![]() |
CENTER ON JUVENILE AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE | |
| www.cjcj.org |
| Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, 54 Dore Street, San Francisco, CA 94103 | Tel: (415) 621-5661 | Fax: (415) 621-5466 |
CONTACT: Daniel Macallair
E-mail: [dmacallair@cjcj.org]
Tel: (415) 621-5661 x310
"We really need an examination of our entire prison policy."
-President Bill Clinton, Rolling Stone interview, October 6, 2000
"The proliferation of our prisons, however necessary, is no substitute for the hope and order in our souls."
-President George W. Bush, Inaugural Address, January 20, 2001
Although Republicans are normally thought to hold the tough on crime mantle, in President Clinton's first-term (1992-1996), 148,000 more state and federal prisoners were added than under President Reagan's first term (1980-1984), and 34,000 more than were added under President Bush's four-year term (1988-1992).3 [See Chart I]
Throughout its tenure, the Clinton administration consistently supported increased penalties and additional prison construction. The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 provided state and municipal governments with $30 billion to add 100,000 new police officers, to build more prisons, and to employ more prison guards, as well as funding for crime prevention programs.
While everyone is affected by the nation's quadrupling of the prison population, the African American community has borne the brunt of the nation's incarceration boom. From 1980 to 1992, the African American incarceration rate increased by an average of 138.4 per 100,000 per year. Still, despite a more than doubling of the African American incarceration rate in the 12 years prior to President Clinton's term in office, the African American incarceration rate continued to increase by an average rate of 100.4 per 100,000 per year. In total, between 1980 and 1999, the incarceration rate for African Americans more than tripled from 1156 per 100,000, to 3,620 per 100,000. (See Chart III)
Today, more than ever before in the history of the United States, education is the fault line, the great Continental Divide between those who will prosper and those who will not in the new economy. If all Americans have access to education, it is no longer a fault line, it is a sturdy bridge that will lead us all together from the old economy to the new...Because of costs and other factors, not all Americans have access to higher education. Our goal must be nothing less than to make the 13th and 14th years of education as universal to all Americans as the first 12 are today.Yet, by signing the Violent Crime Control Act and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which provided prison construction funds to the states, President Clinton's policies had already helped shift funds from higher education to corrections. By 1995, state expenditures for prison construction grew by $926 million, while expenditures for university construction fell by an equivalent $954 million.9 That year, more was actually spent by states around the country building prisons ($2.6 billion) than building universities ($2.5 billion).10
-President Bill Clinton, Princeton University Commencement Address
"During the Clinton administration, the Department of Justice grew faster than any other agency of the federal government."An analysis by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse in January 2001, mapped out growth of the criminal justice sector, versus the decline in other federal government departments. The 1999 federal payroll had 25 percent fewer civilian employees--in relation to population--than it did in 1992. Meanwhile, the number of federal criminal investigators increased from 1 for every 30 federal employees in 1992, to 1 for every 20 twenty employees by 1999. Measured in constant dollars, from 1993 to 1999, spending on the Environment Protection Agency declined 15 percent, the Energy Department was down 28 percent, and NASA dropped by 21 percent. During the same period, spending on the Justice Department rose by 72 percent, leading the pack of a handful of federal agencies that had saw their budgets rise.13
-The Washington Post, February 9, 2001.
In the last days of his presidency, President Bill Clinton told a reporter from Rolling Stone magazine that mandatory minimum sentences were "unconscionable" and "we really need a re-examination of our entire prison policy."14 With a state, federal and jail inmate population that has grown by over 673,000 inmates since 1993, President Bill Clinton managed to contradict the last eight years of his stance on crime control in one sentence. President Clinton devoted two consecutive campaigns to "getting tough on crime," signing into law a bill that included the largest increase in crime control funding ever,15 and promoting measures that revoked sentencing discretion from federal judges. In his last days in office-- when he could no longer make lasting criminal justice policies--President Clinton repudiated one of the major tenets of his approach to crime control.
