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.

While McCain, apparently, clings to the ridiculous assertion that incarcerating more than 2.4 million people somehow keeps our country safer, Obama is in favoring of utilizing prison resources more strategically. Too much prison time does not serve the interests of an enlightened society, and Obama has the courage to confront this problem. Along with Justice Anthony Kennedy, Obama agrees that America needs to rethink its prison policy.

Moore reported that as a state Senator Obama helped sponsor legislation intended to reduce prison sentences that unfairly discriminated against ethnic minorities. As an American of Cuban heritage, who has been incarcerated for a non-violent drug offense since 1987, I was elated to read Obama’s position. According to Moore’s article, Obama has said he would instruct the justice department to change mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent drug offenses.

I have been an advocate for prison reform that would encourage offenders to earn freedom through merit since my term began in 1987. Throughout the more than 21 years I have served in prison thus far, I have worked to build a record that would convince taxpayers and legislators that our prison system needs reform. My own journey is thoroughly and indisputably documented on www.MichaelSantos.net, tangible proof of my personal commitment to reentry into society as a law-abiding, contributing citizen.

High recidivism rates show that prisons, as they operate today, waste billions of taxpayer dollars and perpetuate failure. Senator Jim Webb (D-Virginia) held a symposium at George Mason University in October 2008 that called for sensible sentencing and prison reform. Under an Obama administration, and with a liberal Congress, changes may come soon. Prison reform, like federal parole and opportunities to earn freedom may come into law within the first 100 days of the new Presidency. That is one reason I urge all voters to elect democrats. We need a more sensible approach to America’s prison system.

Let freedom ring!

The post Let Freedom Ring! appeared first on Prison News Blog.

Karl Rove’s electoral map showed that if the election were held today, Obama would win more than 300 electoral votes. Although I know the polls may tighten, I am hoping and praying for a Democratic landslide.

For today, at least, I and all prisoners have reason to hope for meaningful prison reform. If Democrats win strong majorities in both houses of Congress, and Obama wins the White House, I expect that parole and other opportunities to earn freedom will be legislated into law. America needs to use all of its resources more effectively. Warehousing humanity may serve the interests of prison lobbyists, though at more than $60 billion per year and with high recidivism rates, clearly those interests do not serve the needs of an enlightened society.

Despite having no history of violence or previous imprisonment, I have been locked inside federal prisons for longer than 21 years. I have educated myself, sustained family and community relationships, and made meaningful contributions to society through my publications. It serves no purpose for taxpayers to fund my continued incarceration, especially now that I’m confined in a minimum-security camp.

The senseless imprisonment of non-violent offenders costs taxpayers billions of dollars and incalculable losses of human capital. Our country needs change, and improvement to our prison system represents one area of reform that I welcome. I want to return home to my wife and family. I am hopeful a Democratic victory will bring meaningful prison reform.

I urge Americans to vote for Democrats on November 4th.

The post The Time is Now for Prison Reform in America appeared first on Prison News Blog.

With a liberal Congress, we will see legislation that encourages prisoners to earn freedom. Instead of measuring prison terms with decades-long sentences marked by nothing more than the turning of calendar pages, Democratic lawmakers will usher in prison reform that includes parole, opportunities to earn more good time, and programs that help offenders emerge from prison as successful, contributing citizens.

I have been incarcerated since 1987. This November marks the sixth Presidential election I have witnessed as a prisoner. The right-wing Republicans that have alternatively controlled both the legislative and executive branches of government have enacted legislation that decimated opportunities for prisoners to earn freedom. They eliminated parole. They took away funding for educational programs. They reduced good time. They sought a more punitive system that has spawned 70% recidivism rates.

We need a more sensible prison system. Democrats will likely reinstate parole, increase opportunities to earn good time, and sponsor programs that encourage education rather than extinguishing hope. Instead of vengeance, liberal policies will encourage prisoners to earn freedom. I have been working toward freedom for more than 21 years. Under the current right-wing system, however, no mechanism exists for inmates to earn freedom. Such shortsighted policies are not good for America.

For more information on strategies to emerge from prison successfully, I recommend reading my articles on MichaelSantos.net.

The post Obama for Prison Reform appeared first on Prison News Blog.

