Advocacy can be a challenging road to navigate. It must start with empowering the person you are advocating for so that they can help themselves, but many times it must work in concert with others helping as well, to rectify situations that are beyond their control. The question in this newsletter was excellent and I’m so glad it was posed. Unfortunately, I think the problem is that the First Step Act caters only to non-violent or drug offenders. So all the white collar, welfare fraud, medicare fraud or crimes involving drugs can get out of prison early. This can only be due to legislators not wanting to frighten the public with the idea of letting a bunch of violent criminals out of prison early so that they would then be in danger.
I challenge the legislators and the public by pointing to this flaw in the logic and saying it is the violent criminals who have the greatest need to “earn” freedom. They rescinded their privilege to live in a larger community by committing acts of violence whereas the drug offenders need treatment and most white collar criminals are already well educated and middle aged so the least likely to re-offend. Selecting this portion of those incarcerated was a safe bet and a way to NOT offend the public/voters by talking about early releases.
Given the way the FSA was written, an inmate may “earn” Time Credits (freedom) by participating in programs but in actuality they only need to have their names on waiting lists. This serves for participation because the institution cannot guarantee an immediate spot in a class or program. Is holding a place on a waiting list participating in a program? Is it enough participation to warrant earning time credits/early release? Even if they are not able to take the class prior to their release? The legislators and the BOP both say yes. Ironically, those not eligible for FSA Time Credits cannot even get their names on waiting lists if they do not have a “need” according to a PATTERN score. A person with a crime of domestic violence takes one class – Criminal Thinking or Beyond Violence – and that Anger need is then removed from their file. So when they try to sign up for Anger Management because they still have anger issues, they are told you do not have an “anger need” and they cannot circumvent policy. That is the reality of how the FSA and policy is enforced.
Director Peters testified in front of the House Judiciary Committee about the FSA and spoke about the 113 EBRR programs available for the 177,000 and during 2022 and 2024 the 560,000+ programs completed. But she did not talk about how the FSA Program Guide lists all the EBRR and PAs available at every BOP institution when in fact there are several programs that ARE NOT available at every institution. Nor could she ever give the statistics for the number of inmates who are denied access to programming because they are not eligible for FSA Time Credits, they don’t have a need (as dictated by a computer algorithm) and they’re not within 24 months of their release.
Certainly the inmates who are close to release need programs to rehabilitate them but the people who have a longer sentence need programming JUST AS MUCH as the short term inmates. No amount of resourcefulness or resiliency can overcome policy when trying to program with a long sentence and no FSA eligibility. No amount of arguing, reasoning or begging can convince a staff member to violate policy if they chose not to, despite the fact you have a compassionate release in, or a parole/clemency hearing for a military board, or a petition in front of the President to commute your sentence. You cannot make a bureaucrat see reason: the violent offender will one day be your neighbor, no matter in what community you live. Do you want them to emerge with skills and a head full of new habits, rehabilitation and goals under their belt? Or would you prefer that they emerge from prison with no programs and frustrated at sitting around for years doing nothing? Wouldn’t correctional officers, educators and employers within the prison prefer to deal with inmates who are actively engaged in things they would like to see in the community at large? Work, church, community service, mentoring, learning new skills, creating crafts with friends for their kids and grandkids, aren’t these the things that regular law-abiding citizens do? Wouldn’t the correctional workers prefer to see inmates doing THE SAME THINGS so that they can learn to live a life within the law and find fulfillment in that? Not everyone is going to be released from prison and be a successful entrepreneur. Some people will just have to get jobs and be happy with their middle-of-the-road-life. Isn’t prison the place to start that? But when inmates who recognize the truth try to explain these things, the staff respond with, “This is what the policy tells me I have to do.”
If I were to give suggestions to people advocating for change within this system, I would start with the idea that the FSA and all other ideas about earning freedom need to target the other side of the fence – the violent offenders. They are the ones who scare the community, they are the ones who need the rehabilitation the most. The drug offenders, whether it is the dealers or the users, need treatment for addictions (money, drugs, gambling, alcohol, etc.). And while there is no point in returning to Draconian sentencing laws that make them do huge chunks of time, statistically speaking, is releasing them early proving to be a way to deter their addiction? No. The violent offenders are doing long stretches of time and as people who have hurt other, sometimes many others, they have the greatest need to “earn” their freedom. Perhaps the FSA can continue to provide an early release to the non-violent offenders and something can be drafted for violent offenders to earn parole. Since that way of release ended in 1987, much has evolved. Psychology and some of the PATTERN scoring can be joined to get a more accurate read on who is up for parole. Classes can be opened up to the long-term inmates and even more added to target some of the root causes of the violence. Another thing that can happen for the females is prisons can be adjusted to house long-term inmates separate from short-term inmates. The BOP can do studies on the differences in the communities. If there is more funding for female prisoners, they can also create more therapeutic communities to study the effects of a caring environment on women who were violent prior to prison.
Unfortunately, prisons are a billion dollar industry, but few law-abiding tax payers want to waste their tax dollars on prisons. Perhaps if we consider them as therapeutic communities to rehabilitate people in an effort to return them to society, it won’t be such a stigmatizing idea to let violent offenders out “early”. As they are now, most violent offenders will leave prison with little to no programming or job skills unless it is a VT or an apprenticeship. The BOP has no computer training as of right now (and hasn’t since BEFORE COVID) so no one will emerge with skills necessary to submit a resume or do a virtual job interview. It is hard to pinpoint exactly where to pull the thread of this web because there are so many things that need attention. I wish you the best of luck in your advocacy and thank you heartily. Please continue to fight the good fight!
READ NEWSLETTER ARTICLE HERE: https://prisonprofessorstalent.com/journal-entries/newsletter-25/