During the final year of George W. Bush's term as Governor of Texas, the State's prison population became the largest in the nation, edging out California's, even though 13 million more people live in California than in Texas.16 In 1999, as Governor, George W. Bush signed more death warrants than any other governor in the U.S.17 Having shown his conservative mettle on the crime issue, and having spoken of his own tribulations with alcohol abuse and a past conviction for drunk driving, President Bush's challenge is now to help others who are caught up in the criminal justice system to achieve the same kind of redemption he has. Based on his campaign platform, and a sober analysis of bi-partisan support for criminal justice reform, the authors recommend that President Bush begin his presidency by breaking with the policies of the last administration in two ways:
1. Deliver on his $1 billion promise for drug treatment.
During the 2000 presidential campaign, Bush-Cheney 2000 issued a brief on drug policy that promised to provide an additional $1 billion for states to expand local drug treatment programs. Following through quickly on this promise will help states marshal resources to treat drug abuse through model programs, and will help the President emphasize prevention over prison. The administration might consider providing matching funds to states that follow the Arizona and California models--diverting less serious offenders into rigorous sentencing options like drug treatment, employment/restitution programs, and community service.18
2. End the Crack/Powder Cocaine sentencing disparity.
"One of the things that we have got to make sure of in our society is that our drug-prevention programs are effective. And I think a lot of people are coming to the realization that maybe long [mandatory] minimum sentences for first-time users may not be the best way to occupy jail space and/or heal people from their disease. And I'm willing to look at that."
-President George W. Bush, on Inside Politics, CNN, January 18, 2001.
In 1986 and 1988, two federal sentencing laws were enacted that made the punishment for distributing crack cocaine 100 times greater than the punishment for powder cocaine. The result of these laws is that persons convicted of federal crack offenses, who tend to be African American, receive much harsher penalties than those convicted of powder cocaine charges, a much larger portion of whom are white. For example, someone convicted in federal court of distributing 5 grams of crack cocaine automatically receives a 5-year, mandatory minimum sentence, while it takes 500 grams of powder cocaine to trigger a 5-year mandatory sentence.
Despite the fact that about 2/3 of crack cocaine users are white or Hispanic, 84.5% of defendants convicted of crack possession in federal court in 1994 were African American, 10.3% white, and 5.2% Hispanic according to data from the United States Sentencing Commission. Trafficking offenders were 4.1% white, 88.3% black, and 7.1% Hispanic.19
By contrast, powder cocaine offenders were more racially mixed. Defendants convicted of simple possession of cocaine powder were 58% white, 26.7% black, and 15% Hispanic. The powder trafficking offenders were 32% white, 27.4% black, and 39.3% Hispanic.
As a part of the 1994 crime bill that President Clinton signed, the U.S. Sentencing Commission--a body designed to develop and oversee federal sentencing guidelines--was directed to study the effects of these laws. In 1995, they recommended equalizing the quantity of crack and powder cocaine that would trigger a mandatory sentence. Congress rejected that recommendation, which marked the first time it had done so since the establishment of the commission. President Clinton followed Congress and signed the rejection into law.
Groups ranging from the Cato Institute to the Rand Corporation have urged the federal government to revisit the cocaine sentencing disparity and mandatory minimums. As President Bush struggles to unite a fractured body politic, this bi-partisan issue is an excellent way to bring people together around criminal justice reform. Having already proven he can be tough on crime, President Bush must now prove that he is able to be smart on crime as well.
This report was funded by a generous grant from the Center on Crime,Communities and Culture of the Open Society Institute. Special thanks to Gregory Caldwell of CJCJ, Doug McVay of Common Sense for Drug Policy, Marc Mauer from the Sentencing Project, and Dr. William Chamblis from George Washington University, for their editorial and research assistance.
| This site and its contents © 2002 Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice |