Accountability for prisons

The Texas prison system has quadrupled in the past two decades according to Marc A. Levin, Director of the Center for Effective Justice at the Texas Public Policy Foundation based in Austin, who wrote a column that appeared in the Fort Worth Star Telegram on Tuesday, June 1, 2008.

He points out that obviously if someone is incarcerated, that person cannot commit another crime, outside of the prison. But 99% of all prisoners will one day rejoin society. Texas has a three-year revocation of parole and probation of about 30%.

There is general agreement among Western societies that reducing recidivism is crucial if we are to control future incarceration costs and the costs to humans when crime is committed. England's Conservative Party published a 111-page report called Prisons with a Purpose: Our Sentencing and Rehabilitation Revolution to Break the Cycle of Crime.

One of the points of the report is a call for accountability for the prisons. There would be a level where basic costs are covered. But a second level would be based on performance, primarily measured by recidivism within several years of release. The funding accountability extend to parole and probation offices as well. They suggest a system where the parole and probation and a specific prison are joined under the supervision of one individual. But this may be quite impractical when many prisoners live in counties far from the location of the prison.

There are many other obvious problems that can be foreseen. But the idea that a prison as well as probation and parole offices would gain more funding by providing more education and other rehabilitation programs for prisoners and those newly released holds a promise of possible success. Education has been shown to be a big factor in recidivism rates. But of equal importance is the availability of gainful employment for released felons. Business would need to get behind such a program if it is to have even the possibility of success.

Another element is a revision of what constitutes behavior that mandates revocation of parole or probation. Many elements that are now found in drug courts could be adapted. We would need to have much smaller caseloads for probation and parole workers so that there was constant supervision and, equally important, more support for the newly released.

Obviously this is not the only possible way to reduce recidivism, but it is well worth consideration. As with all things that originate in another nation, there are adaptations that must be made to come into line with our constitution, our society, and our beliefs.

You can read the entire article here: http://www.texaspolicy.com/commentaries_single.php?report_id=1961.

Do you think it has any merit?