How Do We Reduce Incarceration Rates While Maintaining Public Safety?

Abstract

T he heavy reliance on incarceration in the United States is unusual relative to U.S. history and relative to the use of incarceration in other nations. By now, the facts are common knowledge. We incarcerate our citizens at a rate that exceeds every other nation and that is multiple times (on the order of five to seven) the rates of other high-income countries. Moreover, since the mid-1970s, our incarceration rate has more than quadrupled. Several recent comprehensive studies of the rise of mass incarceration have concluded that nearly all of the growth in U.S. incarceration rates over recent decades can be attributed to changes in sentencing policy that have resulted in a higher propensity to apply prison as punishment and longer effective prison sentences (Raphael and Stoll, 2013;Travis and Western, 2014).Tonry (2014, this issue) offers a road map for the sentencing reforms that states and the federal government must pursue in some combination to affect substantial declines in the U.S. incarceration rate. The overall proposal is to the point, frank, and enumerates the sentencing practices specifically that drive mass incarceration. In terms of general principles, Tonry argues for a greater degree of proportionality between offense severity and sentence length, the greater individualization of sentencing, and a more systematic approach to sentencing that incorporates capacity constraints and social scientific knowledge on the determinants of offending and reoffending.Tonry's (2014) proposal calls for the elimination or moderation of sentencing practices that tend to create long sentences for repeat and serious offenders, for example, three-strikes laws, truth-in-sentencing restrictions, life-without-parole sentences, and various mandatory minimums that govern sentencing at the state and federal levels. Such changes in conjunction with the establishment of sentencing commissions shielded from political influence would

The Extent and Correlates of Public Support for Deterrence Reforms and Hot Spots Policing

“…Under optimization theory, there is legitimate motivation for reinvesting “criminal justice resources toward interventions with higher returns per dollar spent,” such as policing (Raphael : 590). If policy makers reallocate resources toward an alternate intervention with crime‐reduction benefits, investing less money in prison does not have to lead to an increase in crime (Lofstrom and Raphael ; Petersilia and Cullen ).…”

“…For decades, the United States criminal justice system relied heavily on incarceration as a crime‐control strategy, despite the extraordinarily high costs, limited crime‐prevention value, and disproportionate impact on the black community (Alexander ; Durlauf and Nagin ; Durose et al ; Maruna and Toch ; Petersilia ; Tonry ; Wacquant ; Western ). According to the research, we have reached a point of diminishing returns on the use of incarceration, such that increases in imprisonment in recent years generated less crime reduction than in the past, with some researchers indicating either no effect or a criminogenic effect of imprisonment (Johnson and Raphael ; Lofstrom and Raphael ; Raphael ; Tonry ). At the same time, the country appears to be entering a transitional criminal justice era, characterized by prison downsizing and a bipartisan shift toward alternative approaches to crime control (Clear and Frost ; Dagan and Teles ; Petersilia and Cullen ).…”

“…At the same time, the country appears to be entering a transitional criminal justice era, characterized by prison downsizing and a bipartisan shift toward alternative approaches to crime control (Clear and Frost ; Dagan and Teles ; Petersilia and Cullen ). According to Raphael (), “most activists, criminal justice professionals, and informed observers of U.S. corrections policy sense a profound political change and the opening of a policy window where fundamental reform is a real possibility” (580). However, reducing the prison population is not a simple feat; without the implementation of other criminal justice reforms designed to prevent crime and reduce recidivism, lower levels of imprisonment may result in increased crime (Bushway ; Petersilia and Cullen ).…”

“…To minimize the possible criminogenic effects of prison downsizing, many experts advocate for the reallocation of resources from imprisonment to other possible interventions, ranging from early childhood interventions to a renewed interest in policing strategies (Durlauf and Nagin ; Nagin et al ; Raphael ). Scholars have focused recent attention on the latter, arguing that simply increasing the resources available to the police is not enough; rather, fundamental changes in the nature of policing are also necessary.…”

Reinventing Sentencing in the United States

“…Although he is supportive of Tonry's () proposals, Steven Raphael (, this issue) is circumspect about whether a 50% reduction in prison population can be achieved without a material impact on crime rates. He goes on to describe how reinvesting the savings from reductions in prison population in other more effective crime prevention methods such as policing could blunt or even avert an increase in crime.…”