A Reagan legacy – the world’s leading jailer

Guest post by Ed Stephan

We seldom notice our own aging. The day-by-day, year-by-year changes are there, but we don’t usually think of them until they become an “event” – though we age continously, we’re suddenly old enough to go to school, drive a car, vote, marry, begin a career, retire. In the abstract, quantitative changes lead to qualitative changes, sometimes dramatically, like the subterranean pressures which gradually build into a major quake; we seldom notice until it’s happened.

Personally, I’m interested in qualitative political change (Republicans out, Democrats in). But professionally I tend to look at American history as a result of changes in demographic quantities – gradual expansion and settlement and closure of the frontier (Turner thesis), waves of immigration preceding our 1921 and 1924 quota laws and “America-First” xenophobia, changes in the workforce composition marked by the presidencies of TR (rise of skilled labor), FDR (factory workers), Yet-To-Be-Named (rise of technical-managerial class).

Criminology was never an area of professional interest for me, but here’s one of those quantitative changes which anyone interested in American politics ought to start paying attention to (I made the graph using data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s HS-24: Federal and State Prisoners):

number of prisoners and rate of incarcertation, 1925-2000

Michael Niman refers to our “Prison Industrial Complex”, which he ascribes to Reagan: the “war on drugs” and “three strikes you’re out”.

When historians look back at the end of the 20th century they’ll write about “the era of incarceration.” Prisons, like consumerism and suburban sprawl, have emerged as defining features of the American cultural landscape. Building and running prisons is one of the fastest growing industries in America, supported by a subservient judiciary eager to keep them filled….

In 1998 the US surpassed the former Soviet Union and won the crown as the globe’s foremost jailer with an incarceration rate of approximately 690 prisoners per 100,000 citizens [his numbers differ just slightly from the ones I used]. By comparison, that is almost 6 times Canada’s incarceration rate (115), over 12 times Greece’s rate (55), 19 times Japan’s rate (37) and 29 times India’s rate of 24 prisoners per 100,000 citizens.

Niman points out that all this growth involves enormous cost to the taxpayers. It’s estimated that maintaining a prisoner costs anywhere from $20,000 to $60,000 a year. Though it’s hard to see what we get for all that, it’s easy to see that the billions “come at the cost of cuts to education, the arts, parks, environmental programs and social programs”. The prison system is also, notoriously, a “war on African Americans”. After presenting more statistics, Niman concludes: “Put simply, this means that if a white man in Amherst and a Black man in Buffalo both personally consume illicit drugs, the Black man is over 20 times more likley to wind up in jail.” To meet rising prison costs, state and local governments turn increasingly to prison labor which they “lease” to private corporations.

The prisoners who stuff junk mail into envelopes for the likes of Bank of America, Chevron and Macy’s, take telephone reservations for hotels and airlines such as Eastern, pack golf balls for Spaulding, repair circuit boards supplied to Dell, Texas Instruments and IBM, etc. often earn about $1 an hour. During the 1990s creative managers leased prison labor for a variety of tasks ranging from the nocturnal restocking of shelves at Toys R Us to raising hogs and manufacturing Honda parts and El Salvadoran license plates.

The Census Bureau counts prisoners as residents of the place their prison is located. So (non-voting) prisoners inflate the numbers used for apportionment and representation in the places where prisons and their strongly unionized employees are, while their official absence from the communites which produced them reduces those communities’ claim on anti-crime and anti-proverty program funds.

Somebody is going to have to address all these issues. Based on recent history, I don’t think it’ll be the Republicans. Certainly not the Bush family which, aside from being able to claim the nation’s most accomplished executioner, has extensive interests in the burgeoning systems of private prisons.

I’d love to blame this on Reagan, but it looks from the graph like we need to blame it on Nixon. That hockey-stick starts going up around 1970, not 1980. Looks pretty flat or declining up until then.

WTF happened back then? Vietnam protesters? People getting busted for smoking pot? Urban blight and poverty causing an explosion of crime in the cities?

That’s really curious. I think some further number-crunching on this might be worthwhile.

  • goatchowder,

    There is a slight upturn during the Nixon era, due mainly to the arrival of the leading edge of the baby boom in its “jail prone” years. The slight depression the years before that reflects the decline in births during during the 1930s. I’d refer you again to the chart I did of births in the US during the 20th century
    Political consequences of the U.S. Birth Roller Coaster”
    .

    The real surge upwards is Reaganesque. It actually began before his presidency, when he was Governor of California, though that data is state-level obviously and wouldn’t show in national figures.

  • Well, the California data would show, and highly, since it is something like 20% of the population and does include both federal and state data. And as for the birth rollercoaster, that does mostly explain the postwar rise in crime, which peaked in 1974. Since the baby boomers were born between 1946 and 1960, they would have been 14-28 in 1974 — prime crime-committing years.

    Some quick back of the envelope (or Mac OS X Calculator.app) calculations means that, were we to drop the rate to historical levels (roughly 100 per 100,000), we’d save $20bn-$60bn a year.

  • The start of the climb can be traced fairly exactly to Nixon’s “war on crime” and his “war on drugs” (with a half-decade delay between the onset of the rhetoric and establishing harsher penalties).

    Can anyone explain the spike around 1940? – too late for the Depression, too early for post-WWII.

