Tucson AFSC: Prison Reform in AZ

In case anyone plans to write thoughtful letters to policy-makers, here a a few concrete ideas to raise, from the American Friends Service Committee in Tucson:

Suggested Reforms for Arizona

1. Declare a moratorium on new prison construction.
Once a prison is built, the state must keep it full. This is particularly true of privately operated prisons, whose contracts explicitly stipulate 90% occupancy. New prison construction reduces our opportunities to have a meaningful discussion on sentencing reform. We need fewer prisons and more treatment and diversion programs.

2. Eliminate so-called truth in sentencing laws or reduce the percentage of time inmates must serve.
During the tough-on-crime '90's, many states passed truth in sentencing laws that eliminated the use of parole. In Arizona, prisoners sentenced under these laws must serve 85% of their sentence, regardless of their efforts toward rehabilitation or their real risk to the public. Many other states are now revisiting these laws and lowering the minimum percentage that prisoners must serve.

3. Amend mandatory minimums for drug and other low-level offenses.
Many drug offenders are sentenced under mandatory minimum sentences, which remove discretion from judges by mandating the terms people must serve. Most drug offenders are non-violent and would be better served in treatment programs, which are cheaper and more effective.

4. Re-think harsh DUI sentences.
While no one would argue against keeping drunken drivers off the road, prison sentences without meaningful treatment do virtually nothing to address the problem of DUI. Instead of spending $21,000 per person per year on incarceration, these offenders would be better served in community-based alcohol treatment to address the issues that led to their alcohol dependency.

5. Establish alternative sentencing programs and expand use of diversion programs that work.
There are hundreds of effective alternative sentencing models in other states. Plus, there are programs already in place in some cities in Arizona, such as Drug and DUI Courts, and programs that are on the books but are underused, such as work release programs. These programs have proven to be successful at reducing recidivism and are far less costly than incarceration.

6. Reduce the number of probation revocations due to technical violations.
About 20% of all admissions to the Department of Corrections are people who committed technical violations of the terms of their probation. These are not people who commit new crimes. These are people who missed an appointment with their probation officer or tested positive on a drug test. Probation departments can develop new programs to hold violators accountable for their actions without having to return them to prison. Another option is "shock incarceration," where violators are returned to prison for a short period (120 days), but then put back on probation in the community.

7. Improve the treatment and educational services provided to prisoners while they are incarcerated.
Our recidivism numbers would be significantly lowered if prisoners were provided with the skills and services they need to become productive citizens. Simple warehousing that ignores the root causes of crime commits us to a never-ending cycle of incarceration and wastes millions of tax dollars every year.

8. Provide well-funded re-entry services to released inmates.
Most prisoners are sent out the prison gates with no more than a check for $50 that they have no means of cashing. Widespread discrimination against people with felony convictions makes it very difficult for former prisoners to find stable housing and decent jobs. People with drug convictions are barred from receiving public assistance or Section 8 housing. As mentioned above, many of them did not have an opportunity to effectively address their addictions, abuse histories, or lack of education while incarcerated. Is it any surprise that so many of them return to prison?

Prison Abuse Remedies Act

Below is an editorial by the New York Times urging revision of the Prison Reform Litigation Act, which has been preventing prisoners from obtaining legal remedies to neglect and abuse since 1996 (another piece of legislative garbage Clinton signed to repress resistance).

The follow-up to the Times Editorital is a good example of what a lot of well-educated people could be doing. The authors below make the direct link between the abuses of that law by prison officials, and the deplorable conditions in American prisons today.

If Congress doesn't pass the Prison Remedies Act before they head full on into their 2010 campaigns, I think we should make it the number one campaign issue.

Thanks to Lois at the Real Cost of Prisons Project for passing this on to us. Perhaps in the meantime the draft legislation could be used as the foundation for new state legislation to remedy prison abuse.

----------------------------------------
Letter to the Editor: Abuse of Female Prisoners
Published: October 2, 2009
To the Editor:

Re “Prisoners’ Rights” (editorial, Sept. 24):

You are right to call for legislation amending the Prison Litigation Reform Act. We sued on behalf of female prisoners in the New York State prison system who reported that they had been sexually assaulted by staff members, and have been appalled to spend the last six years litigating whether these 17 women — each of whom bravely complained of her abuse to departmental officials — exhausted their administrative remedies sufficiently to satisfy the law.

As a result, New York State has been able to avoid addressing the prison system’s longstanding failure to protect female prisoners from sexual abuse, allowing more and more women to be victimized.

The Prison Litigation Reform Act was sold in Congress as a measure against frivolous litigation, but has served in reality to prevent the redress of the most serious violations of prisoners’ human rights. The time has come for reform, or better yet, repeal of the law.

Lisa Freeman
Dori Lewis
New York, Sept. 24, 2009

The writers are lawyers with the Prisoners’ Rights Project of the Legal Aid Society and lawyers for the plaintiffs in Amador v. Andrews.

---------------------------------------------:

Editorial - NY Times
Prisoners’ Rights
Published: September 23, 2009

In 1996, Congress passed a law that made it much harder for inmates to challenge abusive treatment. It has contributed significantly to the bad conditions — including the desperate overcrowding — that prevail today.
The law must be fixed.

Times Topics: Prisons and Prisoners

In the name of clamping down on frivolous lawsuits, the Prison Reform Litigation Act barred prisoners from suing prisons and jails unless they could show that they had suffered a physical injury. Prison officials have used this requirement to block lawsuits challenging all sorts of horrific conditions, including sexual abuse.

The law also requires inmates to present their claims to prison officials before filing a suit. The prisons set the rules for those grievance procedures, notes Stephen Bright, the president of the Southern Center for Human Rights, and they have an incentive to make the rules as complicated as possible, so prisoners will not be able to sue. “That has become the main purpose of many grievance systems,” Mr. Bright told Congress last year.

In the last Congress, Representative Robert Scott, Democrat of Virginia, sponsored the Prison Abuse Remedies Act. It would have eliminated the physical injury requirement and made it harder for prison officials to get suits dismissed for failure to exhaust grievance procedures. It would have exempted juveniles, who are especially vulnerable to abuse, from the law’s restrictions.

The bill’s supporters need to try again this year. Conditions in the nation’s overcrowded prisons are becoming increasingly dangerous; recently, there have been major riots in California and Kentucky. Prisoner lawsuits are a way of reining in the worst abuses, which contribute to prison riots and other violence.

The main reason to pass the new law, though, is human decency. The only way to ensure that inmates are not mistreated is to guarantee them a fair opportunity to bring their legitimate complaints to court.

This and other news about women and mass incarceration can be found at www.realcostofprisons.org/blog/