By Joe Luppino-Esposito | Due Process Institute | Director, Rule of Law Initiatives
The Due Process Institute is supporting the Prison Reform and Redemption Act (H.R. 3356), which is the leading piece of prison reform legislation that is poised to go through Congress this year. The goal of the legislation is to extend more programming opportunities to federal prisoners in order to reduce recidivism.
Unfortunately, rumblings on the Hill are that a number of groups that have long advocated for reform are ready to oppose the PRRA unless sentence-reducing reforms are also simultaneously signed into law. Some proponents of sentencing reform fear that if Congress engages in any criminal justice reform, then the entire subject will be considered “done” for many years to come. This inside-the-Beltway thinking—that if any criminal justice reform is done, no future reform can be done for another generation—is by no means a foregone conclusion. This approach also fails to recognize the multi-tiered progress we’ve seen in the states when it comes to criminal justice reform. But most importantly, it ignores the fact that, right now, there is a real opportunity to achieve serious benefits for the lives of those currently incarcerated in the federal system and to enhance public safety .
The PRRA intends to accomplish these complimentary goals in a number of ways. The bill calls for establishing a risk and needs assessment tool that will help Bureau of Prisons officials determine how best to work with an inmate to prepare him for returning to society. For example, the tool may show that there is a need for education and anger management programming for that individual. After such programming is accomplished, officials can use the tool to reassess needs and determine the new risk level for that individual’s chances of re-offending.
With this tool in hand, the BOP will be able to more accurately assess what programming is needed, and the legislation encourages the department to work with new partners, including nonprofit and faith-based groups, to come up with solutions. BOP will also be tracking the success of these programs and looking for ways to offer more opportunities to inmates.
In order to encourage inmates to participate in this new push, they will be incentivized by getting earned-time credits that can be used for alternatives to incarceration for the final weeks or months of that inmate’s sentence. On a practical level, this means that an inmate might be able to go to a halfway house, home confinement, or even community corrections to finish out his sentence. Research shows that doing this reduces recidivism by easing the transition back into society. Under the PRRA, inmates can earn 10 days of credit for every 30 days of successful work in the recidivism-reducing programming, or other activities that are considered to be productive. Once a prisoner lowers his risk level to the lowest level, the days earned increases.
There are also a handful of other much-needed reforms, including the creation of a “release preparation coordinator” at every BOP facility; expanded opportunities for elderly release; de-escalation training for corrections officers; and disallowing the shackling of pregnant inmates.
At first blush, the subject matter of this legislation wouldn’t seem like a natural fit for the organization. Our mission is to “restore principles of fairness in the criminal justice system.” Most obviously, this includes the procedural protections housed in the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments of the US Constitution. But that certainly does not mean that our concern for due process ends at the last gavel at sentencing.
Part of what the criminal justice system promises, when it is working well, is the rehabilitation of offenders. This is a promise that is inherently made to victims of crime, society at large, and even to the incarcerated. There is a reason why incarceration facilities are run by the “corrections” department in each state. There is an expectation that time incarcerated will be time well-spent on making changes to one’s life. Though at the federal level, the cold-sounding Bureau of Prisons is in charge, the goals ought to be the same.
As our mission directs us to restore fairness principles, that is how we are called to the PRRA from a policy standpoint.
There is also a practical consideration to supporting any major criminal justice reform legislation at this point in time. Though the organization is new, our personnel is not, and we are well aware of the contours of the broader criminal justice reform effort in Congress. Like most issues that come up in Washington, world-changing legislation that addresses every advocate’s concern is hard to come by. Finally, it is our view that were this bill to pass, it could improve lives. It is also our deepest hope that supporting the PRRA represents an opportunity for us to work with the new administration and new allies to open the door for other additional much-needed reforms.
Being a long-time advocate myself, and as one who has seen significant state progress in conservative states in particular, I’m disappointed that so many fellow advocates are willing to keep holding out just because they believe the reforms are not as strong as they could be. To that I say: Of course they aren’t. This is Congress. Perhaps its thanks to my own political predilections, but I do not assume that government will get things right on the first try. Nor do I think that governing in Washington ever leads to clear, bright-line solutions. It’s hard to control how legislation will ultimately find its way to the President’s desk, and in what form.
But here’s something that is in our control: we can keep advocating for any improvements to the system even if the current legislation does not meet all of the broad goals of the reform community. There are few on either side of the aisle who think that any one piece of legislation will “solve” problems with the criminal justice system. Instead, let’s work on the art of the possible and move on the PRRA right now.
The PRRA is bipartisan legislation in an era where that is hard to come by. In that way, the Due Process Institute shares that idealism with the bill’s sponsors.