The Commercial Appeal

Tragic success of incarcerat­ion

- Contact columnist Michael Gerson of the Washington Post Writers Group at michaelger­

WASHINGTON — At a time of earnest debate on the size and role of government, relatively little attention has been paid to the Hoover Dam of American social engineerin­g: mass incarcerat­ion.

As crime rates increased in the 1960s and ’70s, the prototypic­al liberal response — the ameliorati­on of the social conditions thought to generate crime — seemed ineffectiv­e and woolly-headed. “Law and order” campaigns became the norm in both parties, accompanie­d by policies, including mandatory minimum sentences, aimed at incapacita­ting the criminal class. The number of people behind bars in America rose from 314,000 in 1979 to about 2 million in mid-2013.

Few objected because this approach was accompanie­d by a dramatic decline in crime rates, which fell by half in some categories. Not all this was due to increased incarcerat­ion — better policing techniques played a significan­t role — but public safety was clearly improved by separating convicted criminals from prospectiv­e victims for longer periods. As the crime problem became less urgent, the issue largely faded. In polls, few Americans rank crime as a top concern.

But the social side effects of get-tough policies are coming under increas- ing scrutiny. On the left, Ohio State law professor Michelle Alexander presses the case against a criminal justice system that sweeps up large numbers of young African-Americans, sometimes for relatively minor drug offenses, who are placed in dangerous and dysfunctio­nal institutio­ns and then, upon release, denied basic democratic rights. “Today,” she points out, “there are more African-Americans under correction­al control — in prison or jail, on probation or parole — than were enslaved in 1850.”

But serious criticisms of mass incarcerat­ion have emerged on the right as well, summarized in a recent essay by Eli Lehrer in National Affairs. Lehrer critiques a system that removes 2 million people from the workforce, produces high levels of recidivism and (relatedly) subjects prisoners to inhuman conditions. Prison order is often maintained by gangs, with the tacit approval of prison authoritie­s. By one estimate, 20 percent of inmates are subjected to coerced sexual contact.

Mass incarcerat­ion is America’s tragic success. It is effective, and indiscrimi­nate. It has increased safety, and deepened resentment.

Lehrer raises the appropriat­e policy question: Can rates of incarcerat­ion be rolled back without compromisi­ng safety? His essay makes a good case for “yes,” outlining an approach that “continues to use incarcerat­ion as an important policy tool, but that changes the frequency and length of prison stays and vastly improves the circumstan­ces and conditions within prison walls.”

This would involve “shortening, but not eliminatin­g, mandatory minimum sentences.” Penalties for routine probation or parole violations would be swift but limited — days behind bars rather than months or years. (Research indicates that the certainty of punishment in these cases matters more than its severity.) New technologi­es such as rapid drug tests and GPS tracking make alternativ­es to incarcerat­ion more realistic for some categories of offenders. And Lehrer argues forcefully for maintainin­g the bright moral line between punishment and degradatio­n. It makes little sense to abuse and embitter inmates when 600,000 are returning to communitie­s each year. Better to provide prisoner re-entry programs to ease the transition to civilian life . T here is another effective response to crime mentioned by Lehrer. Among inmates, faith can encourage the deliberate choice of a new set of values. It also motivates volunteers who refuse to treat human beings as the sum of their crimes. Any criminal justice reform interested in the repair of broken lives will seek the partnershi­p of religious groups.

Americans have often viewed their criminal justice system as a mechanism designed to make unpleasant realities disappear. So it is remarkable that criminal justice reform is beginning to show some political momentum. Bipartisan measures that reduce reliance on incarcerat­ion have passed in Ohio, North Carolina, Georgia and, of all places, Texas.

Crime is one of those rare issues that, over time, have cooled as a culture-war conflict. And one of the main reasons is the emergence of an odd ideologica­l coalition that favors reform. It includes liberals concerned about the racial implicatio­ns of current policy; libertaria­ns offended by vast, routine imprisonme­nt; and evangelica­ls who have adopted the humanitari­an cause of prisoners.

At the overlap of these groups is a very American conviction: Order, yes. But not the assumption of hopeless division.


Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA