Webb conducts hearings on prison population increase

Local, National, Norfolk, Politics 5 Minutes

Senator Jim Webb is conducting Joint Economic Committee hearing this morning to explore the steep increase in the prison population. The hearing is entitled “Mass Incarceration in the United States: At What Cost?” and will include testimony from experts in the field. One of those scheduled to appear is Norfolk’s own Alphonso Albert, who is executive director of the Second Chances program. Second Chances is a program designed for Norfolk residents that have been incarcerated and are now ex-offenders. The goal of the program is to to reduce the recidivism rate of incarcerated individuals by providing opportunities for employment and social inclusion.

The hearings started at 10am this morning. According to this page, you should be able to view the hearings live; however, I have been unable to connect.

UPDATE: The video is not working but the audio is here. (Scroll down to SH-216.) Also, the text of Webb’s opening remarks are below the fold.

 

I would like to thank Chairman Schumer for agreeing to hold this important hearing and allowing me the opportunity to chair it. I would also like to thank our witnesses for appearing today. Following my remarks, I would ask Vice-Chair Maloney and Senator Brownback to make their opening statements.

Over the course of the period from the mid-1970s until today, the United States has embarked on one of the largest public policy experiments in our history, yet this experiment remains shockingly absent from public debate: the United States now imprisons a higher percentage of its citizens than any other country in the world.

In the name of “getting tough on crime,” there are now 2.1 million Americans in federal, state, and local prisons and jails — more people than the populations of New Mexico, West Virginia, or several other states. Compared to our democratic, advanced market economy counterparts, the United States has more people in prison by several orders of magnitude.

All tolled, more than 7 million Americans are under some form of correction supervision, including probation and parole.

America’s incarceration rate raises several serious questions. These include: the correlation between mass imprisonment and crime rates, the impact of incarceration on minority communities and women, the economic costs of the prison system, criminal justice policy, and transitioning ex-offenders back into their communities and into productive employment. Equally important, the prison system today calls into question the effects on our society more broadly.

As Winston Churchill noted in 1910, “The mood and temper of the public in regard to the treatment of crime and criminals is one of the most unfailing tests of the civilization of any country.” With the world’s largest prison population, our prisons test the limits of our democracy and push the boundaries of our moral identity.

The growth in the prison population is only nominally related to crime rates. Just last week in the Washington Post, the deputy director of the Bureau of Justice Statistics stated that “the growth [in the incarceration rate] wasn’t really about increase[ed] crime but how we chose to respond to crime.”

The steep increase in the number of people in prison is driven, according to most experts, by changes in drug policy and tougher sentencing, and not necessarily an increase in crime. Also, the composition of prison admissions has shifted toward less serious offenses: parole violations and drug offenses. Nearly 6 in 10 persons in state prison for a drug offense have no history of violence or significant selling activity. In 2005, four out of five drug arrests were for possession and only one out of five were for sales.

Is incarcerating low-level drug offenders working, particularly given recidivism rates?

The racial composition of America’s prisons is alarming. Although African Americans constitute 14 percent of regular drug users, they are 37 percent of those arrested for drug offenses, and 56 percent of persons in state prisons for drug crimes. African Americans serve nearly as much time in federal prisons for drug offenses as whites do for violent crimes.

A black male who does not finish high school now has a 60 percent chance of going to jail. One who has finished high school has a 30 percent chance. We have reached a point where the principal nexus between young African-American men and our society is increasingly the criminal justice system.

Moreover, we are spending enormous amounts of money to maintain the prison system. The combined expenditures of local, state, and federal governments for law enforcement and corrections personnel total over $200 billion. Prison construction and operation has become sought after, if uncertain, tools of economic growth for rural communities.

Are there ways to spend less money, enhance public safety, and make a fairer prison system?

Having such a large prison population also has significant employment and productivity implications. The economic output of prisoners is mostly lost to society while they are imprisoned. These negative productivity effects continue after release. As we’ve gotten tough on crime, we’ve given up on rehabilitating offenders. And we’ve created additional barriers to reentry with “invisible punishments.” These include ineligibility for certain government benefits, such as housing, public assistance, or student loans. It is no longer possible to pay your debt to society.

We want to keep bad people off our streets. We want to break the back of gangs, and we want to cut down on violent behavior. But there’s something else going on when we’re locking up such a high percentage of our people, marking them at an early age and in many cases eliminating their chances for a productive life as full citizens. It will take years of energy to address these problems. But I am committed to working on a solution that is both responsive to our needs for law and order, and fairer to those ensnared by this system.

I welcome the thoughts of our witnesses today regarding these important topics, and a continuing national dialogue to address these enormous policy issues.

I would like to introduce today’s witnesses:

Professor Glenn Loury is the Merton P. Stoltz Professor of the Social Sciences at the Department of Economics at Brown University. He has taught previously at Boston, Harvard and Northwestern Universities, and the University of Michigan. Mr. Loury is a distinguished academic economist who has contributed to a variety of areas in applied microeconomic theory and written on racial inequality.

Professor Bruce Western is the Director of the Multidisciplinary Program in Inequality and Social Policy at the Kennedy School of Government. He taught at Princeton University from 1993 to 2007. Dr. Western’s work has focused on the role of incarceration in social and economic inequality in American society. He is the author of Punishment and Inequality in America, a study of the growth and social impact of the American penal system.

Alphonso Albert is the Director of Second Chances, in Norfolk, Virginia, a program designed to provide comprehensive support services that lead to full-time employment and social stability for those individuals impacted by the stigma of being labeled “ex-offender.” Prior to working with the Second Chances Program, Mr. Albert served as the Assistant Director and Business Liaison for the City of Norfolk’s Enterprise Community initiative, Norfolk Works Inc.

