The main purpose of rehabilitation programs in our prisons is to reduce the rate in which incarcerated people return to prison or their former lifestyle of crime once released. The issue of the high recidivism rate in our prison system today has not been a hot topic for the presidential candidates, but it should be. The recidivism rate has been growing for the past few decades. It jumped 5% between 1984 and 1993. Today, the national recidivism rate is 67%. This percentage is outrageous. How have we been able to reduce crime on the streets but not been able to reduce the rate in which formerly incarcerated people return to crime? It is largely because of the “tough on crime” attitude of the 1990s. This big talking approach to crime made major cut-backs on rehabilitation programs around the country. In the mid 90s only 6% of the $22 billion budget states used for prisons was spent on in-prison programs that educated, empowered, and prepared inmates to reenter society.
Although neither McCain nor Obama have focused on rehabilitation as a means to reducing recidivism in their campaigns, they do have clear stances on criminal justice, much of which plays a large role in the punishment vs. rehabilitation topic. Their past also gives us some insight into how they stand on this issue.
"Obama will give first-time, non-violent offenders a chance to serve their sentence, where appropriate, in the type of drug rehabilitation programs that have proven to work better than a prison term in changing bad behavior."
This, along with other statements regarding Obama’s platform indicate his agreement that rehabilitation more than punishment needs to be our main focus. As of July 2008, ProCon.org was unable to find McCain’s stance on this issue. McCain’s campaign was emailed and asked this question directly but there has yet to be a reply. This does not mean he is for or against a focus on rehabilitation above punishment, but there is no direct statements telling us his view. However other platforms and his past give us insight into where he stands on relating issues.
In Obama’s one term as senator of Illinois he co-sponsored the Second Chance Act of 2007, which provided greater support for inmates reentering society through programs and state requirements. He was also the cosponsor of the Count Every Vote Act of 2005 which included voting rights of individuals convicted of criminal offenses. Although this act does not specifically relate to rehabilitation, it shows support for greater acceptance of formerly incarcerated people into our society. McCain was also in support of the Second Chance Act of 2007.
In 2004 about 20% of state prisoners and 53% of federal prisoners were sentenced with drug offenses. One of the major parts of rehabilitation is drug rehab. Because of this, drugs play a large role in the issue of rehabilitation and recidivism. Both Obama and McCain have substance use tied into their pasts. Obama has admitted to using marijuana and cocaine in his youth and McCain admits to heavy drinking. McCain’s wife Cindy struggled with an addiction to prescription drugs that resulted in a DEA investigation but did not lead to a criminal charge. This information from their pasts might give us better insight into their positions today.
The 2008 presidential campaign has caused the candidates to define more clearly the differences between their future plans and opinions on criminal justice policy.
McCain supports stricter penalties for violent felons and laws that make sure violent criminals serve their full sentence without parol. He supports a larger budget to build more federal prisons. In regards to rehabilitation, McCain supports programs that teach inmates vocational and job-related skills, job-placement programs for released inmates, and drug and alcohol addiction treatment programs.
Obama has focused more on civil rights issues regarding the war on drugs (probably a result of his history as a Civil Rights lawyer). He is also a strong supporter of rehabilitation. In his “Blueprint for Change” Obama’s platforms are laid out. It states that Obama will provide ex-offenders with access to job training, substance abuse and mental health counseling, and employment opportunities (this is similar to John McCain). One of the specific programs he plans to create is a prison-to-work incentive program that will reduce barriers that former inmates have faced when finding employment. Rehabilitation has been Obama’s main plan for reducing crime. McCain hopes to reduce crime by increasing the funding for community policing programs.
Another issue in which McCain and Obama differ is mandatory minimum sentencing. McCain supports mandatory minimum sentencing, which have most notably been used in drug-offense sentences. Obama proposes abolishing mandatory minimum sentencing.
I know that I just loaded a lot of information on you. Not all of it was in regards to rehabilitation but I believe it is important to get a broader understanding of the candidate’s platforms on all criminal justice issues if you want to make your own judgments on how realistic or how committed they are to rehabilitation programs.
After reading a lot about both candidates and gaining a fairly holistic view on their platforms regarding the justice system, I feel more confident that Obama will follow through with his rehabilitation plans. We have had the programs that McCain mentions for the past decade and yet our recidivism rates are still through the roof. Everyone will say that rehabilitation should be involved in the prison system, but it is the funding and the focusing on rehabilitation that really says something about their commitment to rehabilitation programs. Obama’s desire to abolish mandatory minimum sentencing shows that he is choosing a different direction for our criminal justice system – one that is more based on individual cases and less on the isolation and punishment ways of the past. Many of McCain’s platforms propose stricter sentences and prison time with no parole without any suggestion that rehabilitation would be involved.
