PRISON OVERCROWDING

Group Members: Dianne Naihe Jose Enovejas Michael Makekau

Overview The overcrowding of prisons remains a major concern and challenge in the United States. The United States incarcerates a higher percentage of its population than any other country in the world. Currently, there are over 2.3 million Americans in prison or in jail. As a result, the safety of inmates and staff alike is threatened and ultimately, that of the public. This presentation will focus on sentencing guidelines, more so the mandatory sentencing that was created in the 80s. In the 1980s increase in crime rates caused public fears nationwide in a demand for the actions of Congress. Additionally, society demanded action on the issue of sentences being handed down to offenders that were too lenient for the offenses committed.

Policies and Statistics

Congress responded to the needs of society through the creation of several tough on crime policies which included mandatory minimum sentencing, three strikes law, and determinant sentences. Of the different policies enacted by Congress Get Tough on Crime movement, mandatory minimum sentencing has posed the most difficult on the elements of the criminal justice system and the public. The purpose behind the Get Tough on Crime policys implementation of mandatory minimum sentences was to ensure the publics safety from dangerous repeat offenders and to deter future offenders from committing crimes. Approximately 80% of the prison overcrowding from 1985 to 1995 is a direct result of the mandatory minimum sentencing policy. In fact, between 1980 and 1993 the number of offenders incarcerated increased dramatically from 329,000 to approximately 949,000 offenders. Despite the fact that incarceration rates have increased dramatically, no evidence exists that supports incarceration reduces crime rate. Instead increased incarceration rates have resulted in overcrowding of prisons and jails which depletes resources. As resources deplete the offenders needs are not met and prison environments become more dangerous and harmful, which cause offenders to carry the consequences and effects of the prison back to society upon reentry.

WHY BE CONCERNED?
Overcrowding impairs the release planning and reintegration efforts of
offenders and contributes to recidivism. Overcrowding soaks up vast quantities of resources (human and financial) to warehouse inmates, with negative rather than positive impacts.

Overcrowding diverts resources from treatment and programs for those who might benefit from them.
Overcrowding increases stress and potential danger for both staff and inmates. Overcrowding contributes to planning backlogs which, in turn, delay timely release of offenders. Overcrowding leads to triple-bunking of individuals in a two-man cell, which is inhumane and infringes upon the basic human dignity of staff, inmates, and volunteers.

Overcrowding cripples the ability of the system to deliver programs and treatment in a timely and appropriate manner.

WHY IS IT AN IMPORTANT PROBLEM FOR SOCIAL WORKERS TO ADDRESS?

In addressing the problem of prison overcrowding, research is important in social work practice. Foremost, research enables social workers to learn about results of the most recent studies while gaining exposure to the theories that support the investigations. This helps social workers know what theories and applications are working best in the field. It also helps social workers better understand the limitations of existing theories of existing theories and practices with respect to complex issues like prison overcrowding. The type of knowledge through research, therefore becomes critical in the design and implementation of social work programs.

WHAT INDIVIDUAL OR COLLECTIVE TACIT PRACTICE KNOWLEDGE DOES THIS SOCIAL PROBLEM REPRESENT? Our tacit/practice knowledge provides affirmation, in this respect, especially with subjects like prison overcrowding. What we recognize, is that we have a growing problem in this country with the incarceration rate. There are well documented societal issues that impact prison population and crime rate. These factors include poverty, lack of education or employment opportunities, drug and alcohol use and abuse, racial disparity, and mental illness. These complex societal issues combined with strict sentencing guidelines leads to a persistent growth of prison population and a high rate of recidivism.

Scholarly Literature Articles Batey, R. (2002). Mandatory Minimum Sentencing: A Failed Policy. Phi Kappa Phi Forum. 82(1), 24.

Marvell, T.B. (1995). Sentencing Guidelines and Prison Growth. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology. 85(3), 696-709.
Pfaff, J.F. (2008). The Empirics of Prison Growth: A Critical Review and Path Forward. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 98(2), 547-619. Roberts, J. (2003). Public Opinion and Mandatory Sentencing: A Review of International Findings. Criminal Justice and Behavior, Vol. 30, No.4, August 2003 483-508. Vincent, B. & Hofer, P. (1994). The Consequences of Mandatory Prison Terms: A Summary of Recent Findings. Federal Judicial Center. <http://www.fjc.com>.

