Prisons: 2012 and Beyond

                   The United States is the land of the free and the home of the brave; at least that’s what we have always been told.  It is written in our national anthem, and our constitution lays out the guidelines we must follow in order to stay that way; violations of those guidelines are grounds for punishment.  The punishment that the United States has been most fond of using is imprisonment; making the inmate population in the United States the largest amongst other nations. We have had a long lasting battle with prisoners and prisons; debates on what to do with criminals and how to do it. This has lead to a large problem amongst our prisons and we are trying furiously to fix them.  Many prisons have turned to early release, and others have turned to the reform of tough on crime legislation (Navarrette, 2011, CalRealignment.org, 2011.)

            California, in particular, has been trying viciously to reduce inmate population size.  One of the biggest attempts began with a Supreme Court case in which the court ruled the settings in which the inmates were living to be cruel and unusual punishment; which violated their eight amendment rights (CDCR, 2010; Biskupic, 2011.) The environment that these inmates are living in includes less staff, and more inmates. This leads to increased stress for both inmates, fighting off assault and sexual attacks, and staff who are in charge of more and more inmates; who can rebel at anytime leaving the officers vulnerable to attack (Martin, J., Litchenstein, B., Jenkot, R., & Forde, D 2012.) Also, the inmates are living in unsanitary conditions; every year millions of prisoners are released into the community.  Amongst those inmates released from prison, thousands now house viruses such as tuberculosis, HIV, or hepatitis C; all of which are contagious (Harrison, 2002.) 
           Other consequences that inmates must deal with due to the overpopulation, are the lack of rehabilitation programs.  Not only are the inmates being locked up for longer periods of time, but they are not given any hope of changing their ways; instead they are given the chance to learn new criminal tactics. How can we anticipate change in criminals if we do not provide them help? We throw them in a cell with others who have similar backgrounds, or who have committed worse crimes, and expect them to leave prison a model citizen of the United States? The prison system is a revolving door. Governor Brown said in a press release on April 5, 2011 that (CDCR, 2010,)

            "For too long, the state’s prison system has been a revolving door for lower-level offenders and parole violators who are released within months—often before they are even transferred out of a reception center. Cycling these offenders through state prisons wastes money, aggravates crowded conditions, thwarts rehabilitation, and impedes local law enforcement supervision (CDCR, 2010.)"

            There has been tons of speculation as to what is the best way to handle and loosen the problems amongst inmates due to overpopulation.  Some believe that the change can come if we change sentences.  California has taken a couple of steps to try and end overpopulation using legislations such as what Governor Brown calls realignment. Realignment began on October 1^, 2011 which sent thousands of prisons from state prisons to county jails (CalRealignment.org.) According to an article posted in The Sacramento Bee (2012) nine months after realignment was enacted in California there was a 39 percent reduction in new prison admissions as well as a 26,480 reduction in inmate population; this accounts for two-thirds of what the Supreme Court ruled needed to be reduced by 2013 (Walter, 2012.)

                        Another attempt at reducing the overpopulation occurred in November of 2012. Proposition 36, a reform to the tough on crime, three strikes lawwas voted into effect by the citizens of California. Proposition 36 is said to cut down on prison overpopulation because it will change the sentencing guidelines of the three strikes law.  Now an individual must commit a violent crime, such as murder,rape, or use a deadly weapon while commiting a crime, as their third strike conviction; making them eligible for life without the possibility of parole. Also, inmates who are currently serving a life sentence based on the three strikes law may have their sentences changed to reflect the guidelines of the new law (Attorney General, 2012.)  Therefore, an inmate who is serving a life sentence on their third strike,who has not committed a violent crime may have their sentence reduced to a more appropriate sentence. The first resentencing took place in San Diego on November 21, 2012 (The CW, 2012.) Kenneth G. Corley was convicted in October of 1996 to 25 years to life for possession of drugs for sale. He was resentenced to 15 years, and released based on time served (The CW, 2012.)

            Because of the new changes in the laws, many California attorneys have been gearing up for more cases like the one of Mr. Corley.  There is anticipation that there will be many more inmates released on similar grounds (The CW, 2012.) With changes in the law such as realignment, and proposition 36 I anticipate that there will be a large reduction in the population within the prisons. I believe that once the inmate population drops to a point where rehabilitation programs can be once again introduced to inmates, there will also be a drop in recidivism rates.Although, I don’t believe that these outcomes will happen overnight, there will be a brighter future for prisons, inmates and a less stressful environment for prison staff.

Works Cited

Attorney General. The Attorney General's Office, (2012).Proposition 36 three strikes law. repeat felony offenders. penalties. initiative statue.. Retrieved from website: http://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2012/general/pdf/36-title-summ-analysis.pdf

Biskupic, J. (2011, May 24). Supreme Court stands firm on prison crowding. USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2011-05-24-Supreme-court-prisons_n.htm

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). (2010). The cornerstone of California’s solution to reduce overcrowding, costs, and recidivism. Retrieved from http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/realignment/index.html

CalRealignment.org. (2011). California realignment. Retrieved from http://www.calrealignment.org/

Harrison, E. (2002). The health status of soon-to-be-released inmates: A letter to congress. National commission on correctional health care, 1, retrieved from http://www.ncchc.org/stbr/Volume1/Health Status (vol 1).pdf

Martin, J., Litchenstein, B., Jenkot, R., & Forde, D. (2012). They can take us over anytime they want: Correctional officers' response to prison crowding. The prison journal, 92(1), 88-105. doi: 10.1177/0032885511429256

Navarrette, R. (2011, May 26). Where does California put 33,000 released inmates?. CNN . Retrieved from http://articles.cnn.com/2011-05-26/opinion/navarrette.california.prisons_1_prison-population-prison-overcrowding-high-court?_s=PM:OPINION

The CW: San Diego channel 6. (2012, November 21). San diego superior court first to re-sentence under proposition 36, releases ‘three-striker’. Retrieved from http://www.sandiego6.com/news/local/San-Diego-Superior-Court-First-to-Re-Sentence-Under-Proposition-36-Releases-Three-Striker-180402461.html

 

Walter, D. (2012, August 15). Realignment has dropped California prison population sharply. The Sacramento bee. Retrieved from http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2012/08/realignment-has-dropped-california-prison-population-sharply.html

 

Problems for Inmates

           The United States has made an impact amongst other nations as being one of the toughest countries in the world.  We have one of the greatest military efforts and have some of the toughest laws. It is no wonder that, although we are only a small portion of the world; the United States houses the largest population of inmates (Chuck, 2012.) Although many citizens praise the efforts of law makers to rid society of crime, the consequences such as overpopulation in practically every prison built and the need for more prisons to be built. Some prisons have even moved their prisons outside, like in Maricopa County, Arizona. The sheriff of Maricopa County, Joe Arpaio, has had his staff create a “tent city” where inmates live in large military style tents, sleep on cots and work throughout the day in the Arizona heat(The Huffington Post, 2012.)

Yes, “tent city” has saved costs and it is a way to deal with overpopulation (The Huffington Post, 2012); however, we can’t very well build tent cities outside all prisons in the United States.  Although many people agree with Sheriff Arpaio’s ideology of inmates living the same way that military service men and women do, there are many complaints that arise People rallied outside of Sheriff Arpio’s tent city to protest that the conditions in which the inmates are forced to live.  They exclaimed that the conditions are inhumane, and there must be a better way to deal with the inmates (The Huffington Post, 2012.)

At the end of 2010, the inmate population in both federal and state prisons was 2,266,800; meaning that approximately three out of every ten people were incarcerated (Glaze, 2011.)  Prisons in the United States have exceeded the occupancy of their prisons by half to two times the amount they were designed to hold. Prison overcrowding has resulted in a decreased availability of basic necessities such as staff supervision and medical services as well as a short coming of privacy.  According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (2008),  the inmate population in the United States in both federal and state prisons increased by ten percent between 2000 and 2005; however, the staff population only increased by three percent (Stephans, 2008.)  The lack of supervision and rising continual increase of inmates causes problems on various levels.

