The Right and Wrong Ways to Shrink a Prison Population
Published May 21, 2009 @ 05:43AM PT
Michigan's prison population is at a seven year low, and the state has closed two facilities this year. Several more are on the chopping block, as the state works to slice its corrections budget by paroling prisoners more quickly, offering alternatives to incarceration and (here's the scary one) packing more inmates into cells.
Michigan is ninth in the U.S. in incarceration rate. The state is planning to cut corrections spending - at $2 billion it is a disturbing one-fifth of the budget -by more than 5% in the next year.
"We have been paroling inmates at a rapid rate and the prison intake is down as well," said Russ Marlan, spokesman for the Corrections Department.
He said it looks like 1,070 people will be paroled from prison during May -- up 30 percent from last year.
(Gov. Jennifer) Granholm beefed up the size of the parole board this year to speed up the release of non-violent inmates who have served longer than their minimum term.
It's sad that it takes a recession to make parole work, but at least it's happening.
There's a dark side here, however (there always is). Michigan officials are also double-bunking prisoners in maximum security facilities to facilitate the prison closings and to cut costs. Crowding more prisoners into units not built to handle them is unsafe, unwise and inhumane.
Mel Grieshaber, executive director of the Michigan Corrections Organization, which represents 8,500 prison officers, said he fears the move will endanger inmates and guards.
"We totally oppose double-bunking maximum security inmates because it compounds an already dangerous situation," he said. "...When trouble starts in places like that, it spreads very quickly."
I don't usually agree with corrections officers unions, and even in this case they have their own jobs to protect, but they're also right that crowding prisons makes a bad situation worse. Gov. Granholm is doing a brave thing by expanding parole in the state to reduce corrections costs, even if it's for the wrong reasons. In politics sometimes you have to wait to do the right thing until it hits voters in their wallets. But it's dangerous and unproductive to cut costs through increased overcrowding and decreased prison services.
By prioritizing parole, Granholm has started something that will lead to a slimmer state corrections budget and will begin to rebuild lives and communities decimated by three decades of lock-em-up policies. She should keep her focus on productive reforms like parole and not fall into the trap of cutting corners without substantive change.
Here's a special report from the Detroit News on Michigan's sprawling corrections system and Granholm's efforts to cut it down.
Share this Post
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
EmailComments (19)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Author
-
Matt has worked and volunteered in various capacities in criminal justice reform for several years. When he's not blogging, he works as the Online Communications Manager at the Innocence Project. Views expressed here are Matt's, and don't represent the positions of the Innocence Project.
Featured Criminal Justice Actions
-
-
-
Overturn the Texas Prison Book Ban
197 People
-
Overturn the Texas Prison Book Ban
Gov Granholm is said by some to be on the short-list for a Supreme Court nomination. I don't know what kind of justice she'd make. Doing the right things for the wrong reasons is a dubious recommendation for a justice whom we would hope to be driven by principle. Nevertheless, the performance of those elevated to a lifetime position can be surprising. That said, I'd like to see someone whose background involved more work in criminal defense, rather than someone with primarily (or solely) prosecutorial experience.
Posted by william newmiller on 05/21/2009 @ 08:13AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
As someone who has worked personally with condmened inmates for 22 years in a lone ministry and was responsible for writing an award winning book about my said loving expolits, it is with great humility that I reply to this well written article. I truly agree with what the author of the above is saying, especially concerning those who are nonviolent. However in order to reduce prison population, again from a very interpersonal level of understanding the subject matter, it is with sensibility I reiterate my comment, which is to administer in a copious manner, a form of psychological involvement with these prisoners, which will more often than enough, assist the more troubled ones while not only on the inside, but before even going to this point of detention, lawmakers and prison officials, and governmental officials, in all, should come together and discuss things as this; the understanding of counseling and a kinder manner of rehabilitating.
In my book "the electric chair: journals of....," I spoke very candidly about things as this, and how much of an impact that by talking to these prisoners on the inside, and to those who have been lucky enough to be released, should rec eive "afrecare" counseling in order to help them to understand life again without bars, walls, and shackles, etc. Again in the interum, it is also a very vital manner I personally witnessed when I spoke to those condemned on DEATH ROW, as this in itself, like anyone, wre able to receive compassionate interaction, and this served as a great way of releasing inhibitions and frustrations which are imposed on a day to day basis form simply being locked up. As someone who was personally inprisoned myself, by means of forced inprisonment with forced torture, starvation, etc, etc, I too learned this tool of kindness which literaly saved my very life while I was inside, and I gained a very personal comprehension of the former.
I believe it is things like this, endowed with kindness and understanding, as well as compassion, which will, in essense at least, help to greatly impact not only those already in prison, but those predestined to enter these barred places of permanent lockdown like Death Row, as well as details suggestive of the former.
Her Holiness;
The Most Ven. Lama Rimpoche, Prof. Ph.D, O.F.M.
