In 1997, Stephanie George of Pensacola, Fla. was sentenced to life in prison, without parole. Police had found a half-kilogram of cocaine stashed by her ex-boyfriend in a lockbox hidden in her attic.
The sentence seemed harsh to most, including the judge ruling on the case who said “I wish I had another alternative.” But because of harsh sentencing requirements mandated by law, the judge’s hands were tied – factors like criminal intent or context would play no role in shaping a sentence to fit the crime.
Fortunately for Stephanie, after spending 17 years behind bars, her sentence was commuted by President Obama, and she was released last year.
But with more than two million Americans behind bars – many of whom are serving extended sentences for nonviolent, drug offenses – Stephanie’s story isn’t all that unusual. It illustrates the devastation wrought by a “tough on crime” mentality born in the 1980s, which gave rise to harsh mandatory sentencing laws and a justice system that prided itself on punishment – an approach that rendered crippling consequences, destroyed lives, and cost taxpayers dearly.
It’s time to fix the mistakes of the past by overhauling federal sentencing practices to not only reduce the prison population and save taxpayer dollars, but to finally establish a justice system with standards that are both smart and fair. And with support for reform sweeping the nation – uniting progressives and conservatives – it’s time that Congress takes the reins and makes reform a reality.
The cost of incarcerating millions of Americans has skyrocketed, costing taxpayers $80 billion annually. Those costs have exploded in recent years: nearly doubling in the last two decades in the federal system, and growing by 400 percent in the states since 1980. And one of the leading culprits in increasing prison populations has been one-size-fits-all mandatory minimum sentencing laws.
Since 1980 the federal prison population has increased by almost tenfold and the state prison population has quadrupled, giving rise to a generation more familiar with incarceration than any before it. If you’re not one of the two million behind bars, there’s a strong chance you are a mother, son, cousin, friend or former coworker of someone who is.
Incarceration can be an appropriate way of keeping communities safe from dangerous people, but should we continue shelling out billions of dollars every year, and tearing lives apart, to exact harsh punishments on the lowest level of offenders? By one estimate, if Stephanie’s original sentence had been carried out, taxpayers would have spent nearly $1.4 million to keep her incarcerated for life.
So as Federal lawmakers are contemplating how to address the devastation of an incarcerated nation, many states across the country are showing us that it’s possible to reduce the prison population, save taxpayer dollars, and increase public safety. And perhaps no other state has shown how quickly reforms can start working as California.
Last year, nearly 60 percent of voters in California approved Prop 47, which among other things amended state laws to reduce prison sentencing for most non-serious and non-violent drug and property crimes. The ballot initiative was predicated on the idea that prison beds (and associated taxpayer spending) should be reserved for the most dangerous people who pose a threat to public safety, while emphasizing the need for mental health and drug treatment programs as an alternative to incarceration.
Although passed less than a year ago, Prop 47 is working as planned according to early signs. Sooner-than-expected reductions in the state’s prison population (triggered by Prop 47) spurred Gov. Jerry Brown (D) in May to readjust spending proposals to reduce projected prison spending by $73 million, and to cut the use of private prison beds in half.
With inmate populations falling across the state, facilities are less crowded and are experiencing less pressure to simply manage inmates, but working with them to prepare them for release – to re-enter society successfully, equipping them with training and tools needed to turn their lives around.
And support for Prop 47 showcased the truly bipartisan nature of reforming our sentencing laws.
Democrats and Republicans supported the effort at the ballot box, and national and state leaders from both sides of the aisle spoke in support of the effort – including prominent conservatives like former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. The effort underscored how important reforming the justice system is, generating support from across the political spectrum. It’s why organizations like the Coalition for Public Safety, which ACLU is a partner of, have been able to bring the right and the left together around reforming the justice system.
With Congress heading back home for August recess, we’re optimistic they will hear from constituents, community leaders, supporters and maybe even their own families that our nation’s justice system is in peril, and it’s time to get something done.
And we’re hoping those pleas translate into action, and that Congress finally moves forward on one of the biggest issues facing this generation – reforming the justice system, saving taxpayer money, and most importantly, establishing a smarter justice system for all.
Holcomb is the director of the ACLU Campaign for Smart Justice.