 Also questionable and unacceptable is the harmful physical conditions and the insufficient sanitary environment. Once in a small space shared by two or three people, sanitation becomes a problem, as well as becoming ill and spreading various sicknesses.  In 2002 there were approximately nine million inmates that were released in the United States.  Of those nine million, approximately 1.3 million were infected with hepatitis C, an inflammation of the liver which can lead to cirrhosis (Harrison, 2002; A.D.A.M. Medical Encyclopedia, 2011.)  Also out of those released in 2002, an estimated 137,000 were infected with the HIV virus, and another 12,000 had tuberculosis (Harrison, 2002.) Illnesses an inmate might suffer from in an overcrowded prison environment also become psychological. 

In prison, an individual goes from being free to do as they like, to an environment where they are now told how to dress, what to do, and enclosed in a cell with one or sometimes two other people.  Inmates enclosed in small spaces with other people who are facing similar problems are more likely to develop depression, post traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, aggression and frustration (Sparks-Myers, 2008.) Some may argue that a criminal chose to commit the crime, and therefore must deal with the consequences. Some may also argue that inmates get treated a lot better in prison than those who live life as law abiding citizens. Inmates get three meals a day, and are provided health care whenever they need it.  However, with the increasing numbers of inmates healthcare inside the prison walls is in short supply.  Inmates with mental health problems sometimes commit suicide rather than to wait for help. Other mentally ill inmates are kept in solitary confinement due to the lack of knowledge amongst staff and the unequipped facilities (Chuck, 2012.)

Due to the low level of supervision, many inmates are suffering from assault, sexual advances, stress, decreasing sanitation, and suicidal thoughts (Chuck, 2012; Sparks-Myers, 2008.)  Although I don’t believe that an inmate should have a glorious life in prison for something wrong, I still don’t agree with the “lock them up and forget them” ideology. Inmates shouldn’t be given more than society, but shouldn’t be treated like animals either.  Although, many states are trying to lower their numbers by releasing prisoners or sending them to county lock up, I believe there should be more done.  Instead of building more facilities, money should be spent on trying to fix the dilapidated prisons that already exist, and create more rehabilitation opportunities for the inmates.  If the United States keeps inmate populations high and the standards for the inmates living conditions low we will see in an increase of illnesses coming into society from the large number of newly released inmates.  It will go from a prison problem to a community problem.

  

Works Cited

A.D.A.M. Medical Encyclopedia. (2011, October 06).Hepatitis c. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001329/

Chuck, E. (2012, February ). For mentally ill inmates, health care behind bars is often out of reach. NBC News, Retrieved from http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/02/03/10309751-for-mentally-ill-inmates-health-care-behind-bars-is-often-out-of-reach?lite

Glaze, L. (2011, December). Correctional population in the United States, 2010. Retrieved from http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpus10.pdf

Harrison, E. (2002). The health status of soon-to-be-released inmates: A letter to congress. National commission on correctional health care, 1, retrieved from http://www.ncchc.org/stbr/Volume1/Health Status (vol 1).pdf

Sparks-Myers, D. (2008, December 17). Mental effects on inmates from overcrowded prisons. Retrieved from http://voices.yahoo.com/mental-effects-inmates-overcrowded-prisons-2305415.html?cat=17

Stephan, J. (2008, October). Census of state and federal correctional facilities, 2005. Retrieved from http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/csfcf05.pdf

The Huffington Post. (2012, June 24). Joe Arpaio tent city protests: Thousands gather for rally . The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/24/joe-arpaio-tent-city-protests_n_1622466.html

California and the Death Penalty

            The act of killing another human being as a punishment has always been a part of man kind’s history.  Laws depicting the concept of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,” can be dated back to 1772 BC with the Code of Hammurabi (Hassall, 1998.) Today, laws and society have evolved.  There are only specific crimes where the punishment may include the possibility of execution: murder, sexual assault of a minor, treason, espionage, and kidnapping are amongst them. There has been controversy over whether or not it is right to execute people as a form of punishment. In the U.S. thirty-three states have an active capital punishment, where as seventeen have abolished it (DPIC, 2012; Dieter, 2007.)   

