Transcript NYC JAIL SYSTEM - St. John's University

Group 4
New York State
Prisons:
A Drain on the
State’s
Resources
Presented by:
Salvatrice Badalamenti
Caz Craffey
Christine Galea
Chris Jackson
Vanessa Marseille
Gary Salvador
PROBLEM
 An examination of New York State’s budget reveals
an increase in spending on operating the State’s jails
 Increased spending in correctional facilities means a
drain on the city’s resources. It will be unable to
provide much needed funding for other projects, e.g.
operating state universities
Questions
 What is causing a rise in New York’s jail population?
 What is currently being done to reduce it?
 What Christian values can be applied to solutions?
 What is our proposal?
The Rockefeller Drug Laws




Increasing population of jails is tied to the Rockefeller Drug Laws
Enacted in 1973 when Nelson Rockefeller was governor, the
Rockefeller drug laws impose harsh prison terms on the sale and
possession of even a small amount of drugs.
As of December 31, 1998, there were 22,386 drug offenders in the
NYS prison system, about 33% of the entire prison population.*
Of the 19,453 commitments to the NYS prison system in 1998, 9,063
or 46.6% were for drug offenses. In 1980, 886 drug offenders were
sent to State prison, 11% of the total commitments for that year.*
* http://www.drugolicy.org/library/factsheets/mandatory_ny.cfm
Prison Terms
Felony Class
Minimum
Maximum
A-I:
Possession: 4 oz.
Sale: 2 oz.
15 - 25 years
15 - 25 years
life
life
A-II:
Possession: 2 oz.
Sale: ½ oz.
3 - 8 1/3 years
3 - 8 1/3 years
life
life
B:
Possession: any amount w/intent to sell;
½ oz. simple possession
Sale: Any amount
1 year - up to 1/3 of max
1 year - up to 1/3 of max
3 - 25 years
3 - 25 years
C:
Possession: 1/8 oz.
Sale: n/a
1 year - up to 1/3 of max**
1 year - up to 1/3 of max
3 - 15 years
3 - 15 years
D:
Possession: 500 mg*
Sale: any amount
1 year - up to 1/3 of max**
1 year - up to 1/3 of max
3 - 7 years
3 - 7 years
Cost Of Operation
Agency Expenditures
$870
$865
$860
$M
$855
$850
$845
$866.5
$840
$835
$841.9
$830
$825
2003
2004
Year
Cost Of Operation
Cost Per Inmate
$60,500
$60,000
$M
$59,500
$59,000
$60,070
$58,500
$58,000
$57,500
$58,288
$57,000
2003
2004
Year
Cost Of Operation
 Expenses decreased by $24.6M and prisoners by 1,874
people.
 2003 average cost per inmate = $58K
 2004 average cost per inmate = $60K
Admissions
Prisoners
110,000
109,500
109,000
108,500
108,000
109,445
107,500
107,571
107,000
106,500
2003
2004
Year
Drug Reform
 On December 14, 2004, Governor Pataki
signed into law the Rockefeller Drug Law
Reform bill.
 This legislation makes significant changes that
will affect sentencing in drug cases in the
future.
 Other aspects of the legislation will affect
those already serving sentences for drug
convictions.
Categories of Drug Offenders
The three categories under new legislation
 First felony offender
 Second felony offender with a prior non-violent felony
conviction
 Second felony offender with a prior violent felony conviction
Each category has its own sentence range.
Governor Pataki's reform legislation:
 establishes alternatives to state imprisonment for certain drug
offenders who would be more appropriately served by treatment
programs.
 establishes a procedure for conditional expungement of drug
convictions for individuals who successfully complete such
treatment programs.
 permits incarcerated non-violent offenders that have been
sentenced for A1 felony convictions to apply to the sentencing
judge to be re-sentenced to as much as a 50 % lower sentence.
 adopts a structure of determinate sentences for felony drug
offenders who are sentenced to prison.
 creates new offenses or elevated punishment levels for those
who :
Objectives Of The Legislation
 Expand judicial discretion to allow judges to sentence nonviolent, drug-addicted offenders to highly-structured treatment as
an alternative to prison.
 Reduce the lowest allowable amount of time non-violent drug
offenders can serve in prison, increase prison terms for violent
drug offenders, and create a determinate sentencing structure to
allow judges to determine the amount of time an offender will
serve in prison.
 Increase penalties for drug traffickers who use or carry guns, sell
drugs in public parks, use children or the Internet to sell drugs, or
lead or manage drug organizations.