Good morning Toastmasters and guests. Thank you for the honor of your attendance and attention.

I want everyone in this room to know that I stand here with an immense amount of optimism, and I am convinced that my good spirits come with a sound basis in reality. As most of you know, on Tuesday, March 11, the United States Senate passed The Second Chance Act of 2007. Members of the House of Representatives passed that same legislation late last year. According to a March 12 report from the Wall Street Journal, the Bill will be sent to President Bush for signature. The process has thus begun to make the Second Chance Act law.

Many people here at Taft Camp have questioned me on whether I think this legislation will change anything within the federal prison system. I do.
Others have expressed pessimism, believing that administrators will drag their feet in implementing changes, and that in the end, all policies will remain the same. Although I can understand and appreciate such cynicism, my experience compels me to respectfully disagree.

To explain the position that I am taking, I want to discuss this legislation from a historical perspective. Then I will provide details that Congress has published with the Act, and there are many. Based on those details, I have taken the initiative to offer suggestions for administrators both at this institution and within the BOP, and I will share those suggestions with you.

As I said, I want to begin from a historical perspective. What I would like to do is take you all back to 1989. Back then, I don’t expect that anyone in this room—other than me—was thinking about the criminal justice system. Certainly none of you thought that the possibility of serving time in prison would have been a complication you would have to confront.

Yet in 1989, I was already in my second year of confinement. Back then I was confined inside the high walls of the United States Penitentiary in Atlanta. You may be surprised to learn that many of the prisoners in high security paid close attention to politics. The reason, of course, was that political leaders influenced the policies that governed the lives of people in prison.

As you may remember, George Herbert Walker Bush defeated Michael Dukakis in the 1988 Presidential election; the first Bush took office from Ronald Reagan in 1989. The time that I want to remind you about was President Bush’s first address to the nation from the Oval office. Hundreds of prisoners sat inside the second-floor auditorium at USP Atlanta to watch President Bush’s televised discussion.

The purpose of President Bush’s speech was to warn Americans of the biggest threat facing America. He held up a bag of cocaine and said that the drugs he was holding had been purchased just a few blocks away from the White House. President Bush warned that it wasn’t only drugs that was threatening America, but an entire crime wave that threatened every citizen. He urged Congress to get tough on crime. Congress responded.

There is a long history of hysteria influencing legislation in this country and around the world. As recently as two weeks ago, I read an article in the USA Today newspaper indicating that in 1954, our nation faced a hysteria over comic books. Leaders in society were convinced that comic books threatened the values of our country; they were turning children into incorrigible juvenile delinquents. Legislators held hearings and put pressure on comic book artists and publishers. Soon there were rules that prohibited comic books from depicting law enforcement, courts, or any part of the establishment in a demeaning way. That may seem crazy in today’s world of violent video games and other content that has become so much a part of our society. Yet history shows that legislation and acceptance follows leadership. People have a tendency to act without thinking when leaders ask.

Look back further in world history. Some people in this room may be familiar with the Grand Inquisition, which resulted in tens of thousands losing their lives through hideous torture because those in power felt challenged by contrary beliefs. We can look at Salem witch trials that occurred much earlier in our country. Why? Because leaders felt threatened and needed a cause to unite the people, and sometimes leaders rely on fear and hatred to unite.

When President Bush held up that bag of cocaine in the Oval office for all Americans to see, he ignited a panic across our great land. Suddenly, Americans feared the great crime wave. Congress responded by passing legislation that showed how tough those leaders were on crime. The new laws did not only have an influence on people convicted of drug offenses. Every person in prison suffered.

Legislation that passed in 1984 had already abolished parole and decimated opportunities to earn good time. President Bush’s speech, however, persuaded Congress to do more. The Congress passed legislation that would prohibit prisoners from funding college educations with Pell grants. It took away funding programs to assist people upon release. The nation became much more punitive. No matter how tough legislators made laws and the conditions of confinement, American citizens were hungry for more.

The mood of the country then was somber, at least as related to those who had been convicted of breaking laws. Administrators of these prisons imposed the will of the people. No one wanted to risk being labeled “soft on crime” by arguing that people in prison needed programs to emerge successfully. The lust was for punishment, punishment, punishment. Society wanted its pound of flesh.