            California, the state with the largest population, is attempting to change many of the laws that our government has enacted in the late 80’s and early 90’s.  Some of these laws have been accused of creating the long battle that California has had with the overwhelming populations and budget spending in the state prisons (Dieter, 2007.)  On the November 2012 election ballot there are a number of new reforms awaiting their fate. Amongst these reforms are proposition 34, and Proposition 36. Proposition 36, is a reform on the three strikes law which is said to help alleviate any future congestion within the prisons, because it would require that the third strike to be a violent offense; opposed to the law of today, where an individual can get a life sentence simply for stealing a sandwich on their third strike (ballotpedia, 2012.)  Proposition 34, is a reform on California’s capital punishment. If enacted proposition 34, will abolish the death penalty, and turn what would be punishable by death, into a life sentence without the possibility of parole (ballotpedia, 2012.)

The death penalty has had a long history in California. It was first allowed in the state in 1872; however, in 1972 the California Supreme Court ruled against the death penalty describing it as cruel and unusual punishment.  The Supreme Court’s ruling turned the sentence for those on death row into life in prison without the possibility of parole; much like what proposition 34 will do if enacted (CDCR, 2010; DPIC, 2012.)  Again, Californians feared the rising rates and severity of crime so much so, that capital punishment was once again enacted.  California re-enacted the death penalty for first degree murder, in 1977; it was only to be used for those guilty of first degree murder. In 1978, the citizens of California decided to extend capital punishment to murder with special circumstances; these special circumstances include multiple murders, or murder during a rape, robbery, or torture.  Since its re-enactment, California has only executed thirteen inmates and there are currently 724 inmates awaiting their execution (CDCR, 2010; Sangiorgio, 2011; DPIC, 2012.)

There has been controversy over whether or not the death penalty is actually an effective punishment or if it is simply a flawed waste of money.  According to an article published in the L.A.  Times ( Williams, 2011) California’s tax payers have spent more than four billion dollars on the death penalty since capital punishment was reenacted; this means that each of the thirteen executions that have taken place in the last thirty-three years cost approximately 308 million dollars. Today, those who are currently on death row in California cost the state approximately 184 million dollars more per year more than those inmates who are currently serving a life sentence. Also costly to Californian’s are the prosecution costs which are estimated to cost at least twenty times that of life sentence cases. According to a study published in the L.A. Times (Williams, 2011), “the least expensive death penalty trial costs $1.1 million more than the most expensive life-without-parole case (Williams, 2011.)”  

It is obvious that capital punishment costs the state millions of dollars more than it does just to house inmates on a life sentence; however, opponents of abolishing capital punishment such as chief of staff to the Orange County District Attorney, Susan Schroeder (appeal democrat, 2011)  explained that,

“…Even if the death penalty is not carried out often in California, we have to hold the line on tough punishments. If prison without possibility of parole becomes the toughest penalty, then a slippery slope could develop in which lesser penalties could be imposed for heinous crimes. Eventually, we could end up like Norway, where Anders Behring Breivik murdered 69 people last year and was given that country's harshest penalty, 21 years in prison (appeal democrat, 2012.)”

Sometimes, as people with emotions, we do things just because it makes us feel better. Even though it costs a lot more money to put someone to death, some may argue that at least now we know that person will never hurt anyone or their family again. They may also argue that it provides closure for victims and their families when their attacker has been put to death. Although the idea of killing another person as punishment has been a part of man kind’s history, California has had a long battle accepting it.  History usually repeats itself, and I believe that if Proposition 34 does get the majority vote and goes into effect on November 7, 2012, in the future there will be some way to bring another form of capital punishment back to the state. 

