Ab109 Paper

Since the tough-on-crime era began in the 1980s, the California prison system and parolee population have grown tenfold. This is in great part due to the three strikes law that passed in 1994. This law made it a requirement for any offender convicted of a felony with two previous felonies to go to prison for a minimum of twenty five years. This law sent many people to prison for longer sentences due to non-violent drug offenses, when in actuality they should have been sentenced to rehab. Prison overcrowding is an important topic that all Americans should care about, since according to The Bureau of Justice Statistics, over ninety-five percent of all prison inmates will be released at some point, with over eighty-five percent of them being placed under parolee supervision. Of this population, sixty-five percent suffer from substance abuse issues and meet the need for treatment for their addiction. Drug and alcohol abuse, specifically drug abuse, and crime are inextricably related. Unfortunately, the majority of those released from prison who suffer from addiction issues are not treated while incarcerated, and as a result end up back in prison.

One of the most recent significant changes to California corrections is the passing of Assembly Bill 109 (AB 109) by Governor Jerry Brown in April of 2011. The realignment is a program that was created as a result of overcrowding in state prisons, and it served to redirect non-violent offenders to county jails and put them under the supervision of county probation officers instead of sending them to state prisons. It “…shifted responsibility for people convicted of certain non-serious, nonviolent or non-sex felony offenses from state prisons and parole, to county jails and probation…” as an alternative (CalRealignment.ORG). AB 109 was primarily the result of a U.S. Supreme Court upholding a lower court’s ruling in Brown V. Plata. The court mandated California to reduce state prison overcrowding because the conditions in these prisons were so bad. The conditions were so terrible, especially when it came to certain

However, the mandated reductions, the prison inmate’s population would still be 137.5 % over its allowed capacity (Liptak 2014). In opposition, the State of California submitted an appeal for the federal order to the Supreme Court seeking protections under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (Newsman and Scott 2012). In 2011, the Supreme Court 5-4 decision upheld three-judge panel’s federal order requiring California state prisons to reduce its population by 30,000 inmates (Liptak 2014).The Supreme Court judges emphasized the notion that overcrowding inflicted pain on prisoners, and, therefore, violated inmate’s constitutional rights (Newsman and Scott 2012). After the Supreme Court’s decision, Jerry Brown advocated realignment in the state prisons that would transfer non-violent, non-serous, and non-sexual offenders to county jails (Ravi 2014). Likewise, to comply with the federal order Brown allocated 6 billion in state funds to be transferred to counties aiding the realignment reforms (Ravi

As of 2015, 2.7% of adults in the United States were under correctional control, the lowest rate since 1994, however that is still roughly 6.7 million adults (Kaeble & Glaze, 2016). While the correctional population has declined, correctional facilities in the United States are still grossly overcrowded, with many facilities at or surpassing capacity. A report in 2010 by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation showed that on average, facilities were at 175% capacity (Brown, 2010). However, as of midnight on October 31st, 2017 the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation reported that their facilities, on average, were 132% occupied (Brown, 2017). Not only is prison overcrowding a burden on the facilities themselves, but also on the inmates. Prison overcrowding, that is, housing more inmates than the facility can humanely facilitate (Haney, 2006), places a strain on all resources throughout the correctional facility, including on the healthcare that’s offered, educational programs, and most dramatically on the physical space available to house inmates (Ekland-Olson, 1983).

ACA Medicaid Managed Care Rebates and the 340B Exemption - Wellpartner. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.wellpartner.com/aca-medicaid-manage

According to Krisberg and Taylor-Nicholson, state budget cuts, lowering prison over-crowding, and improving corrections are the underlying reasons for the policy shift. Although “county custody costs (county jail) may be somewhat lower than state prison costs, shifting the custody and supervision costs of selected offender groups to the county will only cut spending in state prisons,” and may fail to lower the overall costs of corrections in California (Owen & Mobley, 2012, p. 47). Whereas the state prison system seems to be progressing toward its population-reduction goal, “this measure is shortsighted and somewhat deceiving” because a “corresponding rise in county jail populations will continue California’s

The White Anglo-Saxon Protestants (WASPs) have been at the top of the social hierarchy ever since they arrived to America in the 1600s. The first wave of immigration consisted of the Germans, Irish and Chinese. The WASPs created a way to measure the success of each immigrant group. They acknowledged four factors of success that would show them whether an immigrant group was successful or not. The first factor of success was how much money an immigrant had when they came to America. The more money they came to America with, the more successful they were. Another factor of an immigrant’s success was how large the group they came with was. The larger the group, the less respect and

While it is apparent why companies involved in the prison industry would support or even push for such a law, they are not the sole cause of the making of this law. There are three main groups outside the prison industry who, due to knowledgeable beneficiary intentions or misinformation, strengthen the strict law against crime and cause the overpopulation and long sentencing that in turn make the prison industry profitable. One of the ulterior motivated

The article, Prop. 47 got thousands out of prison. Now, $103 million in savings will go towards keeping them out, speaks of the positive effects the proposition could have on communities. It states that although the proposition has come to be controversial over the fact that several crime rates have increased due to the lenient nature of the proposition, the enactment of such is still a great win. This being due to the new investment in rehabilitation programs that will open doors for troubled individuals to truly make changes in their life that they were unable to do so before due to prior lack of such support.

The proliferation of prison overcrowding has been a rising concern for the U.S. The growing prison population poses considerable health and safety risks to prison staffs and employees, as well as to inmates themselves. The risks will continue to increase if no immediate actions are taken. Whereas fighting proliferation is fundamentally the duty of the U.S. government, prison overcrowding has exposed that the U.S. government will need to take measures to combat the flaws in the prison and criminal justice system. Restructuring the government to combat the danger of prison overcrowding, specifically in California, thus requires reforms that reestablishes the penal codes, increases the state’s budget, and develops

Since 1984, the California Penal System has been forced to undergo drastic changes resulting from increased legislation aimed at increasing the severity of retribution to offenders leading to an exponentially increasing prison population. In the 132 years between 1852 and 1984, the state of California built twelve prisons, but has since supplemented the prison system with 21 new facilities. In 1977, the California Department of Corrections was responsible for 19,600 inmates. California’s inmate population now stands at 160,655, an increase of close to 800%.

The United States Supreme Court ruled that prison overcrowding in California was equivalent to cruel and unusual punishment. This decision recharged a long-standing disagreement among scholars and politicians as to whether or not courts should intervene to protect make changes. Some believe this is a matter or the well-being of those unable to make decisions for themselves. Others believe this is not a top priority and by forcing states to improve state institutions, the already costly industry will have cost increase. The journal also discusses the economic effects reform has had. Concluding that they have made positive changes at a slightly higher expense. The changes made by the state made the facilities closer to “humane” by court standards. (7)

Another way to resolve this issue, would be to have each individual state come up with various health care plans in which inmates’ would be able to sign up and pay for with the money on their accounts, or having family members or friends pay for

One public policy issue that is attracting a great deal of attention is the matter of prison reform. While a great many members of the public support improvements in the safety, security and quality of life in prisons, few will endorse this at the expense of the same for law-abiding citizens. However, according to Koh (2013), Texas is currently facing one such dilemma. According to Koh, "prison reforms may result in better conditions for inmates, but those improvements come at the expense of welfare cash assistance and other government relief for the needy, according to a study released this month by Rice University and Louisiana State University." (Koh, p. 1)

These measures were taken to ensure public safety but are now posing a problem for our correctional facilities. Overcrowding and budgets are among the problems brought about by these measures. Both the state and federal correctional population throughout the United States have steadily seen significant increases in their population, every year for the past decades. Based on the census found on the Bureau of Justice website, the data collected between June 30th 2000 to December 30th 2005 showed that prisoners held in custody between federal and state prisons increased by 10%. (“Bureau of Justice Statistics”, p.1 -2)