No one questioned what the costs of this lust for punishment would be, neither in human nor in financial terms. People did not ask whether the draconian approach to criminal justice was right. Legislators had passed the laws, and that settled all discussion on the matter.

Of course our country has a history of accepting laws, regardless of whether those laws are right. Everyone in this room knows that at one time our laws approved slavery as being right. In fact, our country’s original Constitution held that some people only counted as three-fifths of a human being. Yet many citizens were loathe to question or change such deplorable positions.

Other bad laws included the Alien and Sedition Act that President John Adams passed to quell dissent. Under those laws, anyone who expressed dissent from government leadership was vulnerable to prosecution and time in prison. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or other right-wing fanatics would not have been able to avoid the penitentiary if those laws remained on our books.

At various times in our history, Congress had passed laws that made it a crime to drink alcohol, or for women to vote. Those laws, I remind you, were rooted in public hysteria that was once launched by leadership. Voters accepted them without question. Such was the same response to George Bush’s call for tougher rather than smarter approaches to crime.

Well, gentlemen, we are no longer in 1989. America’s citizens are no longer willing to accept those simple-minded responses to criminal justice. In fact, some of America’s most influential scholars and leaders began calling for change a few years ago. In 2003, at a conference before the American Bar Association, Justice Anthony Kennedy of the U.S. Supreme Court gave a keynote address on the ineffective reliance on our nation’s prison system. He said that our resources were being misspent, our punishments were too severe, and that our sentences were too long.

In 2004, during his State of the Union speech, the current President Bush spoke about the need for legislation that would help released offenders re-enter society. A wave of studies were then published that urged legislators to change the way our system operated.

Two of the most recent studies that have been widely cited include the one titled Unlocking America, and another known as The Pew Report. Both of those studies were presented by some of America’s leading penologists. Some statistics that I extricated from those reports follow:

• In 1970, our country incarcerated fewer than 200,000 people.
• In 2007, we incarcerated more than 2.3 million people.
• Our nation processes more than 10 million people into jails and prisons each year.
• Americans serve sentences that are significantly longer than anywhere else in the world.
• Our nation pays more than $60 billion per year to confine our prisoners, more than $200 billion per year to fund our criminal justice system.

The Pew Report held that 1 in every 53 people in their 20s was behind bars. That same report held that 1 in every 36 Hispanic men over 18 was incarcerated; for black men that number climbed to 1 in every 15. Between the ages of 20 to 34, 1 in every 9 black men was in prison. Overall, 1 in every 99 U.S. adults was incarcerated. These numbers come at an extraordinary cost. In Oregon, for example, 11 cents of every dollar in the state’s general fund is spent on corrections. While prison funds have escalated, American investment in education has not kept pace. In fact, our nation’s lust to punish over the past 30 years has boosted budgets on prison spending far beyond that of any other programs.

Some may ask why, or how this spending grew so out of control. As I mentioned at the beginning of this speech, my observations suggest that tougher punishments had roots in claims from our leadership that America faced a crime wave. By holding up that bag of cocaine in the Oval office, and using his awesome influence to tell Americans that we needed to toughen up on crime, President Bush launched the War-on-Crime lobby. They argued for harsh mandatory punishments to incapacitate, deter, and punish. Broadcasters recognized that reporting on crime drew large audiences, and so crime reports led the news. Soon contractors and suppliers of these prisons began arguing for more government spending to fund the prison boom. Our nation’s leadership had spread misconceptions that drove a perfect storm for the imprisonment binge.

That growth in our prison system, however, came with consequences. People in prison couldn’t support their children. Prisons alienated offenders from their communities. Those who returned to society struggled to overcome the stigma of incarceration. Tough treatment resulted in a cycle of recidivism.

America is now taking notice of the ineffectiveness of our criminal justice system. Every day, media reports are showing that the approach of the past 20 years has cost too much, in terms of both financial dollars and human lives. The hysteria to confine is dead. Americans are now calling for a smarter approach to the criminal justice system, and the Second Chance Act of 2007 represents the first Bill of prison and sentence reform; I expect that we will see many more in the years to come.

From a personal perspective, I can tell you all that this is a huge change. As I have published in the various books that I have written, prison administrators have told me in the past that they had no interest in steps I was taking to prepare for a law-abiding life upon release. Their only concern was the security of the institution. This historic legislation, however, will change that mission. Now, Congress is demanding that prison administrators prepare offenders for re-entry. I am optimistic because Congress has published some categorical statements with this Act. In fact, the stated purpose of the Act is to “Break the cycle of recidivism.”

Further, the Act proposes “to rebuild ties between offenders and their families, while offenders are incarcerated… to promote stable families and communities.” To me, this means huge changes are to come.

From a political perspective, I also am encouraged by the promising candidacy of Barack Obama. My hopes are that he will win the White House, as I am convinced that he offers the most hope for a new style of leadership. With Obama, the chances for prison reform increase exponentially. In a speech he delivered in Philadelphia, Senator Obama spoke about the importance of prison ministries. He spoke about young men languishing in our prisons without hope or prospects for the future. He spoke about ensuring fairness in our criminal justice system. That is the type of leadership I want to govern our country, and I am convinced that Obama will do more to unite this nation than any President since Lincoln.

Those are the reasons that I stand before you with optimism today. Although the Second Chance Act of 2007 may not provide us with a get-out-of-jail-free card, or give us $200 when we pass “Go,” it is a start in the direction toward real prison reform. That gives me hope.

Personally, I am nearly finished with my sentence. But after 21 years in prison, I still feel a connection with every other man in confinement. I may not receive much benefit from the prison reform that I am predicting, but I feel as if I am brother with each of you. I know the struggles of living in separation from those I love. I know the struggles of preparing for meaningful lives. Yet I feel a great sense of hope that the people who are beginning long sentences today will see significant change within the next three years.

With the Second Chance Act, some of the immediate benefits include more access to halfway house, and the possibility of release to home confinement for elderly offenders. More important to me, however, was the expanded duties of prison administrators. Congress has recognized the importance of family ties. Specifically, the Act found evidence to suggest that inmates who are connected to their children and families were more likely to avoid incidents, and that released prisoners cited family support as the most important factors in helping them stay out of prison. Because Congress also found that families were an often underutilized resource in the re-entry process, my hopes are that administrators will institute more opportunities for those of us in prison to nurture closer family and community ties. In an effort to help administrators understand how they could expand programs to implement the will of Congress, I offered suggestions to the warden at Taft Camp and to administrators in Washington. To nurture closer family ties, I wrote, administrators ought to expand access to visiting. They should eliminate the 300-minute telephone restriction, or in the alternative, they should encourage inmates to earn supplemental phone and visiting privileges through good behavior and program participation. They should introduce the inmate e-mail program to all prisons. Inmates ought to earn access to furloughs through objective means, and eligible inmates ought to have the ability to attend academic or vocational programs on campus at local colleges. Further, inmates ought to be able to sit on a guidance committee through which they can make suggestions to administrators that would help inmates preserve and nurture community ties.

Rather than continuing to govern prisons in a manner that conditioned inmates to fail upon release, I am optimistic that the Second Chance Act of 2007 will push administrators to implement helpful programs. In fact, the legislation requires the Director of the Bureau of Prisons to report to Congress regularly; he must describe steps he is taking to reduce recidivism. That is an obligation that has not existed before, and it bodes well for every individual serving time in America. That is my take on this historic legislation. It is the reason that I am so optimistic for additional legislation on prison reform in years to come.

The post Speech on Second Chance Act appeared first on Prison News Blog.

I keep track of my daily progress by recording my activities in a weekly planner. When this year began, I knew that we would have several events to help the time pass faster. This being an election year, my daily entries show that I’ve been following the primary elections closely. I subscribe to several news magazines to keep me current with political events, and most evenings I watch the national television news or listen to reports on NPR. This year there has been so much to follow.

As a long-term prisoner, I am especially hopeful that Barack Obama wins the White House. After the first three months of the year, his candidacy is the strongest, despite recent controversy over remarks from his former pastor. With Obama, I am convinced that America would end Bush’s war in Iraq, bring health care to all Americans, enjoy a better economy, and perhaps most important on a personal level, move toward real and meaningful prison reform.

