By Inimai M. Chettiar and Vanita Gupta, cross-posted from American Constitution Society
Elderly prisoners are the least dangerous group of people behind bars
but the most expensive to incarcerate. Yet despite this truth, the
number of elderly prisoners is skyrocketing. Harsher sentencesfor
less serious crimes – one defining characteristic of our failed “tough
on crime” and “war on drugs” policies – are responsible for this
staggering increase in the number of older prisoners, and taxpayers are
taking the hit.
You may be shocked to learn how much money states are dumping into
housing aging prisoners who pose little safety risk. Today the American
Civil Liberties Union released a report, “At America’s Expense: The Mass Incarceration of the Elderly,”
which details the growth of our aging prisoner population, the low
public safety threat elderly prisoners pose and the fiscal impact of
incarcerating them. Strikingly, the report estimates that the average
aging prisoner costs taxpayers about twice as much as the average prisoner.
The report is co-authored by the ACLU’s fiscal policy analyst and
in-house economist, Will Bunting. He conducted a fiscal impact analysis,
weighing the cost of incarcerating the average aging prisoner against
the burden releasing that same prisoner would impose on public benefit
programs. Even taking into consideration the cost of state payments for
Medicaid, supplemental security food stamps, energy assistance, and
other public assistance benefits, the report estimates that states could
save $66,000 per year for each aging person released from prison. To
put this number in context, the average American household makes
$40,000. The money thus saved could be redistributed to more worthwhile
and cost-effective state goals like education and infrastructure.
A look at the grander scheme of things is even more startling: in
1988, the United States spent about $11 billion on the entire
corrections system. Today, we spend about $16 billion annually on the
aging prisoner population alone.
As the number of prisoners in the United States climbs ever higher,
the number of aging prisoners is climbing even faster. Between 1980 and
2010, the total number of people incarcerated in this country grew by 400 percent.
In that same timespan, the population of prisoners age 55 and older
grew by nearly 1,400 percent. At the current rate of growth, the number
of prisoners age 55 and older will have increased 4,400 percent from
1981 to 2030 and will make up fully a third of the nation’s prison
population.
The increase in the number of aging prisoners is not due to a spike
in the number of crimes committed by older people. There is no “elderly
crime wave.” And contrary to popular belief, older prisoners aren’t more
likely to have committed a serious crime. Rather, many elderly
prisoners are incarcerated for crimes committed in their youth for which
they received disproportionately long sentences, and many elderly
prisoners are in prison for nonviolent crimes. The current mentality of
“lock ‘em up and throw away the key” has led lawmakers to impose
exceedingly harsh penalties on individuals who commit low-level
offenses, ensuring that they stay behind bars well into age and often
until they die. The adage “let the punishment fit the crime” has given
way to a reign of disproportionality in sentencing that is nothing if
not cruel and unnecessary.
For instance, in California, Leandro Andrade,
a father of three, received a mandatory sentence of 25 years to life in
prison for two counts of shoplifting children’s videotapes valued at
$153. He had two prior offenses for misdemeanors. In Mississippi, Atiba Parker
was sentenced as a habitual offender to a total of 42 years in prison
for selling a total of .3 grams and possessing less than .1 grams of
crack cocaine. And also in Mississippi, the now-famous Scott sisters, Jamie and Gladys, were sentenced to two consecutive life terms for a robbery in which they stole $11 when they were teenagers.
Like many aging prisoners, Andrade, Parker and the Scott sisters are
caught in the net of our extreme sentencing laws enacted since the mid
70’s. Politicians over the last quarter-century have held strong to the
conventional wisdom that being "tough on crime" will win elections and
appease the public's appetite for safety. To alleviate the public's
overblown fear, or even to slake a thirst for retribution, our lawmakers
have increasingly deemed more private acts criminal and doled out
harsher punishments for a generation. Law enforcement has selectively
enforced these laws against the "feared" Black and brown communities. In the end, we’re left with a massive, unsustainable prison population – and equally unsustainable aging prison population – unlike anything the world has ever seen.
If aging prisoners posed a serious threat to public safety, the costs
of incarcerating them might be justified. But aging prisoners are in
fact highly unlikely to commit new crimes upon release. Research has
conclusively shown that by age 50 most people have significantly
outlived the years in which they are most likely to commit crimes. For
example, arrest rates drop to just over 2 percent at age 50 and are
almost nil at age 65. In other words, there is no value to the continued
incarceration of a large majority of our aging prisoners.
Today’s report provides a number of recommendations to legislators
and correctional leaders interested in meaningful reform. Given the fact
that public opinion is shifting toward a desire for fewer people in prison,
the time to implement these reforms is now. The longer term solution
requires political will to redesign our extreme sentencing regime to
reintroduce proportionality, and repeal or reform habitual offender,
mandatory minimum and truth-in-sentencing laws. A more immediate
recommendation is for states to empower parole boards to determine which
aging prisoners are worth the cost of continued incarceration because
they pose grave public safety threats and which are not and can be
safely released. In 2011, a bipartisan coalition in Louisiana passed just such a reform measure; if Louisiana – which leads the nation in incarceration – can take these steps, other states can surely follow suit.
In today’s hobbled economy, legislators cannot continue wasting
taxpayer dollars by turning our prison system into a vast complex of
nursing homes. It is a moral and fiscal imperative to stem the explosion
in the aging prisoner population. Aging prisoners pose little threat to
the public’s safety and incarcerating them is breaking our collective
bank. Furthermore, it is inhumane to keep people locked up when there is
no compelling societal justification to do so. The tools for grappling
with this crisis are well within reach of legislators around the nation
and the time for reform has arrived.
Inimai M. Chettiar, Policy Counsel, and Vanita Gupta, Deputy Legal Director, at the American Civil Liberties Union. Ms. Gupta directs the ACLU’s Center for Justice and its Safe and Fair Initiative to End Overincarceration.
Ms. Chettiar serves as national legislative counsel coordinating the
Initiative, and is incoming Director of the Justice Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law.
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Why Are We Spending So Much To Lock Up Elderly Prisoners Who Pose Little Threat?
Tags
ACLU
,
ACS
,
incarceration
,
law and justice
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
0 comments :
Post a Comment