Drop The Rock
 The campaign to repeal the Rockefeller Drug
Laws
 Composed of many that want to see a change
in these harsh laws.
 Russell Simmons is happy with the State’s
decision and credits the hip hop community
for helping “raise awarness” of this issue.
Privatization Solutions
Problem identification:
 - Bloated state and local government budgets
 - Increased tax burdens
 - Cost inefficiencies resulting in decreased
effectiveness
 - Capacity constraints resulting in
overcrowding and early releases of prisoners
 Estimated total outlay of state and local
governments for correctional services is
expected to exceed $18B by 2009 or 2010.
Privatization Solutions
Recent calls for change:
 - Taxpayers refusal to increase tax revenues
without better cost efficiencies
 - Fiscal constraints concerning correctional
funds available
 - Court-ordered demands for facility quality
improvements
 - Immediate demand for increased capacity
levels
Privatization Solutions
Our proposal:
 * Accelerate the already existing trend of converting prison
functions from the municipal side to the private side. Can be
done in one of the following three forms:
 1) The contracting of various prison services out to private firms
(medical, food services)
 2) Allow private investors/firms to own and operate functioning
prisons
 3) Contract out prisoners for labor and allow the actual prisoner
to pay for their housing
 - Currently, using the limited number of privately-run prisons, it
costs an average of approximately $36 to house a prisoner per
day, versus $44-$45 per day in publicly-run prisons.
 - Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) holds a 55.6%
market share in the operation of private prisons
 - New Mexico, Montana, and Alaska currently have the largest
percentage of state prisoners in private prisons (all 30-35%)
Privatization Solutions
Questions regarding Christianity and the privatization of
prisons:
 - Are human rights violations more likely to occur in a
privately-run prison versus a publicly-run prison?
 - Is profit an appropriate primary objective for the
operation of the imprisonment of human beings?
(Does profit conflict with good practice?)
 - Is this a move that will lead to prisoners being
treated as a commodity rather than a human being?
 - Should private security guards have the right to
carry and utilize deadly weapons?
 - With respect to the free market system, is the
prisoner at an immediate disadvantage in facing the
private market since he has no free thought process to
select a prison over other alternatives? Isn’t this
comparable to a free consumer facing a monopoly?
Privatization Solutions
Other questions to consider during this transition:
 - Can the government maintain adequate
supervision/regulation over the prison industry?
 - What will be legislated to require a minimum
standard level of safety and security at all prisons?
 - What will be the legal liability of the private entity
for malpractice issues?
 - Finally, is incurring some quality costs worth the
cost savings to state and local municipalities?
Privatization Solutions
Potential pros of privatization:
 - Not only will private firms act more efficiently, but state and
local governments will be forced to compete in the free market
and will have to operate with better efficiencies
 - Accountability for failed employees
 - Cost containment in specific areas such as labor
 - Reduced overall operational costs
 - Comparable safety and security quality
 - Conversion of legal liabilities from the municipality to the
private enterprise
 - Increased potential for staff promotion and development
 - Private market has shown a better ability to react to demand
fluctuations
 Most importantly, it has been estimated by privatization
proponents that within five years of full private implementation
10-15% of state and local budgets can be cut or allocated
elsewhere.
Privatization Solutions
Immediate criticisms of the plan to privatize:
 - Quality of the facility is not based on the intrinsic value of the
correctional facility to rehabilitate prisoners, but rather, better
revenues must be the driving factor for quality improvements
 - The private sector will inevitably engage in ‘necessary’ cost
cutting compromising the safety of the prisoners and the
surrounding community
 - Facilities will be inherently unequal, having better ‘moneymakers’ with the ‘best’ facilities, while states with lower crime
rates will have lower quality facilities
 - Constitutional violations against prisoners are much more
likely to occur when the government takes a back-seat to private
investors
 - Correctional officers will incur increased competition for work
and consequently will receive lower wages, which has the
potential to result in a severe drop in quality of the labor force
 Anti-privatization push being led by the American Civil Liberties
Union (ACLU) and the American Bar Association (ABA)
Privatization Solutions
Suggestions to mitigate the issues rose by critics, and to
maximize the likeliness of the pros taking place:
 - Private entities are held accountable for failing
facilities by state and local municipalities and
alternatives are immediately available
 - Careful monitoring of facilities’ safety and security
measures, as well as implementation and enforcement
of ‘complete contracts’ dictating minimum standard
levels for private prisons to abide by
 - Local communities affected will be consulted by
state governments before conversion to privatization
takes place
 - Top importance placed on upholding the
constitutional rights of all prisoners