Professor Jana Craft from the business school at Saint Mary’s University in Minnesota sent me the article from the peer-reviewed Journal of International Business (Volume 2, Spring 2010). David Geenens, Director of Graduate Business Programs at Benedictine College wrote the article. He was an authority on the subject because prior to becoming an academic, Mr. Geenens ran the Impact Design business that operated inside the Kansas prison.

The article encouraged me because it showed the benefits that would come to so many facets of American society if prison systems worked in partnership with businesses and citizens in the private sector. Too many citizens in our country have distorted perceptions of the ever-growing subculture that proliferates inside of prison boundaries. Lobbyists who have vested interests in the growth of America’s prison system perpetuate such myths, but they come at the expense of the taxpayer. Our society now incarcerates more than 2.3 million people, and I’ve read reports suggesting that warehousing so many people costs taxpayers $75 billion each year.

David Geenens served as president of Impact Design, a private company that manufactured specialty sports apparel for college students. In an effort to meet demands of that changing marketplace, Mr. Geenens approached the officials at the state prison to inquire about the possibility of establishing a factory inside prison boundaries. The factory would offer prisoners opportunities to learn marketable skills and earn resources that would help them transition into society as law-abiding citizens.

Prison officials found authority for such partnerships with the private sector through Congressional legislation commonly known as the PIE Program (Prison Industry Enhancement certification program) that passed in 1979. In order to comply with the requirements of the PIE Program, Mr. Geenens’ company, Impact Design, paid the prisoners who accepted employment minimum wage or better. Impact Design made appropriate deductions from each prisoner’s gross wages. Those deductions served the interest of Kansas taxpayers by paying numerous taxes, contributing to crime victim compensation funds, offsetting each prisoner’s cost of confinement, and enabling prisoners who worked in the Impact Design plant with opportunities to build a savings account. The earnings prisoners saved could help them meet the expenses associated with reentry such as housing, clothing, food, and transportation costs necessary to find employment.

Prison guards (who like to be called correctional officers) resent progressive programs like Impact Design because they threaten the high recidivism rates that keep the prison system booming. If prisoners learn new skills and develop financial resources, they’re more likely to emerge from confinement as law-abiding citizens. Although such an outcome would be good for American citizens, it “threatens the security of prison institutions” in the same way that smoking-cessation programs threaten tobacco manufacturers. Expecting prison officials to enthusiastically support programs that lower recidivism rates would be akin to expecting tobacco companies to enthusiastically support programs that help people refrain from smoking.

If taxpayers could see the many ways that programs like the one Mr. Geenens spearheaded at the Kansas State Prison, more people would support prison reform. I’ll do my best to bring such programs to the attention of all Americans.

The post Benefits of Prison Reform appeared first on Prison News Blog.

http://criminaljustice.change.org/blog/view/f_is_still_for_failure

The post F is Still For Failure appeared first on Prison News Blog.

Early this morning I heard an NPR broadcast report that Attorney General Eric Holder had traveled to New Orleans to investigate the massive oil spill caused by British Petroleum. Mr. Holder announced that the Justice Department had opened a criminal investigation into the disaster, and that if the investigation concluded that people had broken the law, criminal trials would follow. Both the pursuit of justice and the clean-up of that environmental catastrophe may require many years, and the United States is missing a great opportunity to make use of federal prisoners who could help on both fronts.

As I watch the daily coverage of news reports that show how millions of gallons of oil are contaminating the environment and hurting the Gulf Coast residents’ way of life, I wonder why prison officials haven’t initiated a program to make use of labor that minimum security prisons could provide. Although I’ve never spent time in the Gulf Coast, clearly I can see that our country needs manpower deployed in the region. Every day the 500 prisoners in the minimum-security camp at Taft serve represents a complete waste of human resources. I will spend my day exercising and writing, but during times like these, I know that my fellow prisoners and I could serve our country better with shovels in hands, working to clean the beaches from the massive oil spill in the Gulf region.