Miss Milkweed L. Augustine
author, pacifist leader, religious leader
VOICE FOR THE CONDMENED
Posted by Lama Milkweed L. Augustine Prof. PhD on 05/21/2009 @ 12:20PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Now if we can just get the Feds to do the same thing
Posted by Thomas Kinney on 05/21/2009 @ 02:10PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Fantastic article. The increase of the parole system is great news. The double-bunking is an outrage and sheer stupidity. It is time for large-scale freeing of non-violent, victimless inmates, parole boards nationwide, implementation of the Second Chance Act, and full oversight and accountability of the Bureau of Prisons. Rev. Bookburn - Radio Volta
Posted by Rev Bookburn on 05/21/2009 @ 04:41PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
In Florida there are approximately 5000 inmates eligible for Parole but the Parole board refused to grant them Parole or Clemency. Specifiacally, there are hundreds of women currently serving life sentences in Fl. behind crimes their abusers committed. They never were a threat to society and are victims also literally dying in prison on taxpayers money. These women need to be granted Clemency and/or Parole when they go in front of the board. http://4justicenow.ning.com
Posted by Mary Ellen DiGiacomo on 06/12/2009 @ 02:53PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
News Flash: 3 of the 4 men recently detained for attempting to blow up Synagogues in the Bronx served time on drug charges. Not poster boys for your "large scale" freeing of inmates campaign are they? You guys need to look long and hard at the people you are trying to put back on the streets, or it will be you that is held accountable.
Posted by Dennis G. on 05/21/2009 @ 08:18PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I heard about this earlier, and when I saw this here I did a little digging online - I found one rather interesting bit of info in this story.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2009/05/20/2009-05-20_fbi_arrest_four_in_alleged_plot_to_car_bomb_bronx_synagogue.html
"The suspects - three U.S.-born citizens and one Haitian immigrant - at least three of whom were said to be jailhouse converts to Islam, were angry about the deaths of Muslims in Afghanistan, sources told The News."
And when I read your comment I couldn't help but laugh, because - I'd just been watching The Daily Show earlier and Jon Stewart's take on the story...
Here = http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=228042&title=bronx-bombers
Is a link to a roughly 4 min clip from tonight's "The Daily Show" - and at about 3:40 mins into it - is the best part, (And the part that sprung to mind when I read your comment above).
They show a clip from Fox News with a lady saying - "we're talking about what we're going to do with these Gitmo detainees, and talk(ing) about bringing them to US prisons potentially..."
Her next line is fraking priceless - "And, apparently the three of these guys were in prison, and hatched this plot IN prison... So, people don't think that this kinda thing can happen, by bringing these terrorists to American soil, but isn't this proof that it does?"
And Stewart, in his ever witty manner, says:
"NO... And, actually You just made an argument that we shouldn't put anybody in jail, Ever.
Because they're not here yet." (Refering to the Gitmo detainees - that have yet to be moved anywhere.)
And while looking through a handful of stories online about this... I saw NO mention of what the men had been in prison for, or that they had served time for drug charges.
Although, considering the percentage of people serving time on (or having previously served timed on) "drug charges" - the odds are pretty good that they did. And for that matter, odds are ANY random person that's "served time" was (quite likely) serving it for "drug charges"!
Posted by Bryan Snowden on 05/22/2009 @ 12:52AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Yeah, lets not put anyone in prison. Good argument! The charges they were incarcerated for were posted on the 11pm news here in NY. Drug charges, among others. Also, if their views and plots did begin in prison, that's just another reason why we should look further into these inmates before we release them into society. If their terrorist conspiracies were uncovered before they got out, they would be in solitary confinement in a federal institution where they belong.
Posted by Dennis G. on 05/22/2009 @ 10:36AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Dennis, That's a misplaced argument for locking up non-violent offenders. We shouldn't incarcerate millions of drug users because a tiny percentage of them might commit a violent crime upon release. We should instead focus on those with violent history or in need of services and support and provide those services.
Yes, these men had drug convictions and drug addictions (see NYT story here - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/22/nyregion/22plot.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&ref=nyregion). But does that mean they were predisposed to violence? No. It appears they were predisposed to violence and also happened to have drug issues.
A wide-ranging law enforcement investigation uncovered the violence these men were planning, and it was stopped. We need to spend more resources on this kind of smart investigation and fewer on locking up millions of people in the fear that one of them might get out and commit a crime.
Posted by Matt Kelley on 05/22/2009 @ 11:28AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Matt, you're comments are appreciated and make a great deal of sense. My comments are directed at the radicals who like to throw around the idea that prisons are filled with innocent people and law enforcement is to blame for society's problems.
However, your comments about predisposition to violence and drug issues begs the question...What comes first? Did their drug issues have something to do with them escalating to violence? I'd have to say that in a lot of cases it does.
