The Government Account Office (GAO) has once again criticized the Bureau of Prisons (BOP), for their failure to use current statutory and regulatory authority to reduce the prisoner population, and thereby save the taxpayers money.
In its study published in 2012, the GAO noted that the BOP has three principal authorities to legally reduce prisoner counts: 12-month sentence reduction for completion of the Residential Drug Abuse Treatment Program (RDAP), transfer of prisoners to community correction centers (also known as halfway houses) under the Second-Chance Act which authorizes up to to 12 months of halfway house, and the use of "good time" sentence reduction for good behavior while incarcerated.
However, as long as Congress continues to approve BOP budget requests without tying them to using these tools at their disposal to reduce prison population, it is unlikely to be a priority for the BOP. What government agency doesn't want to justify maintaining, or better yet, increasing their current budget?
However, the BOP, never known for administrative efficiency in the administration of any of its programs, continues to lag behind in its use of common sense to get people out of prison, back in their community, and home to their families. High prison populations are only popular with prison guard labor unions, thankfully not a large group. More on this in the future.
Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Monday, January 7, 2013
Illinois Quietly Closes Prisons Despite Guard Protests
With little publicity, the Illinois State Supreme Court ruled that Governor Quinn can now proceed with the closing of several under-utilized prisons in the State of Illinois, saving millions of dollars. The closings had originally been set for October 31st, but had been delayed by an Alexander County judge's preliminary injunction blocking the move, but the Supreme Court ordered that the injunction be dissolved..
On the chopping block is the supermax prison, Tamms, as well as Dwight Correctional Center for Women, and two juvenile justice centers in Joliet and Murphysboro.
Predictably, the union representing employee at these facilities raised the issue of public and guard safety, stating that overcrowding could put employees at risk There was no mention of prisoner safety in the statements of the union, that, understandably, is trying to preserve the jobs of its membership. Left unsaid is the fact that the Illinois prisoner population is dropping quickly now that previously scuttled reforms aimed at reducing that population have also been quietly reinstated. The simple fact is that State of Illinois finances are in a shambles, and the closing of underused or vacant facilities is the responsible thing to do.
On the chopping block is the supermax prison, Tamms, as well as Dwight Correctional Center for Women, and two juvenile justice centers in Joliet and Murphysboro.
Predictably, the union representing employee at these facilities raised the issue of public and guard safety, stating that overcrowding could put employees at risk There was no mention of prisoner safety in the statements of the union, that, understandably, is trying to preserve the jobs of its membership. Left unsaid is the fact that the Illinois prisoner population is dropping quickly now that previously scuttled reforms aimed at reducing that population have also been quietly reinstated. The simple fact is that State of Illinois finances are in a shambles, and the closing of underused or vacant facilities is the responsible thing to do.
Thursday, November 29, 2012
U.S. Attorney Admits BOP Served Meat Intended as Pet Food to Prisoners
According to the Justice Department, John Soules Foods of Tyler, Texas has entered into a settlement agreement with the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, concluding a three-year investigations that the company sold meat trimmings intended for pet food to customers for human consumption, including the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP). the meat was apparently either adulterated or mislabeled before it was sold to a food broker who later re-sold the product to the BOP.
Although the BOP claims that its food meets all federal standards for prisoner consumption, federal prisoners would argue otherwise. There are periodic complaints about meat served in the system causing prisoners to become ill and sometimes hospitalized, as occurred in Pennsylvania in the past year. In 2011 and 2012, some BOP facilities attempted to utilize meat trimmings packed into plastic sleeves in various dishes, although prisoners complained about the smell and taste. the quality of that meat was so poor that it could not be formed into either meat loaf or hamburgers.
This followed the 2010 incidents in some BOP prisons where a cubed form of turkey was passed off as chicken. Prisoners complained that its rubbery texture and taste made it unpalatable. It was eventually pulled from the menu when prisoners filed complaints which properly pointed out that the item was not on the BOP National Menu, and at that time, it was improper to serve it. Although prisoners are used to being served expired food and bruised fruit, poor quality meat by-products intended for use as pet food will always bring complaints. The unanswered question is: What is happening to food purchased for prisoner consumption if what is being served is of such poor and unwholesome quality?
Under the agreement, John Soules Foods will pay $392,000 to the U.S. Treasury General Fund to resolve the investigation and reimburse its costs, and in return Soules will not be subject to additional criminal, civil, or administrative action. Soules is the leading fajita processing and marketing company in the United States and employs approximately 500 people. It makes meat products for food service distributor, chain restaurants and supermarkets across the country, something to think about the next time that you go shopping.