Works Cited

Appeal Democrat. (2012, September 26). Our view: No on prop. 34 – repeal of death penalty. Retrieved from http://www.appeal-democrat.com/articles/death-119740-penalty-prison.html

 

Ballot Pedia. (2012). California proposition 34, the end of the death penalty initiative. Retrieved from http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_34,_the_End_the_Death_Penalty_Initiative_(2012)

CDCR. (2010). Capital punishment: History of capital punishment in California. Retrieved from http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/capital_punishment/history_of_capital_punishment.html

 

Death penalty information center. (2012). State by state database. Retrieved from http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/state_by_state

Dieter, R. (2007). Changing views on the death penalty. Death penalty Information, http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/Beijing07.pdf

Halsall , P. (1998, March). Ancient history sourcebook: Code of hammurabi, c. 1780 bce. Retrieved from http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/hamcode.asp

Sangiorgio, C. (2011). The death penalty and public information on its use. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 25, 33-44. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=93f87b04-76f2-4853-82b2-6c1e4379a5ad@sessionmgr14&vid=4&hid=7

Willams, C. (2011, June 20). Death penalty costs California $184 million a year, study says. L.A. times. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/20/local/la-me-adv-death-penalty-costs-20110620

 

 

 

           

Three Strikes and We're Full

Under the tenth amendment, each state has the right to impose laws as they see fit for their jurisdictions as long as it does not infringe the constitutional rights of their citizens. Many states have imposed various laws based on concerns with in their societies and social norms; California is no different. In the early 1990’s, California was in somewhat of an uproar due to the rise in violent crimes.  As a response to these violent crimes, the legislature felt that there needed to be a harsher punishment imposed. They hoped to reduce recidivism rates as well as to create a deterrent; this deterrent became  the three strikes and you’re out law (Attorney General, 2012; LAO, 2005; Males, 2011). There were a few unexpected issues that came along with the new law, such as overcrowding prisons and the use of more money to keep these overcrowded prisons running (LAO, 2005; Males, 2011).   There are a few different aspects of the law that I’ll be discussing such as the intent of the law, how it works, its affects on prisons and inmate as well as  proposition 36.

Intent

In 1994, the three strikes law was passed. It was considered a way to keep repeat offenders off the streets.  Repeat offenders are classified as a group of people that are difficult to manage because no matter how many times they have been put behind bars, they simply do not change their way of thinking.  Because repeat offenders were in and out of prison and crime was continually rising, society as well as policy makers felt that harsher sentencing was necessary (Attorney General, 2012; LAO, 2005; Males, 2011).  The harsher sentencing would serve as a greater deterrent than the typical sentencing guidelines.  Supporters of the three strikes law argued that imposing lengthy sentences on repeat offenders would reduce crime because sentence enhancements would remove repeat felons from society for longer periods of time. In turn, it would control their capability of committing more crimes.  The risk of such long sentences would deter some repeat offenders as well as new offenders of furthering their criminal lifestyle (LAO, 2005­). 

How It Works

            As it was intended, the three strike law adds sentencing enhancements for repeat offenders.  Once a criminal is processed and sentenced for the second time on a felony charge, even if it was not considered a violent crime, the three strikes enhancement doubles the sentence that would have been imposed based on the crime they had committed (Attorney General, 2012; LAO, 2005­).  For example, if a criminal was charged with their second offense and the sentence for that crime was five years, because of the three strikes law, the sentence becomes a mandatory ten years.  When facing a third felony charge, even if it was a non violent crime, the individual is now faced with a mandatory minimum sentence of twenty-five years to life in prison.  Every felony thereafter is a twenty-five year sentence added on to their term. The inmate must serve their twenty five year sentence without any possibility of parole and cannot be transferred to any other type of facility or programs (Attorney General, 2012; LAO, 2005; Megerian, 2012).

