A BILL
To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide an alternate release date for certain nonviolent offenders, and for other purposes.
• Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
• This Act may be cited as the `Federal Prison Bureau Nonviolent Offender Relief Act of 2011′.
SEC. 2. EARLY RELEASE FOR CERTAIN NONVIOLENT OFFENDERS.
• (a) In General- Section 3624 of title 18, United States Code, is amended–
◦ (1) in subsection (a), by inserting `at the early release date provided in subsection (g), if applicable, or otherwise’ after `A prisoner shall be released by the Bureau of Prisons’; and
◦ (2) by adding at the end the following:
• `(g) Early Release for Certain Nonviolent Offenders- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Bureau of Prisons, pursuant to a good time policy, shall release from confinement a prisoner who has served one half or more of his term of imprisonment (including any consecutive term or terms of imprisonment) if that prisoner–
◦ `(1) has attained the age of 45 years;
◦ `(2) has never been convicted of a crime of violence; and
◦ `(3) has not engaged in any violation, involving violent conduct, of institutional disciplinary regulations.’.
The above text has the power to directly change lives. Word for word (I left out the intro which says who presented the bill and a bunch of stuff you don’t really need to know), that is H.R. 233, the Federal Prison Bureau Nonviolent Offender Relief Act of 2011, a proposed amendment to the United States Code (U.S.C.) Title 18. It’s a bill that has been presented and is in the early stages, and one I’m willing to openly support.
There are currently over 211,000 inmates in the United States Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP). There is a high likelihood that you, yes you reading this, know at least one of them personally. I do. I know several (former and current). This doesn’t even include inmates who weren’t convicted of federal charges and therefore aren’t in federal correctional institutions (ie: the state pen). Many are incarcerated for white collar crime, think the Martha Stewart and Steve Madden types (except many are serving much more time than they did), some are quite possibly in there for things they didn’t actually do or got drawn into unknowingly, and then of course there are the genuinely twisted individuals who you would not want to encounter in a dark alley, or even a brightly lit shopping mall on a Friday afternoon for that matter.
This isn’t about the latter group – in fact it doesn’t even apply to them. Some are doing five, ten, fifteen, maybe even more years on conspiracy charges. Wrong place, wrong time type of thing. Hell, some of them made huge mistakes when they were younger. Not trying to argue that any federal inmate is a saint that doesn’t deserve punishment, but at the same time it is widely accepted that the U.S. justice system is outdated, flawed, and lacking resources. Many facilities are over populated, understaffed, and facing budget cuts. Simply decreasing the inmate population would instantly alleviate all of the aforementioned issues.
As of late 2010, the cost of housing a federal inmate for a year is $27,251 (a figure that has been on the incline in recent years). This, of course, comes from government funding fed by taxpayer (read: your) dollars. Meanwhile a significant portion of these inmates are housed in minimum security camps, which may not even have so much as a fence around the perimeter. It’s not just a rumor, I’ve seen one of these firsthand, and yeah – no fence. If the BOP can trust the inmates that our justice system deemed criminals enough to not just freely walk away from the facility and go on the run, why should society worry about them being on the streets? In fact, why are taxpayers paying almost $30k per year for someone to remain behind no bars at all, not be able to easily see their family or friends, and to have free meals handed to them, all the while not having to worry about a daily 9 to 5 grind in an office – just like the one you likely bust your ass in to lose a healthy chunk of your paycheck just to help fund these guys’ lunches. And it’s only getting worse, as the incarceration rate is on the rise:
You see where I’m going with this? Martha Stewart has more money than I’ll likely ever see in my life, and yet my nearly impoverished ass paid how much in taxes this year? So she could complain about prison food or something (among other things my tax dollars pay for, but this is for argument sake, of course)? I have friends that I might not see outside of a controlled environment supervised by a correctional officer until I’m possibly yanking gray hairs out of my dome piece. Did they commit a crime? Yes. Is prison helping them? Well it may have saved them from getting killed on the street (or in some people’s cases overdosing [but don't be fooled, you can get drugs in prison anyway, contraband is a bitch], or quickly killing themselves before they have to serve their time as a quick cop out to something they know they’ll never see the light of day again for), but really? In all I’ve seen, prison really isn’t the rehabilitative experience that the BOP’s spokespeople seem to think it can be.
