This week, the Pew Center on the States released a bombshell study revealing that our country is locking up record numbers of people in jail and prison.

For the first time in history, the U.S. -- which, according to Pew, lock up more people than any other country, including China -- is now putting one out of every 100 people behind bars.

Beyond that shocking headline are some interesting details:

* The South leads: Thanks to its punitive justice policies, the South has led the country's incarceration boom over the last two decades -- and Pew finds 2007 was no exception:

The South led the way, with its population jumping from 623,563 to 641,024—a rise of 2.8 percent. Only three of the 16 states in the southern region reported a drop in inmates, while nine experienced growth exceeding 4 percent.

[Note: Pew's definition of the South is different than the Institute's, but that doesn't affect the numbers.]

* Race is a huge factor: Compared to the one-in-a-100 national average, one out of every 36 Hispanic males are incarcerated; for African-American men, that number jumps to one in 15.

* Florida tops the list: Pew offers Florida as a cautionary example in exploding incarceration rates, noting that the state's increase -- the highest in the country -- was not due to higher crime but "stemmed from a host of correctional policies and practices adopted by the state." For example:

One of the first came in 1995, when the legislature abolished “good time” credits and discretionary release by the parole board, and required that all prisoners—regardless of their crime, prior record, or risk to recidivate—serve 85 percent of their sentence. Next came a “zero tolerance” policy and other measures mandating that probation officers report every offender who violated any condition of supervision and increasing prison time for these “technical violations.” As a result, the number of violators in Florida prisons has jumped by anestimated 12,000.

Pew further notes that, while Florida's crime rate has gone down, it's not due to locking more people up -- other states that didn't incarcerate more people, or even locked up less people (like New York) also saw declines.

* Incarceration is costly: As Pew's analysis finds:

Total state spending on corrections—including bonds and federal contributions—topped $49 billion last year, up from $12 billion in 1987. By 2011, continued prison growth is expected to cost states an additional $25 billion.

The full report is available here. (pdf)

Labels: crime, criminal justice, Florida, incarceration, race and racism

The Supreme Court's 7-0 decision yesterday to reduce extraordinarily harsh sentences for crimes related to crack cocaine is drawing widespread applause from advocates who have long noted the lack of fairness in drug sentencing.

The decision will retroactively affect nearly 20,000 inmates -- a small but important portion of the millions charged and locked up during the Drug War, which peaked in the 1990s. It was harsh drug sentences that, more than anything, fueled the skyrocketing rate of incarceration in the U.S., especially among African Americans. 27% of the growth in prison rates for blacks from 1990-2000 was from drug busts, even though 72% of illicit drug users in the country are white.

By the late 1990s, thirty-three percent (33%) of convicted white defendants received a prison sentence, while 51% of African-American defendants received prison sentences. And the sentences for crack, a drug more common to urban street communities, were indefensibly higher -- by a factor of 100 to 1 -- than those for cocaine, the drug of choice for urbane whites.

The effects of the Drug War and incarceration were especially hard-felt in the South. By 2000, nine of the 20 states with the highest incarceration rates were in the South. Prevention, treatment and re-entry programs were slashed while prison budgets went up.

Since 2000, many states have edged away from the mass-lock-up approach, mostly to save money. It's estimated the Supreme Court's decision will save $1 billion alone.

There's a lot the Supreme Court's decision doesn't do: It doesn't address the draconian "mandatory minimum" rules which especially harsh on first-time offenders. It doesn't deal with racial profiling and other disparities in who gets arrested and charged for what offense. And it doesn't speak to the need to adequately fund all aspects of a real drug policy, including prevention programs, strong schools, and rehabilitation.

But it's a start.

Labels: drug policy, incarceration