Effects

 Because of laws such as the three strikes law, more individuals are being sent to prison for longer sentences, even though the crime rate has continually decreased over the years.  This has caused prison populations to be almost double the capacity that the prisons were initially created to house.  Also, since they are spending more time in prison, the inmate population is getting older.  Statistics show that the cost for inmates over the age of fifty are double or triple that of the average inmate.  The older inmate population is costing the state, and tax payers, millions more in funding for medications, hospital visits, special housing and personal care. The number of inmates who are over the age of fifty has increased from approximately 5,500 to 16,300 in a ten year time span (Endorsement, 2012; Males, 2011)

  In 2010, the prison population included 40,998 inmates that were serving a sentence based on the three strikes sentencing guidelines.  About 8,727 of those inmates were serving sentences on their third strike.  In current year, the population of inmates serving sentences for their second strike is decreasing; however, the population of inmates that are now imprisoned for a life sentence is increasing and has almost doubled.   Statistics show that the average inmate costs approximately $46,700 a year, making the average third strike inmate serving a twenty-five year sentence around $1.1 million, and an inmate serving a life sentence approximately $1.8 million; these figures do not include any added cost for medical care or special needs (Endorsement, 2012; Attorney General, 2012).    

Proposition 36

            A current solution to the three strikes law is proposition 36, which is on the November ballot this year.  The new initiative would require that the third strike be considered a violent or serious felony in order to hand down the twenty-five years to life sentence.  Supporters of prop 36 claim that if passed, it would keep the true and dangerous criminals where they belong for the rightful length of time (Endorsement, 2012; Furillo, 2012, Harris, 2011).  The proposition would also have sentencing guide lines for those third strike offenders who are not guilty of a serious or violent offense.  The sentencing guidelines would require that the non-violent offender serve a double term; that is double the sentence they would get if it were their first offense (Harris, 2011, Attorney General, 2012).   

            Analysis of proposition 36 also shows that if enacted, the new legislation would save the state millions of dollars.  It is estimated to save approximately $70 million a year and eventually up to $90 million a year after the first few years the law has been put into effect.        Not only would the new legislation save the state money, but it would also help alleviate the prison overcrowding issues (Attorney General, 2012).  If proposition 36 is passed, individuals who have been sentenced to a life sentence for a non-violent crime can petition to have their sentencing overturned and resentenced based on the new guidelines.  Although the resentencing of inmates would cost the state more money to start, the attorney general’s analysis claims that it would be a onetime fee; over time the new legislation would save the state more money even after the resentencing fees (Attorney General, 2012; Harris, 2011; Furillo, 2012).    

Conclusion

            California has dealt with issues of prison overcrowding for many years. Even though the crime rates have been decreasing, prison populations have been increasing; now California inmates are in an unconstitutionally fit environment.  The three strikes law has proven to be ineffective and expensive to the citizens of California; even though it was enacted with good intentions.  Proposition 36, although similar, will alleviate some of the issues and impacts created by the three strikes law.  I believe proposition 36 will help with the inmate relocation issues and keep dangerous inmates behind bars, instead of allowing inmates to leave prison early. Prisoners early release is an  alternative the state is considering in order to meet the lower inmate population the Supreme Court has required of California state prisons. If proposition 36 does not work out as intended, I believe that in the long run it will still have made a difference for the prison systems.

           

Works Cited

Attorney General. The Attorney General's Office, (2012).Proposition 36 three strikes law. repeat felony offenders. penalties. initiative statue.. Retrieved from website: http://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2012/general/pdf/36-title-summ-analysis.pdf

Endorsement. (2012, September 26). Yes on proposition 36. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/endorsements/la-ed-end-prop36-20120926,0,3913799.story

Furillo, A. (2012, September 24). How prop. 36 would change 'three strikes' in two ways. Sacramento Bee. Retrieved from http://www.sacbee.com/2012/09/24/4848167/how-prop-36-would-change-three.html

Harris, K. Attorney General of California, (2011). Request for title and summary for the three strikes law reform act of 2012 initiative. Retrieved from website: http://ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/initiatives/pdfs/i1000_11-0057_(three_strikes).pdf

LAO. (2005). A primer: Three strikes the impact after more than a decade. Legislative Analyst's Office, Retrieved from http://www.lao.ca.gov/2005/3_Strikes/3_strikes_102005.pdf

Males, M. (2011). Striking out: California’s “three strikes and you’re out” law has not reduced violent crime. a 2011 update. Center on juvenile and criminal justice, Retrieved from http://www.cjcj.org/files/Striking_Out_Californias_Three_Strikes_And_Youre_Out_Law_Has_Not_Reduced_Violent_Crime.pdf

