

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Talk about worrying about the symptom instead of the cause: Attorney General Eric Holder recently sent a letter to Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, warning of the devastating effect budget cuts will have on the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) if sequestration moves forward. If no deal is reached by March 1, the BOP will face a 5% reduction in staffing levels.

[The cuts] would endanger the safety of staff and over 218,000 inmates. As a consequence, BOP would need to implement full or partial lockdowns and significantly reduce inmate reentry and training programs. This would leave inmates idle, increasing the likelihood of inmate misconduct, violence, and other risks to correctionalworkers and inmates.
Holder's concerns are legitimate, but he's not talking about the real problem: our federal prison population is completely out of control.
How did we get to this point? At a time of historically low rates of crime, our federal prison system is operating at almost 40% over capacity. We've seen the federal prison population balloon by nearly 800% since 1980. Meanwhile, many states have enacted innovative criminal justice reforms that contributed to the first decline in overall prison population in 40 years.
Testifying before the House of Representatives, Charles Samuels, Director of the BOP, attributed the explosion of the prison population to excessively harsh sentencing and the increasing prosecutions of drug offenses. Samuels explained during his testimony that "drug offenders comprise the largest single offender group admitted to federal prison, and sentences for drug offenses are much longer than those for most other offense categories."
We also know that immigration enforcement programs like Operation Streamline contribute to this unsustainable prison growth. Operation Streamline is a "zero-tolerance" program that requires the federal criminal prosecution and imprisonment of all unlawful border crossers in designated sectors. The program annually sweeps in tens of thousands of migrant workers with no criminal history and is a major contributor to prison overcrowding, privatization and the soaring federal rate of Hispanic and Latino incarceration.
We have focused so much on locking people up in this country that we have ignored viable and fiscally sound alternatives to prison. It's time for our elected officials to seriously consider criminal justice reforms that will maintain public safety while reducing the federal prison population. These reforms include eliminating mandatory minimum sentences drug sentences, expanding time credits for good behavior, enhancing elderly prisoner early and compassionate release programs, and making the Fair Sentencing Act retroactive. We also need to eliminate programs like Operation Streamline that have added immigration prisoners to BOP who would need to be housed in new facilities, which would likely be privately operated.
Sending people to prison should be the option of last resort, not the first. We did not have to get to this point, but fortunately we have an opportunity over the next few years to adopt sensible reforms to the federal criminal justice system while maintaining public safety. While Congress is debating how to prevent the sequestration, it's time for a real discussion about how we can stop wasting money by incarcerating people who pose little risk to our communities for long periods of time for non-violent drug crimes.
If Congress is serious about trimming the budget, the answer is simple: reduce the federal prison population.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |

[The cuts] would endanger the safety of staff and over 218,000 inmates. As a consequence, BOP would need to implement full or partial lockdowns and significantly reduce inmate reentry and training programs. This would leave inmates idle, increasing the likelihood of inmate misconduct, violence, and other risks to correctionalworkers and inmates.
Holder's concerns are legitimate, but he's not talking about the real problem: our federal prison population is completely out of control.
How did we get to this point? At a time of historically low rates of crime, our federal prison system is operating at almost 40% over capacity. We've seen the federal prison population balloon by nearly 800% since 1980. Meanwhile, many states have enacted innovative criminal justice reforms that contributed to the first decline in overall prison population in 40 years.
Testifying before the House of Representatives, Charles Samuels, Director of the BOP, attributed the explosion of the prison population to excessively harsh sentencing and the increasing prosecutions of drug offenses. Samuels explained during his testimony that "drug offenders comprise the largest single offender group admitted to federal prison, and sentences for drug offenses are much longer than those for most other offense categories."
We also know that immigration enforcement programs like Operation Streamline contribute to this unsustainable prison growth. Operation Streamline is a "zero-tolerance" program that requires the federal criminal prosecution and imprisonment of all unlawful border crossers in designated sectors. The program annually sweeps in tens of thousands of migrant workers with no criminal history and is a major contributor to prison overcrowding, privatization and the soaring federal rate of Hispanic and Latino incarceration.
We have focused so much on locking people up in this country that we have ignored viable and fiscally sound alternatives to prison. It's time for our elected officials to seriously consider criminal justice reforms that will maintain public safety while reducing the federal prison population. These reforms include eliminating mandatory minimum sentences drug sentences, expanding time credits for good behavior, enhancing elderly prisoner early and compassionate release programs, and making the Fair Sentencing Act retroactive. We also need to eliminate programs like Operation Streamline that have added immigration prisoners to BOP who would need to be housed in new facilities, which would likely be privately operated.
Sending people to prison should be the option of last resort, not the first. We did not have to get to this point, but fortunately we have an opportunity over the next few years to adopt sensible reforms to the federal criminal justice system while maintaining public safety. While Congress is debating how to prevent the sequestration, it's time for a real discussion about how we can stop wasting money by incarcerating people who pose little risk to our communities for long periods of time for non-violent drug crimes.
If Congress is serious about trimming the budget, the answer is simple: reduce the federal prison population.

[The cuts] would endanger the safety of staff and over 218,000 inmates. As a consequence, BOP would need to implement full or partial lockdowns and significantly reduce inmate reentry and training programs. This would leave inmates idle, increasing the likelihood of inmate misconduct, violence, and other risks to correctionalworkers and inmates.
Holder's concerns are legitimate, but he's not talking about the real problem: our federal prison population is completely out of control.
How did we get to this point? At a time of historically low rates of crime, our federal prison system is operating at almost 40% over capacity. We've seen the federal prison population balloon by nearly 800% since 1980. Meanwhile, many states have enacted innovative criminal justice reforms that contributed to the first decline in overall prison population in 40 years.
Testifying before the House of Representatives, Charles Samuels, Director of the BOP, attributed the explosion of the prison population to excessively harsh sentencing and the increasing prosecutions of drug offenses. Samuels explained during his testimony that "drug offenders comprise the largest single offender group admitted to federal prison, and sentences for drug offenses are much longer than those for most other offense categories."
We also know that immigration enforcement programs like Operation Streamline contribute to this unsustainable prison growth. Operation Streamline is a "zero-tolerance" program that requires the federal criminal prosecution and imprisonment of all unlawful border crossers in designated sectors. The program annually sweeps in tens of thousands of migrant workers with no criminal history and is a major contributor to prison overcrowding, privatization and the soaring federal rate of Hispanic and Latino incarceration.
We have focused so much on locking people up in this country that we have ignored viable and fiscally sound alternatives to prison. It's time for our elected officials to seriously consider criminal justice reforms that will maintain public safety while reducing the federal prison population. These reforms include eliminating mandatory minimum sentences drug sentences, expanding time credits for good behavior, enhancing elderly prisoner early and compassionate release programs, and making the Fair Sentencing Act retroactive. We also need to eliminate programs like Operation Streamline that have added immigration prisoners to BOP who would need to be housed in new facilities, which would likely be privately operated.
Sending people to prison should be the option of last resort, not the first. We did not have to get to this point, but fortunately we have an opportunity over the next few years to adopt sensible reforms to the federal criminal justice system while maintaining public safety. While Congress is debating how to prevent the sequestration, it's time for a real discussion about how we can stop wasting money by incarcerating people who pose little risk to our communities for long periods of time for non-violent drug crimes.
If Congress is serious about trimming the budget, the answer is simple: reduce the federal prison population.