It’s not only the minimum-security prisoners at Taft who could help. More than 40,000 prisoners are confined in camps across the United States. That’s a lot of wasted manpower because prison administrators have classified every prisoner in camp as presenting zero threat to the public safety.

Administrators and legislators fail America by not creating programs that make better use of minimum-security prisoners. People in prison are resources, and as an enlightened society, American justice should include mechanisms to make the best use of all resources. I could make a contribution with a shovel, or with a power point presentation that would convince executives to abide by the law. Many of my fellow prisoners could do the same.

Our federal prison system is “a national disgrace” as Senator Jim Webb declared, not only because of the injustice and massive costs to taxpayers, but also because of its tragic waste of human resources. We serve ridiculously long sentences that satisfy public vengeance, not justice.

The post Catastrophe in the Gulf: Utilize Prisoners as Manpower appeared first on Prison News Blog.

Most Popular Posts by Michael Santos

• What Happened to Prison Reform?
• Do Longer Prison Sentences Make the Public Safer?
• The View from Inside: Prison Time Doesn’t Equal Justice
• Take Action on Long-Term Imprisonment
• Bring Back Federal Parole

And here’s a related article addressing the issue of prison lobbyists vs. prison reform: 

First Solve Prison Crisis, then Fix California’s Budget
by Dick Price‚ Mar. 16‚ 2010

 http://www.beyondchron.org/articles/First_Solve_Prison_Crisis_then_Fix_California_s_Budget_7915.html

The post Prison Lobbyists vs Prison Reform appeared first on Prison News Blog.

http://criminaljustice.change.org/blog/view/mad_as_hell_about_the_failed_us_prison_system

Mad As Hell About the Failed U.S. Prison System

by Michael Hamden

category: Prison Reform

Published March 10, 2010 @ 05:34AM PT

Yeah, I’m angry. I’m all riled up because our misguided criminal justice policies destroy individuals, families and entire communities. I’m steamed because at a time of financial crisis worse than any downturn since the Great Depression, government throws away billions of dollars (more than $39 billion, by most estimates) on policies that have proven to be abject failures. And I’m furious that people continue to call for ever harsher sentences, penalties and the further stigmatization of offenders in the face of overwhelming evidence that current practices are counter-productive and unsustainable.

It’s especially frustrating, because we know that there are more positive, effective means of holding criminals accountable that are far more successful and far less costly.

The insatiable desire for vengeance is itself mad! The statistics are stark, and by now familiar. The U.S. incarcerates more people than any other country in the world, whether you consider it in terms of a percentage of the population or in absolute numbers. Yes, more than South Africa during the years of apartheid. More than the Soviet Union before its dissolution. More than China. And more even than the brutal regime of North Korea. Shameful!

Roughly 2.4 million people are locked up in this country, many for nonviolent offenses. Some reports conclude that as many as 50% of federal prisoners are serving time for drug-related offenses. (In some future article, I’m sure I’ll get around to discussing the draconian drug laws that infringe personal liberty in this “land of the free,” but at the moment there are bigger fish to fry.)

It’s crazy! It costs an average of about $24,000 a year to lock somebody up. But years of experience, social science research and common sense all point to work, education and the strengthening of family and community ties as the best way to bring criminal offenders back into the fold. And after all, given that 95% of prisoners eventually return to our communities, shouldn’t that be our objective?

Prisoners are people just like us: sons and daughters, brothers and sisters and mothers and fathers of people we all know. And in case you don’t think you could possibly find yourself among them, staring out from a small, foul-smelling cell through cold steel bars, think again. There are more than 4,000 federal criminal laws, and vastly more federal regulations that can lead to criminal penalties. Additional laws and regulations at the state level mean that virtually everyone violates the law every day.