Megerian, C. (2012, February 24). Three-strikes law costly and ineffective, study says. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/california-politics/2012/02/prison-california-three-stirkes.html

Busting at the Seams: Overcrowded Prisons

           The U.S. has had a long history of creating and amending laws that are intended to help keep its citizens safe. It is no stranger to creating a law with the intent of creating a good outcome, and instead it turns out to create just the opposite.  America is a diverse country, that has seen various cultures, ethnic groups, and fears impact the social order. Today, America is seeing the affect of fears that lead to what people have called “get tough” laws.

America is only five percent of the world’s population; however, twenty-five percent of the world’s prisoners are housed in American prisons (The Economist, 2012 & Guerino, P., Harisson, P., & Sabol, W., 2011.) This disproportionate number of inmates has brought about a grave issue concerning the overpopulation within the prison walls.  Prisons are almost double the capacity of which they were initially built to withstand.  An article published in the Prison Journal (2012) showed that the Alabama state prisons contain 206 percent of their capacity; that’s over twice the capacity of inmates the prison was intended to hold (Martin, J., Litchenstein, B., Jenkot, R., & Forde, D., 2012.)  In California the prison population is almost double the capacity as well. California state prisons were constructed with the intent of housing 80,000 inmates; however, today they house over 130,000 inmates (The Economist, 2012 & Guerino, P., Harisson, P., & Sabol, W., 2011.)  This creates a problem not only for inmates, but also for the prison staff, who due to budget cuts have fallen in numbers; it communities will also be affected.    

Since the late 1980’s, which began the war on drugs, individual were being sentenced to several years behind bars for minor drug offenses. Tough on crime laws such as the three strikes law, put into effect in 1994, created a way to put more repeat offenders behind bars for longer periods of time until eventually they were slapped with a life sentence (LAO, 2005 & Navarrette, 2011.)

On May 23, 2011 the Supreme Court ruled that the overpopulation of California prisons was unconstitutional, making them lower their inmate population by the year 2013 to 110,000 (Navarrette, 2011 & The Economist, 2012 & Guerino, P., Harisson, P., & Sabol, W., 2011.)  The problems faced in the overpopulated prisons had to do with negligent health care, as well as unseen inmate on inmate violence.  Having the inmates so packed together and having so many people sharing one toilet or other hygienic facilities is a way of spreading sickness, and diseases (Unknown, 2012.)  Not only is it easier to get sick, but because there is so many inmates that need physicians attention, they have to wait severely long periods of time to do so.  Also, inmates with mental disabilities do not have the adequate care necessary to accommodate their illnesses (Biskupic, 2011.) When discussing the issues with California prisons, Justice Kennedy of the Supreme Court commented that "for years the medical and mental health care provided by California's prisons has fallen short of minimum constitutional requirements and has failed to meet prisoners' basic health needs (Biskupic, 2011.)"

Also due to the overpopulated environment in prisons, inmate violence often goes unnoticed.  There have been instances where inmates were found murdered in their bunks; no one knew when it had happened because of how crowded the sleeping quarters were (unknown, 2012.)  Not only do inmates suffer the consequences of the overpopulated prisons, but so do the prison staff.  Correctional officers are unarmed and outnumbered, which can become very stressful and frightening.  Due to the economy there are more prison personnel losing their job, but more inmates being taken in.  Correctional officers are now working more; they are under trained, and tired making them more at risk of being victims of violence by the inmates (Martin, J., Litchenstein, B., Jenkot, R., & Forde, D., 2012.)

Although there has been some lowering of the population, California prisons have not yet been able to get the number that the Supreme Court has ordered.  They have now decided that they must lower their numbers any way possible. There is a likely hood that prison inmates will not only be sent to county jails like they have already, but also they will be released early; this has become a concern for communities (Navarrette, 2011 & Chettiar, I., & Stamm, A., 2012 & Walker, 2012.)  Some community members are afraid of the impact of having more criminals released into society before they have completed their sentence.  They are afraid of a rise in crime, or the effect that having ex-offenders in the area may have on the real estate market (Walker, 2012.)  

