensure that inmates' mental health is not sacrificed for the purpose of punishment. Offenders must be taught how to live productively as law-abiding citizens so that they can return to society without posing a threat to our safety. These goals can be accomplished, but to do so, policy makers must make rehabilitation paramount in sentencing over retribution and punishment. (John Howard Society, 1999)

Policy Brief - Washington Policy Center

In a study conducted by the Washington Policy Center in relation to prison overcrowding in Washington State a sensible solution is sought to aleve extreme overcrowding in its' prison system. The study gives consideration to the benefits that might be derived from "free-market competition" and the experiences that states have had thus far in efforts toward privatization. According to the study the adoption of privatization of prisons, "does not mean giving over control of prisoners to big corporations." The findings in this study were that, " a well-managed program can reduce the cost of prison services to the government, open up new markets in Washington businesses, and increase the quality and efficiency of existing government facilities." (Mongatue, 2001)

The study states that the prison system is a threat both internally and externally. Internally because of the dangers from overcrowding and externally due to the problems that overcrowding in the prison lead to outside of the prison. In communities of prison overcrowding the effort of law enforcement is weakened due to being forced to pick and choose which criminals of a dangerous nature will be incarcerated. Furthermore, rehabilitation efforts cannot be effective in situations with jail cells that are overcrowded. The Washington State initiative set forth nine objectives, which were to:

Ensure public safety

Punish the offender for law violation.

Stress personal responsibility and accountability to reduce recidivism.

Treat all offenders fairly and equitably.

Reflect the values of the community.

Provide for prudent management of resources.

Develop a system that provides restitution for victim's damages.

Be accountable to the citizens.

Meet national standards.

One of the problems within the government-ran prison system is that there exist no competition and no reason for employees at correction institutions be innovative, expedient, efficient or to 'provide prudent management of resources.' However the private prison institution does have these motivations.

The benefits of the free market are stated by the Washington Policy Center to be the following:

Lower cost - Private corporations are taught to search for ways to become more efficient to increase profit thereby delivering superior service at a competitive charge.

Higher Service Levels: Government of private monopolies lack the motivation for innovation in delivery of services. Competition within the prison industry will result in upgraded services and within existing budgets.

Better Management: This will enable streamlining of the prison operation by the same measures used in other industry

Changed Government Culture: This in essence means that through privatization of the prison system the government will be freed from this dimension of service and will be able to devote their time to other services to the public. Tennessee was the first state to use privatization in its prison system. Since then 31 states have followed suit. According to the Washington Policy Center:

Competitive contracting for prison service increased significantly since 1984. The question leaders are asking is, "Does it work?" To address that question, we reviewed three real examples of Texas, Louisiana, and New Mexico, comparing the performers of public and private. The results have been overwhelmingly positive. While the private prison system is not perfect quality, low cost and management innovations that have resulted from introducing competitive pressures to this government service have been largely beneficial."

Texas Analysis

Texas has 43 facilities and a capacity for approximately 30,000 prisoners and has privatized its prison system more so than any other State in the U.S. The program begin in Texas in 1897 and was 'designed as a pilot project in the effectiveness of private prisons in comparison to public facilities, but the success of it resulted in significant expansion." (Washington Policy Center, 2004 p.5) the qualities evaluated by the Texas Sunset Advisory Committee were those of:

Security

Safety

Medical Care

Education

Substance Abuse Programs

Staff Treatment

Disciplinary Process

Living Conditions

Activities

After having combined the inmate interviews of the prison employees as well as reviewing four other states it was found that prisons that were privatized "performed as well or better than public facilities..." (Washington Policy, 2004)

The cost comparison was listed as follows:

Type of Prison Unit Cost Per Day

Public $42.47

Private $35.25

The evident savings were found in evaluation of the "specialized facilities." In many contracts of privatization stipulations are made that the prison firms must "hire and buy locally whenever possible." (Washington Policy Center, 2004) the communities that are local to the private -managed prisons are inclusive of "service projects, sales tax revenue and local property taxes." (Washington Policy Center, 2004)

Louisiana Analysis

Louisiana begin privatization in prisons in the middle of the 1980's due to extreme overcrowding in its' prison system. Three prisons with medium security were designed by the Louisiana Department of Public Service Corrections in a field test for evaluation of the effectiveness of prisons that were privately operated. Six years later the results were analyzed. The stated results of the study were that, "Private prisons significantly outperform state-operated prisons." There was an 11% to 13% lower cost in operations in the private prison as compared to the state prison system.

The following chart labeled Chart 3.0 illustrates the differences in costs reported by Louisiana in the field test.

Chart 3.0

Source: Washington Policy Center

Safety incidents of the nature of assault on both staff and inmates were noticeably lower in private than public prisons. According to the report two private prisons were listed as "safe to very safe" and public prisons were rated "unsafe to moderately safe." Disciplinary measure evaluations were evaluated to be "better" according to inmates and staff. Staffing evaluations reported 'higher safety levels' than public prisons. Education standards were 'consistently higher (Washington Policy Center p.17)

New Mexico Analysis

Budget constraints and an increasing population of female prisoners compelled New Mexico toward seeking assistance from Corrections Corporation of America for construction and management of the female prison. Results of the contract are reported to be "positive" and "confirm the quality of service provided by the private prison contractor." (Washington Policy Center, 2004 p. 8) in fact quality and costs improvements were noted in the area of: " a well designed facility, Greater operational and administrative flexibility; decentralized authority, higher morale, enthusiasm, and a sense of ownership among line staff; greater experience and leadership among the top administrators; and stricter, 'by the book' governance of inmates.'