Summary of Scholarly Literature

Previous literature review have shown that mandatory sentences do not deter drug crime and prevent the proper administration of justice. There is substantial evidence that mandatory minimums result every year in the lengthy incarceration of thousands of low-level offenders who could be effectively sentenced to shorter periods of time at an annual savings of several hundred million dollars, and that the mandatory minimums do not narrowly target violent criminals or major drug traffickers. The statutes have unintended consequences that compromise the basic frames and integrity of the criminal justice system. Mandatory sentencing laws, particularly those affecting drug offenders, have swelled prison populations and also increased prison budgets. The U.S. has led the world in the creation of mandatory sentencing laws, and there is evidence that other countries have learned from the U.S. example. Many jurisdictions, including Australia, England, Wales have adopted variations on Three Strikes laws.

What is the primary theory, research philosophy or other way of thinking that influences your study?
The primary theory that influences our study is the social control theory. The social control acknowledges the endogenous influences of crime. It argues that unemployment, sentencing guidelines, and other factors better explain the rise in crime rates and prison growth. The social control theory is primarily concerned with understanding how social structures, the criminal justice system and law enforcement, are causally related to crime. In short, when the social contract has been violated, social bonds are broken and individuals will commit crimes. Social contract theory, therefore, views the issue of crime deterrence as matter of systemic and social justice. If the justice system and law enforcement systems are equitable and fair in treatment of people, social control theory, predicts that crime will then be reduced, which translates to reductions in incarceration rates and prison growths.

What facets of an indigenous paradigm might be applicable to your study?

The issues native peoples faces intensify with globalization. Through case studies from around the world, indigenous peoples movements can be understood only by linking highly localized processes with larger global and historical forces. Indigenous peoples have been resisting and adapting to encounters with states for millennia. Unlike other anti-globalization activists, indigenous peoples primarily seek autonomy and the right to determine their own processes of adaptation and change, especially in relationship to their origin lands and community.

A better understanding of the cyclical nature of such conflicts is itself an important element in ensuring recognition of those rights. As a result we are obliged to rethink not just our scholarly analyses but also the nature of our own political and cultural commitments to a more equitable world.
Indigenous peoples throughout the world are experiencing the full presence of injustice in the form of dishonest development schemes, poverty, landlessness, political, religious oppression. Therefore, one can conclude indigenous people may be incarcerated more often than non-natives simply because of their historical belief system. All factors are applicable to our study because indigenous people historically are not use to globalization. Due to these facts, we will make sure we incorporate this into our study.

Research Question:
Does Mandatory Minimum Sentences Impact Prison Overcrowding?

Hypothesis: Prison mandatory minimum sentences does affect overcrowding.

Measurement and Conceptualization

The process of calculating prison capacity is analogous to the practice of John Deweys Texas farmer, who weighed his pigs by putting them on one end of a plank that was balanced in the middle, placing rocks on the planks other end until it was level, and then guessing the weight of the rocks (Bleich 1989). The connection between crowding and increased prison population occurs if populations are growing more rapidly than the original prison design capacity limit, thus overcrowding takes place. Concepts = mandatory minimum prison sentences, overcrowding Operationalized = number of prison mandatory minimum sentences, records of prison population becoming more than capacity limit. Basically I want to see if the number of inmates with mandatory minimum sentences impacts overcrowding. Overcrowding is the dependent variable because it is dependent on the number of mandatory minimum sentences. We will be using existing data records collected from the facility through court documents and prison guards.

Sampling
The sampling design that will be appropriate for our research study is Probability Sampling: Gerneral Characteristics. Our population is inmates with mandatory minimum prison sentences and the sampling frame is the list of inmates with a mandatory minimum sentence taken from the inmates court documents/prison records.

We will be conducting our study with a sample size of 500 inmates in order to increase the odds of having a representative sample.

Research Design and Methodology

We will be conducting a longitudinal study that will last for 20 years, and we will be collecting inmate data at every 5 year point. We will be using a Trend Studies or another name is repeated cross-sectional studies, which involves collecting data at two or more points from different samples of the same population The data will be collected from the records department of the prison from court documents and prison guard documentation. Face Validity may be a problem if the data from the records department was improperly documented or misplaced. Content Validity may be a problem if the original prison design capacity limit is incorrect , vandalized or unidentified. Construct Validity may be a problem if the data gathered by prison guards are inaccurate.

Research Design and Methodology

Criterion Validity may be a problem if the data obtained through the prison guards documentation dont match up the data in the prison records department. We expect our studys findings to be generalizable with all of the prison facilities because the increase in the mandatory minimum sentences were applied throughout the entire U.S. We can improve generalizability by increasing our sample size up to 1000 inmates in order to increase the odds even more of having a representative sample. We would analyze the data from our study by using a qualitative method for gathering data in which natural social processes are studied as they happen in the field rather than in the laboratory and left relatively undisturbed and our role would consist of complete observation.