Don’t believe it? How ’bout on the highway? Your taxes? And, hey! Ever heard of the “honest services” law? Under that laudable piece of legislation, a person can be convicted and sentenced to prison for depriving another of “honest services.” (18 U.S.C. § 1346, just in case you’re doubtful.) What are “honest services,” you might well ask?  No one knows because the law doesn’t define them and the courts have yet to decide. The issue was heard by the Supreme Court on March 1 (Skiling v. U.S., Docket No. 08-1394), but at least until a decision is announced, don’t take anything home from your job.  Be sure to perform your work competently, and for goodness sake, be punctual. It simply wouldn’t do to be late for work or stay too long on a break. It might turn out to be criminal! So, be kind to your fine feathered friends. For a duck may turn out to be you!

We can find better ways to use $39 billion than locking people away for years at a time, especially when they pose little or no risk to the public. Instead, require the perpetrator to rectify the wrong done (if there was a wrong done). Surely crime victims are better served by being repaid for financial harms sustained or receiving compensation for injuries inflicted. Currently, they have to be content with the offender’s incarceration and an noncollectable restitution order. An offender who’s required to truly “pay” for the crime would be more likely to realize the error of his or her ways than someone who’s warehoused with more dangerous career criminals, and all without access to meaningful opportunities to work and gain an education.

Here’s an idea: Let’s reserve expensive prison cells for those who really must be punished harshly: people, that is, who pose too great a risk to public safety or social order. As for others, let’s see if we can get them to pay for their crimes in rational ways. If such an approach fails, it’s never too late to lock ’em up. To me, that makes a lot more sense. But no politician has ever lost an election by advocating the criminalization of an ever-expanding range of conduct. To many of them, I suppose that abandoning such a potent political lever would seem insane.

Someone defined the term “crazy” as doing the same thing repeatedly, expecting a different result each time. We’d be crazy to continue the failed policies of the past. They simply cannot be sustained. Sooner or later, we’ll run out of money. (Oh, wait. We already have.)

The post Michael Hamden is Mad As Hell About the Failed U.S. Prison System appeared first on Prison News Blog.

Rather than relying on law enforcement’s use of weapons, handcuffs, and prisons alone, Kennedy suggests that persuasion can also prove effective in stopping drug crimes. He instructs law enforcement officers to gather evidence against drug offenders and prepare criminal indictments. Before arresting them and locking the drug offenders into a system that perpetuates failure, he urges the officers to call the suspects in for a candid look at the evidence against them. The officers then give the criminal suspects a choice. Either they can enroll in a program with mentors who will help them develop community values and live as productive citizens, or the officers will go forward with the criminal cases against them and put them through the prison system. That liberal approach, to the chagrin of lock-em-up-and-throw-away-the-key conservatives has proven far more effective in reducing crime.

Prison administrators and legislators ought to consider the valuable lessons Professor Kennedy teaches. The use of intelligence is far more effective than the use of force in fostering safer communities. If prison administrators were to use incentives that would encourage prisoners to work toward developing skills and credentials and resources, the prison lenders would take a huge step toward both lowering recidivism rates and prison operating expenses.

By extinguishing hope for those who serve time in prison, administrators create us-versus-them environments. The more oppressive and controlling the prison regime, the more recalcitrant prisoners become. It is precisely the lack of hope that leads to the proliferation of gangs and violence inside America’s prison system. Such policies contribute to the cycles of failure and unsafe communities, as prisoners revert to crime upon release.

Some prisoners present a danger to law-abiding society and show no interest in living in accordance with the principles of good citizenship. Many more prisoners, however, would welcome opportunities to work toward reconciling with society and earning their freedom. The heavy-handed policies of get-tough politicians, however, keep society locked into a so-called “corrections” policy that is fundamentally flawed. It is the reason that taxpayers must spend $60 billion per year to fund a system that perpetuates failure. Although prisons churn out failure, the system ??? urge to punish.

The post Intelligence Trumps Force, Professor David Kennedy Suggests appeared first on Prison News Blog.

