"prisoners could safely determine their own reality"

one of the most eye-opening and faith-in-a-world-without-prisons-increasing books i have read recently is the newly published, When the Prisoners Ran Walpole, by Jamie Bissonette, with Ralph Hamm, Robert Dellelo, and Edward Rodman.

below are just a few excerpts, which by no means do the text justice. read for yourself, and please share your thoughts.

-----
For many of the volunteers, the experiences from March to May of 1973 revealed two surprising things: prisoners could safely determine their own reality, and a prison with no guards that was run democratically by prisoners functioned smoothly and was profoundly productive. (212)

The NPRA (National Prisoners Reform Association) was first and foremost a prison-based project. Even though the prisoners recognized that prisons themselves were a primary cause of crime, and the NPRA was an abolitionist organization, the leadership knew from experience that prisons were maintained by complex interests. The path away from punishment and toward problem solving could not be left to prison administrators or advocates or community support groups--no matter how dedicated. (213)

The NPRA was a full employment project. One of the most crucial tasks a prisoner undertakes upon release from prison is that of finding employment. The NPRA recommended that prisoners work with federal and state governments, along with private industry, to develop job-training programs within prisons. A job-placement network would complement the job-training programs. The NPRA was clear: the jobs needed to be decent and pay fair wages, or prisoners would return to crime. This brief recommendation for decent, well-paying jobs for prisoners was written when the whole country was experiencing the high unemployment and skyrocketing prices that became known as "stagflation." Yet, the NPRA was not about to buy into the idea that there were "not enough" jobs for everyone. The fact that society was willing to waste substantial amounts of money keeping them in prison led them to draw their own conclusions. They knew there were enough resources; they simply needed to be apportioned more pragmatically, and for the good of all people. (214)

re: public safety

i think it's important to reiterate some points very clearly, and repeat them as much as possible:

mass incarceration does NOT increase public safety.

in the words of angela davis,

"Mass incarceration is not a solution to unemployment, nor is it a solution to the vast array of social problems that are hidden away in a rapidly growing network of prisons and jails. However, the great majority of people have been tricked into believing in the efficacy of imprisonment, even though the historical record clearly demonstrates that prisons do not work. Racism has undermined our ability to create a popular critical discourse to contest the ideological trickery that posits imprisonment as key to public safety" from ColorLines, Fall '98

Julia Sudbury notes on the CR10 blog,
'We believe that the violence of crime cannot be solved through the additional violence of policing, surveillance and separation from loved ones. Instead, we advocate focusing attention and resources on building empowered communities, with decent housing, secure jobs, food security, healthy environments and high-quality education, as the ultimate alternative to incarceration.
The challenge facing us is immense. In the US alone, over 2.3 million people are warehoused in prisons and jails. A recent report from the Pew Center found that, for the first time, in the US we now imprison one in every 100 adults; the figure is one in nine for black men aged between 20 and 34. The Pew report also found that this massive incarceration is impacting state budgets without delivering a clear return on public safety."

Federal Prison Bureau Nonviolent Offender Relief Act of 2009

i've been thinking lately about the reform v. revolution debate, which in relation to prisons and the prison industrial complex becomes reform v. abolition. where is the line separating prison reform which ultimately lends further legitimacy to prisons as an institution by making the system somewhat less inhumane or somewhat more comprehensive (more education programs available, better quality programs, etc) from prison reform which moves us and society in the direction of a world without prisons? this bill has the potential to release large amounts of people from prison--
...but it also reinscribes the idea that "violent offenders" should be locked up for longer, and should not have the chance to successfully re-enter society, the idea that violent crime is about individual responsibility and never our collective social responsibility, the idea that our prison system is legitimate instead of its fundamentally being a racist-- and therefore illegitimate--institution.

also, what is the rhetoric of the 45-or-older clause?

Federal Prison Bureau Nonviolent Offender Relief Act of 2009, introduced on January 6th:

LEGISLATIVE CHAMBER: U.S. House of Representatives

SPONSOR: Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee, D-TX

Digest of H.R. 61:

Amends the federal criminal code to direct the Bureau of Prisons, pursuant to a good time policy, to release a prisoner who has served one half or more of his or her term of imprisonment if that prisoner:

(1) has attained age 45;

(2) has never been convicted of a crime of violence;

(3) has not engaged in any violation, involving violent conduct, of institutional disciplinary regulations.

In July 2007, Sheila Jackson-Lee said about the bill:

Many may hear this debate and suggest that incarcerated persons should be treated in a certain way. This is a very simple amendment. It asks for a study to look at the possibilities of early release for nonviolent prisoners who are over the age of 45.

How does that help our community? One, it sends individuals back home to their families to provide resources. We know that we are watching a second chance bill make its way through this Congress. We hope that it will move quickly. Many of these offenders are middle age. Many of them are sick. This costs a great deal for the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

It is noted that 1.1 million nonviolent offenders are currently locked up. Many of them are African Americans, and in the 1930s, 75 percent of the people entering State and Federal prison were of the majority population. That is not the case now.

So it's a simple premise. It has been adopted in the authorization bill. It asks the hard question, why are we incarcerating for decades and decades nonviolent individuals who pay their debt to society, when they could come out and provide the comfort and nurturing and financial support to their own families and also address the question of Federal prison overcrowding?


to track this bill, go to Open Congress or GovTrack