Years of “get tough on crime” policies have failed, according to a study by Karol Lucken of the University of Central Florida. Lucken’s study condensed decades of analysis of mass incarceration policies.
When coupled with reports of the Vera Institute of Justice, clear conclusions can be drawn that demonstrate few winners in the “get tough on crime” era. According to the analysis, the get-tough era, or as some call it, mass incarceration, has failed in every respect. The perpetual prisoner machine is a broken-down clunker.
Lucken pointed out that financial considerations are bringing criminal justice operatives face-to-face with the reality of their failed policies. Unsustainable practices leading to mass incarceration have caused political jurisdictions to suffer financial strain. Because of their inability to carry the financial burden they created, politicians and bureaucrats are now changing course and their messages.
Public sentiment and penal practices are shifting. Pronouncements fanning public fear as a way into office are giving way to more reasoned policies. According to Lucken, “voters are moved by language that suggests they could be getting more bang for their investment,” when it comes to corrections.
The university report says “policies which defined the era such as the War on Drugs, minimum mandatory sentencing, habitual offender statutes, three strikes and truth in sentencing statutes, have been thoroughly analyzed and disputed.” In addition, according to Lucken, documented effectiveness of the programs has been found lacking.
Years of interpretation by many organizations leads to an inescapable conclusion that the failures are significant. There is a clear lack of success in criminal sentencing practices across the board. The studies show mass incarceration has no demonstrable affect on crime or recidivism. William Shepherd, chairman of the American Bar Association, said that over-criminalization has in fact produced negative results and made the problem worse.
Newly incarcerated people primarily come from three sources, according to the Vera Institute.
The first group are people who have been just been convicted of a crime. Then there are those who are on probation or parole, who violate the conditions of their probation or parole. This second group of probation or parole violators makes up 44 percent of the national prison population, according to the report.
However, research found when examining the probation/parole group who have committed a new offense in which the evidence is weak, the authorities simply declare the person “in violation of his parole” and do not have to prove anything in court. This makes up the third group.
As a punitive policy experiment, scare tactics of law enforcement propelled the get-tough era. Legal factors such as legislative and statutory changes to penal codes facilitated excessively long sentences, according to Vera.
In the last 40 years, the combined prison population of all states swelled by over 700 percent. During the same period, costs of running state prisons increased from $6.7 billion to about $50 billion.