After the Supreme Court ruling regarding California prisons, many other states took the initiative and began trying to lower their inmate populations as well. Many states have altered their sentencing guide lines making it possible to lower the sentencing for non- violent crimes and lowering some drug laws to misdemeanors rather than felonies. Some states have also begun to shut down prisons and relocate their prisons to county jails (Navarrette, 2011, The Economist, 2012 & Chettiar, I., & Stamm, A., 2012.)  Due to the Supreme Court’s ruling California has been sending large numbers of its prison inmates to county jail; Governor Brown has named it the realignment. The realignment will allow inmates who have committed non violent crimes, to go to county jail rather than prison (The Economist, 2012 & Navarrette, 2012.) It is also possible for inmates to be released early on good behavior and be placed under county supervision rather than state or federal (Navarrette, 2011.) 

When it comes to American laws, I don’t think that there is ever a truly right way to handle something.  The economy and society norms change all the time.  The decisions we make affect us throughout our life as we can see from the way our economy today has dropped so severely. Many people would argue that criminals shouldn’t complain because they have a bed and three meals a day, which is more than some law abiding citizens have. I would argue that while that may be true, they are still humans and should not be treated like animals; in some cases animals are treated more humane than these prisoners.

  The money taken from tax payers and put toward the prison facilities is basically a way to keep all the law breakers in a big room so that society doesn’t have to deal with them.  We don’t want these criminals in our communities, so we shove them into prisons and expect them to change.  How can they change if there are no programs available for them to help them learn new trades?  We shove them in these prisons with other people who can teach them other tricks of the criminal world; it is a never ending cycle. If the overcrowding is stopped then it will allow room for some of the rehabilitation programs that had not been affected by the state budget, to return.  It would lead to tax payers saving more money, as well as ex-offenders being able to return into society with a higher likely hood of actually staying out of prison. We can never be sure what exactly the future holds, but we can try to make it better and hope that we make decisions that will give us flexibility when we need it.  Changing the overcrowding in the prison population will be one of those flexible decisions.  If changing the overpopulated prison systems to help inmates rather than continually punishing them doesn’t work, then stuffing the prisons to the seams can be done again.

Works Cited

Biskupic, J. (2011, May 24). Supreme Court stands firm on prison crowding. USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2011-05-24-Supreme-court-prisons_n.htm

Chettiar, I., & Stamm, A. (2012, June 24). [Web log message]. Retrieved from http://www.aclu.org/blog/criminal-law-reform/states-take-sizeable-steps-2012-end-overincarceration

Guerino, P., Harrison, P., & Sabol, W. (2011). Prisons in 2010. Bureau of justice statistics, Retrieved from http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/p10.pdf

LAO. (2005, October). A primer: Three strikes - the impact after more than a decade. Retrieved from http://www.lao.ca.gov/2005/3_strikes/3_strikes_102005.htm

Martin, J., Litchenstein, B., Jenkot, R., & Forde, D. (2012). They can take us over anytime they want: Correctional officers' response to prison crowding. The prison journal, 92(1), 88-105. doi: 10.1177/0032885511429256

Navarrette, R. (2011, May 26). Where does California put 33,000 released inmates?. CNN . Retrieved from http://articles.cnn.com/2011-05-26/opinion/navarrette.california.prisons_1_prison-population-prison-overcrowding-high-court?_s=PM:OPINION

The Economist. (2012, May 19). The challenge of "realignment". The economist. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/21555611

Unknown. (2012, May 2). California prisons address overcrowding, remove last of nearly 20,000 extra beds. Huffpost San Francisco. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/02/california-prisons-overcrowding_n_1317722.html

Walker, C. (2012, May 21). Overcrowded prisons: what to do?; a Christian science perspective. The Cristian science monitor. Retrieved from http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/?verb=sr&csi=7945&sr=BYLINE(Channing)+w/3+Walker)+AND+HLEAD(Overcrowded prisons : what to do?)+AND+DATE+IS+2012