Pubdate: Wed, 05 Mar 2008
Source: Daily Cardinal (U of WI, Madison, Edu)
Copyright: 2008 The Daily Cardinal Newspaper Corporation
Contact: http://dailycardinal.com/resources/letter_to_the_editor
Website: http://dailycardinal.com
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/712
Author: Matt Jividen
Note: Matt Jividen is a senior majoring in history.
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/prison.htm (Incarceration)

U.S. PRISON POPULATIONS, COSTS UNNECESSARILY HIGH

New survey data shows 1 of every 100 Americans is in the prison 
system which highlights flaw in government's priorities.

Is this country getting emptier, or is it just me? A study released 
last week might help explain this trend.

The land of the free has a long history of being No. 1--especially 
when it comes to incarcerating its citizens. For quite a few years we 
have ranked first in this arena, but now we are taking this record to 
even greater heights.

According to state-by-state data collected by the Pew Center during 
2007, more than two million Americans were serving time in 
correctional institutions at the beginning of 2008. That number makes 
us first in the world--in both total number and per capita. China, 
for example, a nation of over a billion people, has only 1.5 million 
incarcerated prisoners.

The United States currently accounts for 25 percent of the world's 
total prison population, and, as of this year, one in every 100 
Americans is serving time in jail.

In the last 20 years, the amount of federal funds necessary to house 
our nation's prison population has swollen from under $11 billion to 
over $49 billion. That is quite an increase--a six times greater 
increase than funding for higher education. And while our bridges and 
other infrastructures may be falling apart, the prison-industrial 
complex is riding high.

More importantly, are we getting what we pay for? The homicide rate 
has remained stable over the last few decades, but is still nearly 
four times higher than that of Western European nations. In the last 
two decades, the number of U.S. prisoners has tripled, yet there has 
been only a slight drop in national crime rates.

The growing number of prisoners is not caused by increased crime in 
the United States, but rather due to increased sentences and harsher 
punishments. While being "tough on crime" has made good fodder for 
political speeches, in reality the 
lock-them-up-and-throw-away-the-key approach is not justifiable under 
the law, cost effective or even effective at reducing crime.

Don't worry, I'm not suggesting we throw the prison doors open and 
let violent criminals stream out into your neighborhoods. There are 
always going to be some individuals who must be 
incarcerated--murders, rapists, etc.

Even so, there are over a million non-violent criminals for whom an 
alternative to incarceration is a viable option. This number includes 
countless scores of non-violent inmates serving time for drug possession.

First of all, we should stop sending people to prison for marijuana 
offenses. In the last 15 years, we have moved from a president who 
admitted to smoking marijuana, but never inhaling, to a viable 
candidate who admits to having "inhaled frequently," adding, "that 
was the point."

Perhaps it is time for our laws to reflect the general consensus in 
this country that while marijuana may be harmful, it is at least no 
more so than tobacco or alcohol. Relaxed punishments of marijuana and 
other "soft drugs" in the Netherlands has resulted in lower rates of 
both drug abuse and imprisonment.

Regardless of how you feel about drug policy in the United States, 
perhaps we could all agree these individuals would benefit more from 
being treated as addicts rather than as criminals. Currently, among 
those serving time for drug related offenses, there is a 60 percent 
recidivism rate. Treatment outside of prison could be a far more 
effective and less costly alternative to incarceration.

Right now, we spend around $20,000 a year per inmate. This funding 
ensures inmates are not only fed, but also have access to free 
healthcare, vocational training, higher education and therapy. That's 
right, only the 2.3 million incarcerated Americans have access to 
universal health care.

Perhaps it is even more ironic these same individuals are the only 
ones with access to free vocational training and the possibility for 
free higher education. These measures are in place because it is 
widely believed that mentally and physically healthy 
individuals--with applicable job training, education and vocational 
skills--are far less likely to be repeat offenders when released back 
into society. Statistics show that these measures are generally 
successful, and I wholeheartedly agree with the programs. However, 
this begs the greater question: Why don't we extend the same 
privileges to our citizens who aren't incarcerated?

It seems that giving citizens on the outside access to these 
privileges might be a better solution than the current stop-gap 
system which waits for them to commit a crime before making these 
opportunities available.

Instead of spending $49 billion a year to keep people in prison, 
perhaps that money could go to education and health care for people 
who abide by the law. Regardless, at this rate, with 47 million 
Americans lacking adequate health care and facing the general lack of 
access to higher education, it seems more than likely that before too 
long, the non-incarcerated American population may have neither the 
health nor the necessary funds to continue supporting the prison 
system in its current manifestation.

Perhaps there is a silver lining to this situation. Wisconsin is one 
of only 14 states which actually decreased its prison population in 2007.

Even though prison population dropped by almost 4 percent, the state 
nonetheless still spends nearly 7 percent of its general fund dollars 
on the prison system.

In the following years we should expect to see many states beginning 
to follow suit by redirecting non-violent prisoners into 
rehabilitation and community service programs. In light of thinning 
budgets, many states are finally noticing that the anachronistic 
system of being tough on crime is, in reality, ineffective and much 
tougher on tax payers.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom