Don’t Question Grassley’s Clout in the BOP /House
Bill Summary
By Derek Gilna
As a native
Chicagoan, I know a little bit about “clout,” that use of power to get what you
want done, no matter who gets in the way or whose feelings get hurt. The BOP
found out what clout means when they ran afoul of Senator Charles Grassley in
peremptorily banning pork from BOP
menus. The BOP
claimed that a “survey” of prisoners found that they wanted pork off the menu.
(Next they’ll be surveying prisoners over what sort of ‘imitation’ coffee they
would prefer.)
You will
recall that Grassley is one of the co-sponsors of the new prisoner relief bill
introduced recently, and as head of the Senate Judiciary Committee has a lot to
say about the subject and how the BOP runs
its operation. That kind of clout bodes well for some sort of relief coming out
of the Senate.
What about
the House? The House bill also has some
powerful co-sponsors, and does resemble the Senate bill. It would also eliminate mandatory life
sentences for three-time, nonviolent offenders, reducing minimum sentence to 25
years. It would also have retro effect, except for offenders who have prior
serious violent felony conviction that resulted in a prison sentence of greater
than 13 months. It would also apply the
FSA retroactively to several classes of prisoners. Although I would have liked to see more in
this bill, it’s a start, and an important one.
Sentence
relief comes in bits and pieces, because politics is important, and even in the
current more favorable climate for relief, no one wants to get too far out in
front of the parade. You can count on
parts of the DOJ to drag their feet, but the DOJ has no votes in either the
Senate or House, and legislators are anxious to show the public that can
cooperate on something.
How may we
help you?
Federal Legal Center, Inc
Derek Gilna, Director
dgilna1948@yahoo.com
