Quantcast
Connect with us

There are way too many people going to jail because they’re too poor to pay a fine

Published

on

- Commentary

The United States has the largest incarcerated population in the world, climbing from 600,000 to over 2 million in just a few decades. We also have the highest percentage of our population behind bars of any country. The people most likely to languish behind bars are Black, Latino, Native American, and poor. It’s a legacy rooted in Jim Crow-era policies that continues in the thinly veiled racism of the war on drugs, as lawyer Michelle Alexander points out in her book The New Jim Crow.

ADVERTISEMENT

But there’s another number that dwarfs the prison population: Nearly 5 million people are under some sort of parole or probation supervision in the United States. That’s a fourfold increase since 1980, according to a new report released this week by the Columbia University’s Justice Lab. During that time, the requirements for people under judicial supervision have become more stringent. The number of conditions people must adhere to has increased, for example, as has the length of supervision required. As a result, many people wind up in jail—not for committing another crime, but for a technical violation of probation or parole conditions.

In fact, from 1990 to 2004, the rate of people on probation who were sent back to jail for non-compliance grew by 50 percent, from 220,000 to 330,000, according to the report.

This suggests a way to vastly reduce the rate of imprisonment in the United States, just by reducing the number of people who wind up in jail because of these technical violations.

In some cases, the infractions that send someone back to jail are as simple as coming late to a meeting with a parole officer or failing to make payments on a fine. Being a person of color increases the odds of winding up in prison for a parole violation, according to a study by the Urban Institute.

One of the most chilling reasons for being sent back to prison is failure to pay a fine or court or supervision fees, payments that can be out of reach for the low-income people most likely to be caught up in the criminal justice system.

ADVERTISEMENT

In some jurisdictions, about 20 percent of those serving time were incarcerated because they didn’t pay their criminal justice debts, according to a Council of Economic Advisors issue paper.

Consider the impossible situation faced by newly released inmates. Many are poor when they enter the system; along with their conviction comes fines and fees. As one example, in Washington state, these average $1,300 for a felony conviction, according to research by University of Washington sociology professor Alexes Harris.

Interest is charged on the original debt, and by the time an inmate is released, their debt may have grown quite large. Finding a job that pays enough to make payments on these debts is difficult after incarceration, especially since public housing and other services are denied to those convicted felons. This challenge is even greater for released inmates who are mentally ill, physically disabled, have a history of substance abuse, or have few social support systems.

ADVERTISEMENT

“High fines and fee payments may force … difficult trade-offs between paying court debt and other necessary purchases,” says the Council issue paper. “Unsustainable debt coupled with the threat of incarceration may even encourage some formerly incarcerated individuals to return to criminal activity to pay off their debts.”

These fines and fees result in what is tantamount to debtors’ prisons. They are expensive and counter-productive.

ADVERTISEMENT

Which suggests a way out. The Justice Lab report proposes policies that would increase the chances that someone who has served their time will successfully transition to life after prison.

These policies include reducing the number of years of supervision on probation or after release. This could reduce the chances that a routine infraction would result in additional fines and jail time, and also reduce caseloads of overworked parole officers, who could then focus on providing support to parolees who are at risk of reoffending. Or we could shorten time on probation or parole based on “good behavior,” so people can work their way out of the system. And we could reduce fines and fees, so there is less financial pressure on people just as they are trying to regain their footing.

Van Jones, host of CNN’s new segment The Van Jones Show and founder of #cut50, a national effort to cut in half the people behind bars, put it this way, according to a news release for the Justice Lab report: Now is the time to “reimagine how probation and parole can truly help people reintegrate back into society—rather than simply being a trap that leads to needless reincarceration.”

ADVERTISEMENT

The Justice Lab report shows that jurisdictions that have taken this route have seen reductions in crime, reductions in spending, and fewer people locked up. A win-win-win, except for those who profit from the prison-industrial complex.

Sarah van Gelder wrote this article for YES! Magazine. Sarah is a co-founder and columnist at YES!, founder of PeoplesHub, and author of “The Revolution Where You Live: Stories from a 12,000-Mile Journey Through a New America.” Read more about her work here, and follow her on Twitter @sarahvangelder.

Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Roger Stone, coronavirus and the upcoming months that may destroy America as we know it

Published

on

From the Electoral College to structural racism, America is feeling painfully aware of its inherent flaws these days. None looms more ominously now than that awkward moment that is the presidential transition. In the momentous winter of 1860-61, the United States literally split in two during the haze between the failed presidency of Pennsylvania’s James Buchanan and the first-ever Republican administration of Abraham Lincoln that terrified the slave-addled South.Now consider this scenario: A seemingly unending crisis has ripped millions of jobs from the U.S. economy, with a growing homelessne... (more…)

Continue Reading

Commentary

Senate Republicans can’t distance themselves from Trump — here’s why they’ll have to go down with him

Published

on

Trump’s failing campaign is threatening Republican control of the Senate. Nevertheless, when asked whether the president has exhibited failed leadership in response to the coronavirus, Senator Joni Ernst defended him saying, “I think that the president is stepping forward.”

Apparently that response helped her opponent, Theresa Greenfield, raise over $100,000. It’s worth noting that the most recent Des Moines Register poll showed Greenfield leading Ernst by three points. In a state Trump won by nine points in 2016, that same poll had Biden ahead by one point.

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

Well, the good news is Trump hasn’t entirely lost his mind — or so he says

Published

on

Donald Trump, 74, bragged last week during a Sean Hannity interview that he had “aced” a recent cognition test at Walter Reed Hospital.

Trump boasted that doctors witnessing the test “said that’s an unbelievable thing. Rarely does anybody do what you just did.” He then challenged Democrat Joe Biden, 77, to match him.

But haven’t we skipped over something here?

Doctors wanted Trump to take a cognition test? Is that a normal thing for presidents?

Trump said he asked to take the test after criticisms over his inability to walk down a ramp with ease at West Point, needing to hold a glass of water with both hands and multiple occasions of slurring and mispronouncing words.

Continue Reading
 
 
You need honest news coverage. Help us deliver it. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1. Go ad-free.
close-image