And yes, this group was brought to justice, but could it have been done sooner? And what about all the other recidivists out there? I definitely believe in people getting a second chance. All I ask is that we are careful.
Posted by Dennis G. on 05/22/2009 @ 12:57PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Right again Matt and Dennis your concerns are valid. However most of the bills that will give ex-offenders early release or a "second chance" like HR 1475 and HR 1529 while not completely fail safe are pretty close. Ex-offenders are not given a free pass. Rather they must prove that they are deserving of early release, in the case of
1475, by having followed all of the "rules" while incarcerated and in the case of 1529, making application to the very same court that sentenced them in the first place. We are talking mostly about first time, non-violent offenders. Many, way toomany, are recidivist because, under current policy, attempts to regain a place in society are met with having a door slammed in your face. Sometimes the face of the "criminal" is not very pretty but sometimes it is just the kid next door who just made a stupid mistake.
Posted by Thomas Kinney on 05/25/2009 @ 11:26AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
While serving time on the drug charges, they became converts to cultism. Thanks to Charles Colson, one of the only avenues for a person serving time is to become a sheep for a cult. Colson (who wrote about a book that glorified holy violence against abortion providers, and was in the Nixon administration) helped create a culture where people who have endless monotony can easily become a cultist. The defendants don't have to be poster-boys for releasing victimless crimes. They should have been provided treatment to get off of drugs instead of beig broken in the prison system. The BOP and prison-industrial complex are probably creating countless poster-boys who started out with charges of victimless crimes. Rev. Bookburn - Radio Volta
Posted by Rev Bookburn on 05/25/2009 @ 06:11PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I know these bills are not about the type of persons you are referring,it is wise to check and research the bills since you are so compassionate in your opinions
Posted by Sherilyn Yeley on 05/26/2009 @ 02:21PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
As I have stated many times, I believe in giving someone a second chance in life. Of course there will be cases that giving a second chance will be nothing but asking a serial killer to do it again, it will depend on the case and as the article says for those that served already more than the minimum term. I think that reviewing our Justice system it is a great thing but I have to agree with William Newmiller who said that doing the right thing for the wrong reason it is a very dangerous thing and it won't solve anything. I truly believe that we should speed up even more our parole board decisions, increase the number of parole officers, etc, but for the reason that I started this comment "giving a second chance" not just to save a state budget. Releasing prisoners by those reasons could be dangerous because when times come to weigh danger to society and saving money I am afraid that the second one would have bigger chances. Also another face of this "reform" in Michigan is overcrowding prison cells in order to accommodate more inmates and thus we could shut down some facilities will cause more harm than good. More people will be killed inside cells, bigger chances for riots becoming more frequent, AIDS and other deceases will increase among prison population and more stressed guards will be in the line. Why not start doing this reform for the right reasons? What will happen when the good times are back? We will build new facilities or re-open some old ones because now it will be a good business again? When the financial/economics good times are back, and they will, what should we do them? Revoke those paroled prisoners and put them back because now we can make money on them again? Arrest more people even using arbitrary reasons so we can justify new prisons?
Posted by Manuela Rodrigues on 05/22/2009 @ 12:34PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I believe that people need to do their research and fully understand the bills in congress and study our Constitution and what it means,look at all the facts
Posted by Sherilyn Yeley on 05/26/2009 @ 02:12PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I am glad a new Federal Parole Bill will be introduced soon, it is being re- written now, there will be a meeting in D.C. on June 24,2009 about a series of issues concerning Criminal Justice Reform,also Danny Davis will be educating congress on these bills that are near and dear to our heart in June,as well
It is definetly time for change in a positive way for all
Posted by Sherilyn Yeley on 05/26/2009 @ 02:36PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
If more emphasis was put on rehabilitation for offenders there would be less need for correction, period. There are staggering numbers of 'petty criminals' who are incarcerated but are non-violent and could be rehabilitated through programs outside of prison walls. I believe it's all about priorities, and it's high time our government gets theirs straight. Also, the public needs to be educated instead of scared to death with propoganda about 'allowing' dangerous criminals to roam the streets.
Posted by Monica Morton on 05/26/2009 @ 07:50PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Community ReEntry & Expungement Summit 2009
Tuesday - June 23,2009 10:00am - 4:00 pm
Walter E Washington Convention Center
801 Mount Vernon Place NW
Washington,DC 20001
People are hearing us !
Posted by Sherilyn Yeley on 05/27/2009 @ 07:56PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I would like to bring to everyone's attention that FedCures Chairman, Kenny H Linn,J.D.,LL.M., is very ill with cancer of of the pancreas,chemo has not done well,it does not look good for him . He has dedicated his life on criminal justice reform, to help the ones stuck in a unjust federal system since 1989when FedCure began he never has given up on the fight for federal criminal justice reform
Please keep him in your thoughts or prayers!
Posted by Sherilyn Yeley on 05/29/2009 @ 05:29AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.