According to the U.S. Attorney in Texas, John M. Bales, "The settlement agreement upholds the government's commitment to food safety while also recognizing that John Soules foods, Inc. is a good corporate citizen with a long record of regulatory compliance and customer satisfaction. We fully support the USDA's vigorous protection of the nation's food supply." The company will adopt additional procedures to assure that laws such as the Federal Meat Inspection Act and the Poultry Products Inspection Act will be followed, and will undertake a thorough review of existing procedures, books and records, and policies to ensure continuing compliance.
The case was investigated by the Office of the Inspector General, Office of Investigation, and Food Safety and Inspection Service, of the USDA, as well as the U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of the Inspector General. There was no announcement as to whether the BOP will be required to overhaul its food purchasing policies to determine whether food purchased for prisoners meets minimal standards of quality to prevent a repetition of this action in the future. The U.S. attorney's office was quick to announce that, "there is no evidence that anyone who consumed any of the 'beef trimmings' product suffered any ill effect;" of course, the BOP's closed prison medical care system is not known for its alacrity in investigating prisoner complaints of food poisoning or stomach upset from ingesting expired or salvaged food products. It is highly unlikely that the from ingesting expired or salvaged food products. It is highly unlikely that the BOP will bring forth any statistics of such incidents unless compelled to do so.
See: kkrause@dallasnews.com
See also: www. justice.gov/oig/press/2012/2012 0817
Although the BOP claims that its food meets all federal standards for prisoner consumption, federal prisoners would argue otherwise. There are periodic complaints about meat served in the system causing prisoners to become ill and sometimes hospitalized, as occurred in Pennsylvania in the past year. In 2011 and 2012, some BOP facilities attempted to utilize meat trimmings packed into plastic sleeves in various dishes, although prisoners complained about the smell and taste. the quality of that meat was so poor that it could not be formed into either meat loaf or hamburgers.
This followed the 2010 incidents in some BOP prisons where a cubed form of turkey was passed off as chicken. Prisoners complained that its rubbery texture and taste made it unpalatable. It was eventually pulled from the menu when prisoners filed complaints which properly pointed out that the item was not on the BOP National Menu, and at that time, it was improper to serve it. Although prisoners are used to being served expired food and bruised fruit, poor quality meat by-products intended for use as pet food will always bring complaints. The unanswered question is: What is happening to food purchased for prisoner consumption if what is being served is of such poor and unwholesome quality?
Under the agreement, John Soules Foods will pay $392,000 to the U.S. Treasury General Fund to resolve the investigation and reimburse its costs, and in return Soules will not be subject to additional criminal, civil, or administrative action. Soules is the leading fajita processing and marketing company in the United States and employs approximately 500 people. It makes meat products for food service distributor, chain restaurants and supermarkets across the country, something to think about the next time that you go shopping.
According to the U.S. Attorney in Texas, John M. Bales, "The settlement agreement upholds the government's commitment to food safety while also recognizing that John Soules foods, Inc. is a good corporate citizen with a long record of regulatory compliance and customer satisfaction. We fully support the USDA's vigorous protection of the nation's food supply." The company will adopt additional procedures to assure that laws such as the Federal Meat Inspection Act and the Poultry Products Inspection Act will be followed, and will undertake a thorough review of existing procedures, books and records, and policies to ensure continuing compliance.
The case was investigated by the Office of the Inspector General, Office of Investigation, and Food Safety and Inspection Service, of the USDA, as well as the U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of the Inspector General. There was no announcement as to whether the BOP will be required to overhaul its food purchasing policies to determine whether food purchased for prisoners meets minimal standards of quality to prevent a repetition of this action in the future. The U.S. attorney's office was quick to announce that, "there is no evidence that anyone who consumed any of the 'beef trimmings' product suffered any ill effect;" of course, the BOP's closed prison medical care system is not known for its alacrity in investigating prisoner complaints of food poisoning or stomach upset from ingesting expired or salvaged food products. It is highly unlikely that the from ingesting expired or salvaged food products. It is highly unlikely that the BOP will bring forth any statistics of such incidents unless compelled to do so.
See: kkrause@dallasnews.com
See also: www. justice.gov/oig/press/2012/2012 0817
Thursday, November 8, 2012
Money from Drug Forfeitures Trips Up Cop
Usually no one cares when a drug dealer loses money through a little-known or understood forfeiture proceeding. This law, beloved by police departments nationwide, has been a lucrative source of cash to fund cop wish-lists. In some cases, however, it just provides a juicy temptation for greedy cops.
Michael Newsome, of North Chicago, IL, is one such cop. He stands accused of helping himself to $140,000 of such drug forfeiture funds. He apparently did not appreciate the inherent irony in taking the drug money. As Mexico has found out, the presence of large sums of cash does strange things to many people, including law enforcement agencies.
We should also focus on laws that permit forfeiture with only the low threshold of "probable cause" that it might be connected to the drug trade to permit its seizure. It might be time to give such laws a second look, and see if giving government and law enforcement largely unchecked and unsupervised forfeiture power squares with our democratic legal traditions.
