The Overcrowding Of Prison And Massachusetts

There have been twenty-three prisoners build that was in the state of California in 1984 and it cost the state between “$280-$350 million apiece”. In 1984 and 2000 more prisons was built for the state penal system to have housing for the prisoners.

One reason for the growth of the population is because the “three strikes” initiative. The “three strikes” according to page 87, California Politics textbook is a law “anyone convicted of a third felony is sentenced to a mandatory prison term of twenty-five years to life without parole, with enhanced penalites for second-strikers.” The second reason for the growth of the priosn population is the skyrocketing costs that contribute to overcrowding. “In 1980, the total prison popultaion was 22,500, and in 1985 it costs less than $100 million to run the entire correctional system(page 87, California Poltics textbook).” What accounts for the understanding of the correctional system is due to the “comparatively higher costs are attributively mainly

Within the last four decades, the rate of incarceration in the United States has continued to increase exponentially. The Bureau of Justice reports that the inmate population in 1971 was estimated at two hundred thousand, while the current number stands at roughly 1.5 million – nearly eight times more than the number of inmates in 1971. Because of the high costs associated with prison operations, their overcrowding, and wrongful convictions, California introduced legislative measures such as Propositions 36 and 47 as well as Assembly Bills 109 and 117, in order to lessen the number of incarcerations. Not only will implementing these reforms save the state millions in revenue, they will also rightfully place truly dangerous criminals in

However, the mandated reductions, the prison inmate’s population would still be 137.5 % over its allowed capacity (Liptak 2014). In opposition, the State of California submitted an appeal for the federal order to the Supreme Court seeking protections under the Prison Litigation Reform Act (Newsman and Scott 2012). In 2011, the Supreme Court 5-4 decision upheld three-judge panel’s federal order requiring California state prisons to reduce its population by 30,000 inmates (Liptak 2014).The Supreme Court judges emphasized the notion that overcrowding inflicted pain on prisoners, and, therefore, violated inmate’s constitutional rights (Newsman and Scott 2012). After the Supreme Court’s decision, Jerry Brown advocated realignment in the state prisons that would transfer non-violent, non-serous, and non-sexual offenders to county jails (Ravi 2014). Likewise, to comply with the federal order Brown allocated 6 billion in state funds to be transferred to counties aiding the realignment reforms (Ravi

In 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered California to reduce its prison population to 137.5% of institutional design capacity. A combination of reforms, inmate transfers, and new construction brought the population below the mandated threshold. As of March 2015, it stood at 112,300, or 135.8% of capacity. As encouraging as these numbers appear, there is a back-end story to this situation.

Prisons are expensive facilities to operate. Each year, California prisons house more than 100,000 inmates (Graves, “Fewer State Prisoners, Higher Cost Per Inmate”). While the number of inmates has been steadily decreasing, spending per inmate has skyrocketed to about $60,000 from $33,000 in 1995 (Dean, “CA Spending Per Inmate Rising Faster Than Spending Per Child”). That is about six billion dollars spent on prisoners alone. The government is wasting more and more taxpayer money on keeping inmates inside the prisons. With about 58% of ex-convicts returning to prison within

According to Krisberg and Taylor-Nicholson, state budget cuts, lowering prison over-crowding, and improving corrections are the underlying reasons for the policy shift. Although “county custody costs (county jail) may be somewhat lower than state prison costs, shifting the custody and supervision costs of selected offender groups to the county will only cut spending in state prisons,” and may fail to lower the overall costs of corrections in California (Owen & Mobley, 2012, p. 47). Whereas the state prison system seems to be progressing toward its population-reduction goal, “this measure is shortsighted and somewhat deceiving” because a “corresponding rise in county jail populations will continue California’s

The United States Supreme Court ruled that prison overcrowding in California was equivalent to cruel and unusual punishment. This decision recharged a long-standing disagreement among scholars and politicians as to whether or not courts should intervene to protect make changes. Some believe this is a matter or the well-being of those unable to make decisions for themselves. Others believe this is not a top priority and by forcing states to improve state institutions, the already costly industry will have cost increase. The journal also discusses the economic effects reform has had. Concluding that they have made positive changes at a slightly higher expense. The changes made by the state made the facilities closer to “humane” by court standards. (7)

Since 1984, the California Penal System has been forced to undergo drastic changes resulting from increased legislation aimed at increasing the severity of retribution to offenders leading to an exponentially increasing prison population. In the 132 years between 1852 and 1984, the state of California built twelve prisons, but has since supplemented the prison system with 21 new facilities. In 1977, the California Department of Corrections was responsible for 19,600 inmates. California’s inmate population now stands at 160,655, an increase of close to 800%.

Earlier I did mention that if no action is taken to reduce the inmate population, it has been predicted that by 2018, overcrowding would climb to more than 45% above the Federal Bureau of Prison’s maximum capacity.

The proliferation of prison overcrowding has been a rising concern for the U.S. The growing prison population poses considerable health and safety risks to prison staffs and employees, as well as to inmates themselves. The risks will continue to increase if no immediate actions are taken. Whereas fighting proliferation is fundamentally the duty of the U.S. government, prison overcrowding has exposed that the U.S. government will need to take measures to combat the flaws in the prison and criminal justice system. Restructuring the government to combat the danger of prison overcrowding, specifically in California, thus requires reforms that reestablishes the penal codes, increases the state’s budget, and develops

As of 2015, 2.7% of adults in the United States were under correctional control, the lowest rate since 1994, however that is still roughly 6.7 million adults (Kaeble & Glaze, 2016). While the correctional population has declined, correctional facilities in the United States are still grossly overcrowded, with many facilities at or surpassing capacity. A report in 2010 by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation showed that on average, facilities were at 175% capacity (Brown, 2010). However, as of midnight on October 31st, 2017 the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation reported that their facilities, on average, were 132% occupied (Brown, 2017). Not only is prison overcrowding a burden on the facilities themselves, but also on the inmates. Prison overcrowding, that is, housing more inmates than the facility can humanely facilitate (Haney, 2006), places a strain on all resources throughout the correctional facility, including on the healthcare that’s offered, educational programs, and most dramatically on the physical space available to house inmates (Ekland-Olson, 1983).

These measures were taken to ensure public safety but are now posing a problem for our correctional facilities. Overcrowding and budgets are among the problems brought about by these measures. Both the state and federal correctional population throughout the United States have steadily seen significant increases in their population, every year for the past decades. Based on the census found on the Bureau of Justice website, the data collected between June 30th 2000 to December 30th 2005 showed that prisoners held in custody between federal and state prisons increased by 10%. (“Bureau of Justice Statistics”, p.1 -2)

Overcrowding in our state and federal jails today has become a big issue. Back in the 20th century, prison rates in the U.S

We can see examples of overcrowded jails all over the US and even out of the US. "California's prison system, originally designed for 100,000 inmates, currently houses 173,000 inmates and has resorted to housing approximately 17,000 inmates in makeshift beds in locations like prison gymnasiums"(Smith, 2006). High government officials scrambled to find remedies to this problem (Camp, 2004).