1 in 100
Locked up in the United States. We’re tops. NYT:
For the first time in the nation’s history, more than one in 100 American adults is behind bars, according to a new report.
Nationwide, the prison population grew by 25,000 last year, bringing it to almost 1.6 million. Another 723,000 people are in local jails. The number of American adults is about 230 million, meaning that one in every 99.1 adults is behind bars.
Incarceration rates are even higher for some groups. One in 36 Hispanic adults is behind bars, based on Justice Department figures for 2006. One in 15 black adults is, too, as is one in nine black men between the ages of 20 and 34.
The report, from the Pew Center on the States, also found that only one in 355 white women between the ages of 35 and 39 are behind bars but that one in 100 black women are.
The report’s methodology differed from that used by the Justice Department, which calculates the incarceration rate by using the total population rather than the adult population as the denominator. Using the department’s methodology, about one in 130 Americans is behind bars.
Either way, said Susan Urahn, the center’s managing director, “we aren’t really getting the return in public safety from this level of incarceration.”
But Paul Cassell, a law professor at the University of Utah and a former federal judge, said the Pew report considered only half of the cost-benefit equation and overlooked the “very tangible benefits — lower crime rates.”
In the past 20 years, according the Federal Bureau of Investigation, violent crime rates fell by 25 percent, to 464 for every 100,000 people in 2007 from 612.5 in 1987.
“While we certainly want to be smart about who we put into prisons,” Professor Cassell said, “it would be a mistake to think that we can release any significant number of prisoners without increasing crime rates. One out of every 100 adults is behind bars because one out of every 100 adults has committed a serious criminal offense.”
Ms. Urahn said the nation cannot afford the incarceration rate documented in the report. “We tend to be a country in which incarceration is an easy response to crime,” she said. “Being tough on crime is an easy position to take, particularly if you have the money. And we did have the money in the ‘80s and ‘90s.”
Now, with fewer resources available, the report said, “prison costs are blowing a hole in state budgets.” On average, states spend almost 7 percent on their budgets on corrections, trailing only healthcare, education and transportation.
In 2007, according to the National Association of State Budgeting Officers, states spent $44 billion in tax dollars on corrections. That is up from $10.6 billion in 1987, a 127 increase once adjusted for inflation. With money from bonds and the federal government included, total state spending on corrections last year was $49 billion. By 2011, the report said, states are on track to spend an additional $25 billion.
The AP report on same says we beat China and Russia.
The report said the United States incarcerates more people than any other nation, far ahead of more populous China with 1.5 million people behind bars. It said the U.S. also is the leader in inmates per capita (750 per 100,000 people), ahead of Russia (628 per 100,000) and other former Soviet bloc nations which round out the Top 10.
A lot of different ways to go on all of that. Open thread.
Topics: America, crime, punishment
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 8:24 pm on Thursday, February 28, 2008
10 Responses to “1 in 100”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
February 28th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
The report said the United States incarcerates more people than any other nation, far ahead of more populous China with 1.5 million people behind bars. It said the U.S. also is the leader in inmates per capita (750 per 100,000 people), ahead of Russia (628 per 100,000) and other former Soviet bloc nations which round out the Top 10.
Yes, probably because we’re not in the habit of executing robbers, white collar criminals, shoplifters, etc., and billing their families for the bullets.
February 28th, 2008 at 10:29 pm
Well, if putting criminals in prison keeps the crime rate down — and it does — what’s the problem?
February 28th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
Heck, Recbecca, the Chinese don’t simply execute their prisoners, they do with efficiency, and manage to harvest many organs at the same time. It’s a win-win scenario!
Maybe if we followed the fine example of the Chinese, Ms. Urahn would cut us some slack?
February 29th, 2008 at 1:39 am
It’s largely because of the stupid drug laws. They’re totally useless (except for laws relating to selling/giving drugs to minors). Ought to get rid of them.
That part about China is hogwash, though. The Chinese still have an extensive gulag system and no one knows how many people are imprisoned in it.
February 29th, 2008 at 3:45 am
I agree about the drug laws. They have spawned a very dangerous, and intrusive DEA, an institution that isn’t satisfied to go after major drug dealers, but is now insinuating itself into medical practices, punishing doctors and patients because there are those who abuse legitimate drug. They are pushing to do so even more, wanting the FDA to go along with their ideas of who can prescribe what drugs and to whom. They’ve already managed to burden patients with ridiculous paper work in order to buy over the counter allergy and cold medicines because some of the ingredients are used to manufacture meth. They already put doctors under the gun over pain medicine.
As for the rest, if it keeps crime down, and it does, then jail the bastards.
February 29th, 2008 at 3:59 am
As Dave Surls said, maybe it’s time to re-think our ridiculous drug laws that lock up non-violent criminals.
February 29th, 2008 at 6:11 am
So let me restate the problem then….
We are only spending 7% on the one thing in the top four expenses that is actually mandated by constitutional language, i.e. “protecting the populace”. If health care, education, and transportation lead prison spending, We have an enormous amount of money available to put even more aholes in jail where they belong.
Was this really a story about misplaced public spending? :>{
February 29th, 2008 at 10:14 am
WE could save a bit of money, by executing the 3-4000 that were sentenced TO execution.
What has to stop as well is, letting this filth, plead down to NO death penalty, to life without possibility of parole (that ‘they’ always ask for after telling one and all, “I have found God”) simply by saying…I’m guilty.
February 29th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
“It’s largely because of the stupid drug laws.”
Actually…I would posit it is largely because we emptied out our mental hospitals.
If one takes a liberal view of drug abuse as “Self medication” there is no longer an option to “Confine Drug Abusers” to a “Mental Hospital” until such time as they are cured/properly medicated.
So we confine them to prisons along with others who have various problems that are better dealt with in a mental facility.
Mental Hospital populations declined daramtically
Prison and Homeless populations increased dramatically
/sarcasm on
There is no causal connection
/sarcasm off
February 29th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
“Actually…I would posit it is largely because we emptied out our mental hospitals.”
You’re right. At the time, I think people were recoiling at the barbarity of some of the common practices such as electro-shock and frontal lobotomy, and I can see why we did it.
But as much as I want to believe that someone who has a serious mental condition can overcome it, the fact is that we asked that question and the answer is, no, they can’t. If the treatments don’t work, either because the meds aren’t good enough or the patient won’t comply, that person needs to be in a hospital.
The other argument against it that I haven’t seen here is “you’re just sweeping the problem under the rug.” Bull. We have an open society. Our institutions are subject to constant monitoring, whereas the city streets have absolutely no monitoring.
And as far the whole premise of this article, that the cost of incarceration is higher, it completely ignores the overall cost to society of crime. You just have to drive through a crime-ridden area to see the cost, both in economic devastation and human suffering and corruption.