Besides the legislation that an Obama Presidency may inspire, I’m pleased to see that the 2008 Congress has passed The Second Chance Act of 2007. According to a press release from the Bill’s sponsor, Representative Danny Davis, President Bush will sign this Bill into law at a signing ceremony on April 9, 2008. To me, this historic legislation bodes well for the possibility of programs that will enable those of us in confinement to build stronger ties to family and community. I have written an article and a speech that describes why the Second Chance Act encourages me. Readers who are interested may review those writings.

This quarter has given me several speaking opportunities as well. In mid-February I was able to travel to Bakersfield with our outreach program to speak with at-risk adolescents about the perils of criminal lifestyles. Besides that outing, I enjoyed the privilege of making presentations to audiences here at Taft Camp. In one speech, I spoke about the development of leadership skills and in another I described the Second Chance Act from a historical perspective. Speaking before large groups opens opportunities to build upon skills that will help my transition to society. I value those opportunities and devote scores of hours to preparation. For my speech on leadership I pulled information from several books that I recently read, and for my speech on the Second Chance Act I took detailed notes from many sources. After writing each speech, I practiced my delivery, devoting many hours in an effort to come across in a lucid, polished manner. Regardless of what career I pursue upon release, I am convinced that the development of effective communication skills will prove a valuable resource.

To that end, and as I outlined in my goals at the beginning of this year, I devote a significant amount of time to reading and writing each day. In the first quarter I read 12 books, each of which had a direct influence on my preparations for release. I’ve written a brief report on each book I read, and for some of those books I recorded detailed notes that will advance my writing projects.

I also spent hundreds of hours writing a new manuscript. Previously I wrote about that book with a working title 25 Years to the Door. I have written three versions of an opening sequence for that memoir. Each version had at least 15,000 words, but none satisfied me. I chucked them all. This memoir will be an important component of my release plan. Since I will not submit the manuscript for publication until I am much closer to release, I intend to continue working on the manuscript with hopes of creating a compelling memoir. I have changed the title, though, to The 45-Year Gift.

My exercise has been progressing in accordance with the schedule I set. In early March, I attempted to add evening tennis games to my routine. On my second night of playing, however, I snapped the muscle in my right calf. That injury has been plaguing me since. The pain put an immediate suspension to tennis. Worse than the loss of tennis games, it stopped my ability to run on the track. The pain is too severe. Fortunately, I’ve been able to exercise by running on the elliptical machine and exercise with the stair climber; as long as there is no heavy impact, I’m able to keep up with my goal of logging more than 40 miles each week, and more than seven hours of weekly exercise. My weight remains constant between 173 and 176 pounds.

In light of the Second Chance Act, I expect release to a halfway house no later than August of 2012. Release could possibly come as early as 2011, depending on a decision from the parole board. If Obama wins the Presidency, I anticipate prison reform could result in my release as soon as 2010. Because of these developments, my wife and I have had to make adjustments to our plans for my release.

Carole graduates from nursing school in May. Our original plans had been for her to continue advancing her professional credentials, however, as a consequence of my anticipated earlier release, Carole and I have decided that we should change those plans. Rather than continuing with another year of schooling, Carole will sit for the board exams to provide her with nationally recognized nursing credentials, followed by relocation to Kern County. That way, she can begin working and contributing to a savings plan that will help my transition to society. Her relocation will ease her commute for weekly visits as well.

I am immensely proud of both Carole and our daughter Nichole. Together we have set a plan in place, and this June Nichole will graduate one year ahead of schedule from high school while Carole brings more stability to our family with her nursing degree. We’re all enthusiastic about the opportunities we will open through the remainder of 2008 and beyond. The hefty monetary fine I received at sentencing in 1988 expired during the month of March, so Carole and I are free to make progress toward our financial security. Life is really moving forward in meaningful ways as I finish these final years in confinement.

Although I expect legislative changes that could advance my release date, the bottom line is that I have nearly 21 years of imprisonment behind me. I am moving closer to home, and I feel better than ever. The support I receive from so many is a blessing, and for that I am grateful.

The post First Quarter Report, Taft Prison Camp 2008 appeared first on Prison News Blog.