Michael Newsome, of North Chicago, IL, is one such cop. He stands accused of helping himself to $140,000 of such drug forfeiture funds. He apparently did not appreciate the inherent irony in taking the drug money. As Mexico has found out, the presence of large sums of cash does strange things to many people, including law enforcement agencies.
We should also focus on laws that permit forfeiture with only the low threshold of "probable cause" that it might be connected to the drug trade to permit its seizure. It might be time to give such laws a second look, and see if giving government and law enforcement largely unchecked and unsupervised forfeiture power squares with our democratic legal traditions.
Monday, October 29, 2012
"A Better Way. . ." Continued
My theory goes like this . Let's say a person gets a 50-month sentence. He will get roughly 8 months off, or "good time," if he commits no rule violation while in prison. If he successfully completed the Residential Grug Treatment Plan, he can earn up to another 12 months off, so goes from 42 to 30 months. Now, if he is rule-follower, he can get another six months of halfway house, so he is down to 24 months in prison.
Clearly, these incentives may make someone think twice before he breaks a rule in prison, and if he re-offends when he gets out, he loses all of these sentence "credits." Talk about motivation!
Let's take this one step further. What about community college prison outreach, certificate programs in green energy jobs, carpentry, plumbing, HVAC, and the like being a way to earn sentence credits? It gives the non-drug using prisoner an incentive to improve their minds, learn a skill, and do something positive with their time.
Let's all to that one month credits for other courses, such as typing on keyboards, computer usage, and other self-improvement programs. Let's identify faith-based organizations who can mentor prisoners on simple interview techniques, and other job skills that they can put to use after they are released.
If the prisoner re-offends, he loses all of the above benefits, on top of any new sentence he obtains. How's that for motivation?
Thursday, October 25, 2012
There's Got To Be A Better Way . . .
What is the purpose of putting people in jail? In the case of violent crimes, clearly, it's public safety. It seems to make sense to punish people who cause physical pain and injury to others. However, except in the most extreme cases, even violent offenders have "out dates," when they are released back into society.
What becomes of them, and the non-violent offenders when they are released? Are they ready? Who is held responsible if they are not?
The American correctional system holds the released criminals responsible for their own behavior, and if he "messes up" and re-offends, "Oh, well!" In other words, we expect people who were guilty of misbehavior before, confine them with other criminals, give them no incentive to improve themselves, and act surprised when they commit new crimes after release.
I have some suggestions, none of which are particularly original, but one that has a mixture of positive and negative reinforcement. It make the prisoner responsible for his own behavior, and is a correctional variant of the old "broken window" school of law enforcement. The theory on that is if you restrain and/or punish simple crimes, you avoid the natural progression to bigger, more serious crimes.
More to come. . .
What becomes of them, and the non-violent offenders when they are released? Are they ready? Who is held responsible if they are not?
The American correctional system holds the released criminals responsible for their own behavior, and if he "messes up" and re-offends, "Oh, well!" In other words, we expect people who were guilty of misbehavior before, confine them with other criminals, give them no incentive to improve themselves, and act surprised when they commit new crimes after release.
I have some suggestions, none of which are particularly original, but one that has a mixture of positive and negative reinforcement. It make the prisoner responsible for his own behavior, and is a correctional variant of the old "broken window" school of law enforcement. The theory on that is if you restrain and/or punish simple crimes, you avoid the natural progression to bigger, more serious crimes.
More to come. . .
Sunday, October 14, 2012
Halfway Houses: Key to Prisoner Reintegration
Build more prisons, says the BOP. Overcrowding is at an all-time high, stressing prisoners,staff, and aging facilities. Thousands of convicted felons col their heels in county jails, in deplorable facilities meant for short- term stays. The solution is more money, right?
Not so fast. What about the high recidivism rate, 70% or less, depending upon the level of security the prisoner is released from? Sorry, not much money for that. It is the law enforcement equivalent of telling an automobile owner that he should buy a new car instead of trying to maintain and repair the old one. Why spend money educating a prisoner when he is coming back anyway?
That's where a well-functioning halfway house comes in. It has resident assistants, employment counselors, and drug and alcohol specialists who can make the difference between a successful re-entry back into society.
Not so fast. What about the high recidivism rate, 70% or less, depending upon the level of security the prisoner is released from? Sorry, not much money for that. It is the law enforcement equivalent of telling an automobile owner that he should buy a new car instead of trying to maintain and repair the old one. Why spend money educating a prisoner when he is coming back anyway?
That's where a well-functioning halfway house comes in. It has resident assistants, employment counselors, and drug and alcohol specialists who can make the difference between a successful re-entry back into society.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)