Dr. Manette, if that is the correct spelling, had been a physician before political leaders imprisoned him in a notorious Paris prison known as the Bastille. The doctor had been locked inside the prison for 17 years, and during that time, he lost his sanity. I knew that my own prison term would require me to pass many years in prison, and I wondered then how the decades would influence my life. I did not want to lose my sanity.

Now I have more than 22 years of imprisonment behind me, and I’m scheduled to serve only a few more. I feel as if the adjustments I began making from the beginning of my confinement have prepared me for the challenges that I am certain will accompany my release. I am educated now, I have skills that will translate into a satisfying career, I have a strong support system, and I have created many resources that I can draw upon to ease my transition.

The irony is that I feel as if the system of “corrections” discourages the efforts I have consistently made to prepare for a law-abiding, contributing life upon release. I feel as if the system of corrections wants to influence more prisoners to adjust to confinement in ways like Dr. Manette; the system is designed to condition failure rather than success. That’s why I feel a duty to bring the issue of prison reform to the attention of American citizens.

Those with a vested interested in the current system of corrections have been successful in spewing propaganda that calls for more controls and more restrictions that block offenders from preparing for release. During my imprisonment, I have seen tighter policies that limit prisoner access to telephones, visiting, education, and communities beyond prison boundaries. Such policies hinder prisoners who strive to emerge as contributing citizens, though they succeed in perpetuating cycles of failure with high recidivism rates and higher taxpayer expenditures to fund “corrections.”

We need prison reforms that will offer mechanisms through which prisoners can earn graduated increases in freedom through merit. Rather than discouraging those who strive to prepare for the challenges that await release, prison reforms should encourage proactive adjustments with meaningful incentives. Such prison reforms would lower recidivism rates, lower taxpayer expenditures on corrections, make society safer, and encourage offenders to prepare for law-abiding lives.

The post Prison Administrators Should Not Discourage Successful Adjustments appeared first on Prison News Blog.

The Bonner case described the struggles a federal prisoner was having with the mail room at his institution. The mail room was rejecting mail Bonner had received without notifying him, as is required when inmate mail is rejected. Bonner filed suit, charging that individuals in the mail room, and the warden who set the policies that governed the institution, had violated the inmate’s constitutional rights.

The warden in the case refused to accept responsibility for the culture of failure over which he presided. He set the policies by which all prison staff carried out their duties. The warden was the chief executive officer of the institution, and staff members in all departments followed the warden’s lead. When supervisors of education blocked inmate access to typewriters or computers, it was with the warden’s expressed approval. When unit managers and case managers and counselors blocked inmate access to community programs or preparations for release, it was because the warden authorized and condoned such interferences. And when the mail room caused inmate frustrations by rejecting mail without notifying the inmate, such practices were simply part of the culture of confinement.

It is a culture I have come to know well, as I have been locked within this system for longer than 22 years. Wardens set the tone, and staff members carry out the warden’s mission. I can live with such realities; it’s what I’ve experienced within the prison system, and it’s what I expect from the prison system. Decisions by prison staff members resulted in obstructions to my pursuit of a Ph.D., to the nurturing of my family and community ties, and to my preparations for a contributing, law-abiding life upon release.

In America’s bloated prison system, most wardens instruct and train staff to accept that the highest value is preserving the security of the institution, not preparing offenders for successful re-entry into society. That misguided directive results in preservation of the institution before meeting the needs of society and the individuals it is supposed to serve. Those are management practices, not leadership, and they contribute to higher recidivism rates and higher operating budgets.

In the Bonner case, the warden attempted to extricate himself from the legal complaint by arguing that he did not have any personal involvement in the day-to-day operations of the mail room. Fortunately, the court did not allow the it’s-not-my-fault defense to stand. The warden set the tone, and he had a duty to lead.

My experience has been that most wardens decorate their institutions with platitudes about the importance of preparing offenders for successful re-entry. Yet those signs exist more for visiting dignitaries and tour groups. The actual policies and practices of the institutions interfere with, and even outright obstruct individuals who strive to maintain and nurture family and community ties; they limit inmate access to telephone calls and visits, and they block inmate preparations for release by prohibiting access to computers, or even typewriters in some institutions.

