Moral Panics for the Current Mass Imprisonment in the United States - Essay Example

On Incapacitation: the New York Experience In the dis of the criminal justice system in New York, one of the most important issues is that of incarceration. Of the big states, New York has had the most sustained decrease in its prison population over a several-year period. From the end of 1999 until the end of 2001, the number of prisoners dropped 7.4% - from 72,899 to 67,534 and the trend continues in the years following although the percentage slightly lessened. (Jacobson 58) The continuous drop in prison population New York highlights several important aspects in the state’s criminal justice system. This paper will explore these and ultimately examine the relationship between incarceration and crime. How did it happen? The positive change in the prison statistics in the state of New York is attributed to the changes and reforms in the law enforcement policies of the state. The state has led reforms and innovations particularly in regard to the reformatory characteristic of its incarceration policy and its introduction of the modern parole. Reform was forced out of the policymakers because in the first half of 1990s, tightening revenues threaten the budget of correctional facilities and that the state correction facilities were then already overcrowded and still more prisoners are awaiting assignments. And so, one of the first acts as governor of the former Governor George Pataki was to loosen laws on minor repeat offenders in order to help decrease prison population and help ease the pressure on the correction system. (Clear, Cole and Reisig 15) Then the state legislature amended and relaxed the so-called Rockefeller Drug Laws, which made New York one of the strictest states when it came to policing drug offenders. Indeed, starting the latter half of the 1990s onwards, the prison commitments steadily dropped prompting the state to close some prison facilities and save millions of taxpayers’ money. The New York experience highlighted the requirement of effective prison policy – one that is characterized by a set of graduated options that can be tailored to specific situations. This led New York policymakers and criminal justice planners to one of its new policies - the use of a variety of alternative sentencing mechanisms, which include: residential community corrections; community service and alternatives to corrections; and, probation. (Mumpower and Ilchman 544) All these alternatives are considered to be less punitive and incapacitative than state prison, but in graduated degrees. Changes in law enforcement policies included the police making fewer misdemeanor arrests and prosecutors and grand juries opting to indict fewer criminals for felony crimes. Impact of the New York Model Because of the empirical evidence that support the success of the New York incarceration initiatives, the fundamental principle that guides incarceration policy is now under scrutiny. Incarceration policy has always been driven by the so-called incapacitation effect, which maintains that if more criminals are sent to prison, the crime rate would go down since most people age out of crime, the duration of criminal career becomes limited. It seems that the popular view that “a thug in jail can’t shoot your sister” has been dispelled prompting Gaines and Miller to label such theory as a myth. Indeed, several studies point to the fact that incarceration does not always curb crime. Gaines and Miller (2008), for example, cited statistics from 1985 to 1995 that show a point wherein the increase in prison population no longer results in the increase in the rate of crime reduction. (416) However, considering the negative effect of incarceration on crime as a myth may be stretching it too far. Incarceration policy is still the main strategy to achieve public safety and reduce crime. It should work. In fact one study of more than 200 heroin abusers in New York City found that if these abusers were imprisoned for one year, they would not be able to commit their annual haul of crimes, which is consisted of 1,000 robberies, 4,000 burglaries, 10,000 shopliftings and more than 3,000 other property crimes. (Siegel, 110) But then there is the economics of crime, which suggests that crime is a money-making activity and that there will always be people who will replace those criminals who were already incarcerated. New criminals will be recruits and trained to fill the void left by the imprisoned lot. Lessons Learned What the statistics and the state of New York’s recent success in lowering prison population do not tell us that incarceration is not the solution to the problem or the other way around. It tells us of a problem - that of a steady rise in prison population if incarceration is to be solely relied upon to solve crime. In addition, it should not serve as an element that further stokes the debate in regard to nature of punishments for criminals. The point is that the relative success in recent years of the New York prison policy demonstrated several crucial factors that must be integrated in developing prison policies elsewhere in America. A concrete example is the attitude of the previous governor Pataki to loosen strict laws on minor offenses. Pataki did not succumb to the politics of punishment, which is one of the impediments to prison reform. Unfortunately, as what we have seen starting from the Reagan to Bush administration, federal bills that are tough on crime have been recurring part of criminal justice policy. This type of policy in addressing crime is one-dimensional and certainly has limited potential for success. Conclusion As it is, while there is no clear correlation between incarceration and the reduction of crime, there is no clear correlation that indicates the opposite either. In examining the national statistics, one finds an irregular relationship with corresponding rates of crime. In the 1970s, incarceration rates rose at a pace comparable to increases in crime; during the 1980s, official crime rates remained steady while incarceration rates doubled; during the 1990s, official crime rates fell by 30 percent, while incarceration rates rose by 60 percent. (Pager 14) And so, one can never be sure if an extreme reliance on incarceration or a reliance on another alternative is the best choice for reducing crime. Then, one must remember that the expenditure that comes with maintaining correction facilities is the main reason for the changes in prison policy, particularly those seeking new alternatives to punish criminals to eventually ease the burden of the criminal justice system. However, if the prison is seen as the only reliable way to achieve a desired degree of public safety then incarceration would be used regardless of its cost. This is one of the areas where one finds the New York experience significant. In addition with incarceration, wherein criminals are incapacitated, there are new and innovative policies implemented that aid crime and prisoner reduction. This is what was meant by an earlier reference to a set of graduated options that are tailored to specific situations. For example, statistics are clear about the high degree of recidivism once prisoners are set free after serving their sentence. Thus, there is a need for a reintegration policy to be integrated on current release mechanisms. It may be included in a release policy that moves prisoners from strict confinement through a series of graduated steps prior to being set free. I would like to cite a point raised by Michael Tonry to end this discussion. He blames the different policy cycles, changing sensibilities and moral panics for the current mass imprisonment in the United States. (70) Tonry’s thoughts on the subject highlight for us the argument that punishment is not the only issue here because several other factors are included and must be addressed. Incarceration is a consequence of our need for public safety and welfare. And so, to view the problem of prison overcrowding in the context of crime and punishment alone, then the policies that would be formulated to address it are doomed to fail. The New York prison policies have already shown policymakers that the a multi-pronged approach – in this case, a combination of economic, social, political and law enforcement initiatives – is effective in dealing with the issue of incarceration and crime. Works Cited Clear, Todd, Cole, George & Reisig, Michael. American Corrections. Cengage Learning, 2008. Gaines, Larry and Miller, Roger. Criminal Justice in Action. Cengage Learning, 2008. Jacobson, Michael. Downsizing prisons: how to reduce crime and end mass incarceration. New York: New York University Press, 2005. Mumpower, Jeryl and Ilchman, Warren. New York State in the year 2000. SUNY Press, 1988. Pager, Devah. Marked: race, crime, and finding work in an era of mass incarceration. University of Chicago Press, 2007. Siegel, Larry. Criminology. Cengage Learning, 2008. Tonry, Michael. Thinking About Crime: Sense and Sensibility in American Culture. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. Read More