But like anyone else I do bring my own biases to the table. I am against mandatory minimum sentences and many of the other aspects of the war on drugs that Obama also opposes. I also am for ex-convict voting rights. I agree with Obama more than McCain on many issues like this that do not particularly have to do with rehabilitation, which has caused me to trust Obama’s stances more than McCain’s. This is my interpretation of the candidate platforms, but I would love to hear how my readers view Obama and McCain’s different stances.
The United States has the largest prisoner population in the world, with some 2.1 million currently incarcerated people in our prisons and jails. Since the 1970s the number of inmates in state and federal prison has increased more than six-fold. States spend more money on prisons than they do on education! What do these statistics tell us? Something must change, and we cannot wait another four years for the change to begin.
6 comments:
Interesting points. It seems like you and McCain might have fundamentally differing views on the the purpose of prisons. I believe McCain may view prison as a place where the prisoners are being punished for the crimes they have committed, where as you say the point of prison is to fix them for normal life. Should there not be consequences for our actions? Certainly for some cases, like drug convictions, rehabilitation is valid, but in general rehabilitation would have a negative effect on the system. Lets say rehabilitation has been put in place for the entire system. A man violently steals a car and is sent to jail. Before committing the crime the man knows that after going to prison he won't be held accountable for his actions. Rehabilitation is a good thing, but there should be long term effects for those who commit crimes
The US being the country with the most prisoners in the world, this is definitely an issue to be discussed. I find it surprising that this has not been brought up more by candidates, and by what your post says, McCain hasn't even expressed a clear position on it.
Of course not all criminal can do rehabilitation. I believe that people who commit serious crimes should be given a sentence, and maybe then do some rehabilitation.
But drug users and such, should be definitely go under rehabilitation....
I had never really paid attention to this issue before, but reading your blog has definitely made me more conscious!
I think you provided your readers with a very fair and in-depth analysis on this issue. I also share some of the same biases you admit to, and appreciate your neutrality when providing the candidates positions. I am concerned just like every other citizen that offenders are likely to offend again once they are released. Because of the high rates, I think many of us see two options; the first being that we just keep them in locked up as long as possible and hope that they are reformed because of the sheer punitive effect that prison had; the other option is where we try to rehabilitate and hope that those efforts are what prevent reoffending. I think it's fair to say that an element of punishment still exists even if rehabilitation is offered, so it is not to say that there are no consequences or accountability for crimes committed. On the other hand, in the first example we rely only on the punishment. I think rehabilitation is helpful, but of course it comes with a price-tag, and that's where people want some kind of assurance that rehabilitation will indeed prevent reoffending. It would be interesting to see some comparative data for recidivism rates with rehabilitation versus without. Are there any facilities where rehabilitation has shown to be successful, either in the US or in other countries? And the non-drug examples would be particularly interesting. Last point, in the interest of trying to prevent the crimes in the first place, it's worth looking at providing some job training and other services to at-risk populations before they offend the first time.
I agree that it is essential to reuduce the ammount of crime coming back into the streets when people are reduced from prison. I think it is very important as well to have the rehabilitation option. However, it is so common amoung drug abusers to refuse treatment because the believe they dont have a problem. It takes a lot to get these people to attend these facilities, which is why it is very important to have laws enforced regarding treatment. One of these is the Marchment Act of Florida which confines a peron to 5 days of treatment based on whether 1 family member or 3 family friends and a doctor describe that person as being a danger to theirself or others. Though this doesnt necesarily have to do with crime...at the same time it increases safety within society. Other acts like this should be considered regarding imprisonment.
Petra -
I am afraid that I may not have presented my position clearly. I do not want rehabilitation to take the place of a prison sentence. Most rehabilitation is simply done with many different rehabilitation programs that prisoners take while in prison serving their sentence. This is the case with the Second Chance program. There are some rehabilitation programs that are outside of prison but I have not done much research on that. I will bring this point up in one of my blogs because I think many people have thought the same thing you did.
Volt-air-
I think the difference between my and your view is that I believe rehabilitation is not an easy out for the prisoners. It is proven that a punishment-based system is not a deterrence. Rehabilitation is not a replacement to a prison sentence, in most cases it is simply an addition. My posts so far have also only been about rehabilitation for non-violent crimes, although I don't think I have made that very clear. I believe that violent crimes will need a different system of rehabilitation.
Post a Comment