Michael P. Jacobson is the director of the Vera Institute of Justice. He is the author of Downsizing Prisons: How to Reduce Crime and End Mass Incarceration. Prior to joining Vera, he was a professor at the City University of New York Graduate Center and the John Jay College of Criminal Justice. He has served as New York City’s Correction Commissioner, Probation Commissioner, and Deputy Budget Director.

Pat Nolan is the Vice-President of Prison Fellowship, where he focuses on efforts to ensure that offenders are better prepared to live healthy, productive, law-abiding lives on their release. He served fifteen years in the California State Assembly, four of them as the Assembly Republican Leader. Mr. Nolan has appeared before Congress to testify on matters such as prison work programs, juvenile justice and religious freedom.

Witnesses should please limit their remarks to five minutes, although their entire statements will be entered into the record. After all the witnesses have presented their testimony, we will move to questions.

Published

4 thoughts on “Webb conducts hearings on prison population increase”

  1. Interesting how the correlation to the increase of drug related crimes and punishment rose significantly due to the increased interest in these crimes. If drug abusers were incarcerated separately away from much more violent offenders, you would see two things. One, that the prison system is heavy with drug abusers, a majority who are black and two, the rate of return of offenders would drop significantly. Add in the cost of rehabilitation with mandatory classroom attendance, you will begin to see rapid change from drug user to productive citizen. It is the mixing of drug offenders with harden violent criminals that causes distrust within society of any released felon. This vicious cycle has got to stop. The war on drugs is not winnable by stocking our jail system with human cargo. Thank you Jim Webb for addressing this issue.

  2. More facts provided by Webb’s office:

    § The United States has the highest reported incarceration rate in the world. While the United States currently incarcerates 750 inmates per 100,000 persons, the world average rate is 166 per 100,000 persons. Russia, the country with the second highest incarceration rate, imprisons 624 per 100,000 persons. Compared to its democratic, advanced market economy counterparts, the United States has more people in prison by several orders of magnitude. Although crime rates have decreased since 1990, the rate of imprisonment has continued to increase.

    § Growth in the prison population is due to changing policy, not increased crime. Many criminal justice experts have found that the increase in the incarceration rate is the product of changes in penal policy and practice, not changes in crime rates. Changes in sentencing, both in terms of time served and the range of offenses meriting incarceration, underlie the growth in the prison population.

    § Changes in drug policy have had the single greatest impact on criminal justice policy. The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 created mandatory minimum sentences for possession of specific amounts of cocaine. The Act instituted a 100-to-1 differential in the treatment of powder and crack cocaine, treating possession of 5 grams of crack cocaine the same as possession of 500 grams of powder cocaine. Crack cocaine is typically consumed by the poor, while powder cocaine, a significantly more expensive drug, is consumed by wealthier users. Mandatory minimum sentences for low-level crack-cocaine users are comparable (and harsher in certain cases) to sentences for major drug dealers.

    § The composition of prison admissions has also shifted toward less serious offenses, characterized by parole violations and drug offenses. In 2005, four out of five drug arrests were for possession and one out of five were for sales. The crime history for three-quarters of drug offenders in state prisons involved non-violent or drug offenses.

    § The prison system has a disproportionate impact on minority communities. African Americans, who make-up 12.4 percent of the population, represent more than half of all prison inmates, compared to one-third twenty years ago. Although African Americans constitute 14 percent of regular drug users, they are 37 percent of those arrested for drug offenses, and 56 percent of persons in state prisons for drug crimes. African Americans serve nearly as much time in federal prisons for drug offenses as whites do for violent crimes.

    § The U.S. prison system has enormous economic costs associated with prison construction and operation, productivity losses, and wage effects. In 2006, states spent an estimated $2 billion on prison construction, three times the amount they were spending fifteen years earlier. The combined expenditures of local governments, state governments, and the federal government for law enforcement and corrections total over $200 billion annually. In addition to these costs, the incarceration rate has significant costs associated with the productivity of both prisoners and ex-offenders. The economic output of prisoners is mostly lost to society while they are imprisoned. Negative productivity effects continue after release. This wage penalty grows with time, as previous imprisonment can reduce the wage growth of young men by some 30 percent.

    § Prisons are housing many of the nation’s mentally ill. Prisons are absorbing the cost of housing the nation’s mentally ill. The number of mentally ill in prison is nearly five times the number in inpatient mental hospitals. Large numbers of mentally ill inmates, as well as inmates with HIV, tuberculosis, and hepatitis also raise serious questions regarding the costs and distribution of health care resources.

    § The United States faces enormous problems of offender reentry and recidivism. The number of ex-offenders reentering their communities has increased fourfold in the past two decades. On average, however, two out of every three released prisoners will be rearrested and one in two will return to prison within three years of release.

  3. “Although crime rates have decreased since 1990, the rate of imprisonment has continued to increase.”

    “Growth in the prison population is due to changing policy, not increased crime.”

    “The composition of prison admissions has also shifted toward less serious offenses, characterized by parole violations and drug offenses.”

    Perhaps there’s a cause-and-effect relationship. As Mayor Giuliani showed when he started prosecuting misdemeanors more vigorously, the crime rate in NYC dropped significantly. Take the criminals off the streets, and they are not committing crimes.

    “Prisons are housing many of the nation’s mentally ill.”

    Yes. Some years ago there was a lawsuit that resulted in the release of many mentally ill who had been involuntarily committed to mental hospitals. This is the result.

    “On average, however, two out of every three released prisoners will be rearrested and one in two will return to prison within three years of release.”

    Then perhaps we should save ourselves the time and trouble and keep them in prison in the first place.

  4. Pingback: Do you believe in redemption? « Vivian J. Paige

Comments are closed.