For a short timer, say someone doing anywhere from a few months to one to two years, a prison sentence will generally discombobulate their possibly peaceful and successful life and family structure, but it’s not going to change their mental state all that much. Given a few months back on the street chances are their personality will be somewhat the same, except way more stressed. You just missed possibly a year of your child’s life, you had to quit the job you may have had just to serve a one year sentence and now you have a felony to your name and aren’t easily employed, and your hypothetical wife who may or may not be loyal just had to go a year devoid of intimacy (unless she cheated, and please note there are no conjugal visits in federal correctional institutions). Life as you know it just got turned upside down in a year, and with likely parole restraints and readjustment to day-to-day life on the outside, it’s going to take you at least twice as long to feel like you have a grip on your situation again. How did this help you? It didn’t. And if you can’t gain employment because nobody is fond of the idea of hiring a felon, you’re stressed out, and your personal life might be suffering, it’s easy to see why the recidivism (or return) rate of inmates is so high – the simplest solution to keep a roof over your head is to turn to illegal activity that doesn’t require pre-employment screenings, a resume which would require you to explain a gap in employment, and has tax-free, quickly made money. Oh yeah, that’s rehabilitation.
And what about the long term guys? The ones doing ten, fifteen, twenty five years or more? If they even have a chance of being released before they’re dead, good luck reincorporating them into regular life. They’ve also probably been “institutionalized” at this point – a certain survival of the fittest, trust nobody, constant application of the same daily routine day after day for years can really alter a person’s mind in a negative way. Yes, they may have gotten an education and participated in work programs while behind bars, but when the last ten years of your resume consists of accomplishments you earned while you were in prison, good luck finding legitimate and lucrative work in the free world. Some of them went in with infant children who they’ve missed grow up who are now about to graduate high school. Whether they chose to be or not, they were cast into a role not far removed from being an absentee father. And there are even some inmates in this category that never laid a finger on someone. It could be financial crime, money laundering schemes and the like, perhaps a non-violent drug offense, etc. Guess what? There are still ways to fraudulently acquire money behind bars, or acquire and sell drugs within the inmate population. If they’re so determined to continue this activity, they’ll do it behind bars anyway. So what difference does it make if they’re locked up or on, say, house arrest?
Imagine removing just 500 of the 200k+ federal inmates who have served at least half of their sentences for non-violent crimes, have nearly perfect disciplinary records while incarcerated, and are ages 45-50. Let’s say we alternatively require they serve the rest of their sentence on house arrest, complete with a tracking device on their ankle and all that. At $27,251 for each inmate, that’s $13,625,500 saved on annual inmate living expenses. It costs significantly less to provide electronic monitoring equipment, and with strict punishment if the conditions of the house arrest are broken, few are going to attempt to bust out of their ankle bracelets and go apeshit. Now these men (or women) will be forced to rely on themselves for financial support, or their families (if around) will likely step in and bear the burden of the costs. This frees up taxpayer money for other services (how about those unemployment benefits, public education costs, war expenses, subsidies, etc.?), and transfers the cost of living to people far more willing to finance it. It also removes these offenders from a limiting and dangerous environment and offers them a chance at normal life again. To see their families, to get a legitimate job and contribute to the economy as a working member of society, etc. Meanwhile they are still under federal correctional supervision and are being tracked by a GPS far more thoroughly than they were being tracked in an understaffed minimum security camp with no fence and no ankle bracelet tracking devices.
H.R. 223 is not only an important bill in the sense that it saves the taxpayer money and gives an opportunity for nonviolent offenders to prove themselves an asset to society rather than a financial burden and a proverbial black sheep, but it would also tremendously improve the lives of the countless family members, significant others, close friends, etc. who are innocent yet indirectly punished by the absence of their loved ones. It’s that same family support that is sometimes hard to maintain while incarcerated that can keep a person on a righteous path. In my eyes, all signs point to “yes” in terms of the Federal Prison Bureau Nonviolent Offender Relief Act. In a time where financial crisis led to a near government shutdown, it’s only right that we reevaluate where budget cuts can logically be made with the least repercussions. While Planned Parenthood was on the budget cut chopping block of losing it’s $80 million per year budget, H.R. 223 may not even make it to voting stages. The money saved on housing nonviolent inmates could singlehandedly replace the money Planned Parenthood is at risk of losing*, bring the officer-to-inmate ratio back to more stable levels, and more. But with democracy comes power in numbers, and if more people speak out, there is a greater chance of H.R. 223 being passed. I encourage you, if you agree with its provisions, to contact your local congressional representative and voice your opinion and support. To spread the word online. Whatever it may be. Any effort can only help, not hurt.
*The anti-abortion crowd is quick to speak out against keeping funding for Planned Parenthood, but under Title X the funds allotted through this legislation are to never be used toward abortions anyhow. I detailed this situation in a previous post.