As a long-term prisoner, I’ve devised strategies to thrive in spite of institutional obstacles that block so many of my fellow prisoners from preparing for success upon release. Successful prison adjustments do not materialize by accident. They require prisoners to understand the environment in which they live, to expect administrative efforts to interfere rather than being surprised when they do.

In the twisted world of prisons, the needs of the institution trump the needs of the individual. It presents the classic case of the tail wagging the dog.

The post Prisoners Must Learn to Thrive Despite Administrative Obstacles appeared first on Prison News Blog.

The U.S. Constitution provides the President with the power to pardon people convicted of federal crimes. Different types of pardons exist, however. Through acts of executive clemency, the pardon can forgive or excuse a criminal conviction, amnesty can absolve an individual or a class of individuals from criminal prosecution, a reprieve can postpone the imposition of sanctions, and a sentence commutation can lower the severity of a criminal sentence.

President Obama should reform the pardon process because the federal prison system has become too large. Federal prisons confine more than 200,000 prisoners, and as the pardon process exists today, only the well connected have a chance of making an effective case for the President to consider whether an individual merits consideration for clemency.

When the founders of our country imbued the office of the President with the power to pardon, they did not envision criminal sentences that would confine hundreds of thousands. Further, long-term imprisonment should require some type of review. The interest of justice should warrant an inquiry as to whether multiple decades in prison meet the need of our evolving society. Without a federal parole board in place, the President ought to have a more effective system to evaluate whether continued incarceration is appropriate for all federal prisoners.

 Although an act of executive clemency is really an act of grace, or compassion, if offenders had a mechanism through which they could work toward earning meaningful consideration for clemency, many more prisoners would strive to build records that might advance their candidacy. I would like to see a system in place that would reward those who built long records of working to reconcile with society. President Obama could instruct those within the pardon office to evaluate such offenders on a regular basis, and political connections should not have as much influence on decision as records of merit.

With 200,000 people in federal prison, it seems inconceivable to me that the pardon attorney should consider so few for the grace of clemency. More clemency requests were granted when our nation’s prison system confined fewer than 40,000 prisoners. That evidence suggests the President and the Department of Justice ought to reform the pardon process.

The post Reform the Pardon Process appeared first on Prison News Blog.

Too many American citizens live with delusions that long-term imprisonment makes for safer communities. By isolating and punishing, the thought goes, offenders will refrain from criminal acts in order to avoid the possible sanctions. Some merit exists in the theory that the fears of punishment keeps people in line, thought 22 years of living in prison convinces me that prolonged isolation and punishment renders society less safe and wastes taxpayer resources.

In Professor Joan Petersilia’s work, I read that between the 1920s and 1970, America incarcerated its residents at a rate of 110 per every 100,000 people in the population. Since the 1970s, we’ve increased that rate of imprisonment to more than 700 prisoners for every 100,000 people in our country. America incarcerates more than 2.3 million people, and more than 700,000 prisoners return to society each year.

By only isolating and punishing, society has conditioned those offenders for continuing cycles of failure. That is the reason government statistics show that 67 percent, or two out of every three prisoners, return to confinement within three years of release. This policy of isolation and punishment does not render society safer.

My experience of living in prison convinces me that long-term imprisonment makes society less safe. As people spend decades in confinement, they learn to adjust to confinement in ways that they perceive makes their time pass easier. Without hope for relief, they join gangs, they hustle contraband, they corrupt the institution. As prisoners adjust to confinement negatively, they simultaneously condition themselves for failure upon release.

We need prison reforms that will encourage prisoners to empower themselves. Those reforms should offer opportunities for prisoners to earn freedom through merit. Isolating and punishing only keeps the cycle of failure going. We need a more enlightened approach to corrections. We should start by rewarding success. Perhaps citizens will start the process by supporting my petition for commutation.

The post Squandering Billions on Corrections appeared first on Prison News Blog.