  • Personally I don’t think that this discussion would be complete without mentioning the introduction of large amounts of cocaine into the American streets via the CIA during the reign of the Republican god – Ronald Reagan.

    This doesn’t neatly coincide with the numbers on the graph but could have fueled an already growing problem. Add this onto the efforts begun during the Reagan years to undermine the growth of the middle class and it seems easy to see a connection as to where we are today.

    I wish that I had a better understanding of this issue but it’s pretty obvious that we have some very deep seated societal problems when we have the highest incarceration rate in the world while at the same time we are using slave labor to undermine our wage base and it’s acceptable to blur the lines between private enterprise and government.

    Ed – thanks for filling in for Morbo this weekend and providing some thought provoking commentary.

  • Can anyone explain the spike around 1940?

    As I said, Criminology isn’t my area, but I’d guess that in gearing up for and then waging World War II they simply couldn’t afford to have able-bodied folks sitting around in jails. The lines get “back to normal” once the war’s over.

  • One of the main ways Dems should push an end to the “War on Drugs” is to push it as a government spending reduction program, something conservatives can get behind. To counter the “soft on crime” charge, Dems should openly embrace the drug court program http://www.ndci.org/. Non-violent drug offenders are remanded to treatment, have very strict guidelines to meet, and if they fail they go to prison, but if they succeed, they end up drug free, productive members of society and often leads to family reunficiation, making it a pro-family, anti-governemnt spending program. Also, over 60% of participants stay drug free, a much higher percentage than residential treatment. As Superior COurt judges with drug court prigrams like to say, a person in handcuffs before a judge is highly motivated to get clean.

    Conservative and liberal, Dem and GOP judges in Georgia alike who have instituted this program consider it to be hugely successful and become staunch defenders after a very short time.

  • The numbers of incarcerated are bad enough but they’re not all doing life without parole or sitting on death row. Most of these totally short-circuited lives are coming back out with no idea of what they will do to fit into general law-abiding society and society hasn’t done much in the way of preparation or infrastructure to provide alternatives to hooking back up with the wrong people and doing the wrong things all over again.

    This is a great topic to focus on Ed. Out of sight, out of mind in this case is a smoldering fuse made of billion dollar bills attached to a huge, densely packed contingent of angry, frustrated, un-skilled, uneducated, drug/alcohol recovering, alimony/child support owing, side-tracked humanity.

    “education, the arts, parks, environmental programs and social programs”…..

    I would highlight EDUCATION from that list focusing on K-6. I don’t know if Vocational Training would fit under “social programs” but I think it’s essential that solid occupational training/opportunities be created for those who don’t attend college as a legitimate career path. And how about sex education with a thorough emphasis on contraceptive options? How many single parents are in jail and how many prisoners, both male and female, are products of single parent, (mom only), families?

    I have read in the last 24 hours that Toyota is locating a new plant in Ontario, Canada rather than in a Southern state in spite of twice the amount of tax kick-backs offered in the South. Why? Because the skill and education level in the South/U.S. is so pathetic that they don’t find that the extra level of kick-backs overrides the need to spoonfeed training to the workforce.

    One less opportunity to provide a step up to a constructive and productive life for many on the edge.

    Whether it’s Reagan’s doing or not, folks need to get past the idea that filling the halls of courts and the cells of prisons is doing anything long term to make them safer.

  • “So (non-voting) prisoners inflate the numbers used for apportionment and representation in the places where prisons and their strongly unionized employees are.”

    Uh, dunno where you got this from, but you obviously must be talking about prisons outside of Texas, and probably other large swaths of the South.

    Ain’t no “highly unionized” down here, especially with a high percentage of privatized prisons.

  • Socratic Gadfly,

    I’m sure you’re correct about Texas and formal unions, though I’ll bet their “professional organization” or whatever they call it has significant clout with your legislature. That much is true in every state.

    A glaring example of what I’m talking about is from my home state, the California Correctional Peace Officer’s Association (CCPOA).

    In 1980 there were 22,500 prisoners in California. The average salary for California prison guards was $14,400 a year. The state budget for corrections was $300 million per year. In the past, California schools and universities were the envy of the world. The state’s economy was strong, bolstered by huge numbers of defense jobs. CCPOA was a politically minuscule organization vying for attention among the giants of fat defense contractors.

    By 1996 there were more than l40,000 prisoners in California. The average salary for California prison guards is $44,000 per year (well over $50,000 with benefits)-$ l 0,000 more than the average teacher’s salary. Prison guards require only a high school education and a six week training course. Most teaching jobs require at least an undergraduate degree in education. In 1993 California spent a greater portion of its state budget on prisons than it did for education for the first time (compared to as recently as fiscal year 1983/84 when California spent 3.9 percent of its budget on its prison system, and 10 percent on higher education). The state corrections budget in 1994 was $3 billion….

    Between 1984 and 1994 California added a whopping 25,900 prison employees, substantially more than were added to all other state departments combined (16,000). By one estimate, hiring for prisons has accounted for 45 percent of the growth in all California jobs in that ten year period.

    Addendum: You might find this article interesting, “Texas struggles to retain guards”, a UPI story from the Washington Times (Godfrey Daniels!). From the looks of things prison guards don’t have it very well there.

    Pay for Texas corrections officers starts at $1,716 a month and climbs to $2,589 after eight years. The hours are long, the stress can be high, and the working conditions can be tough, according to the officers and their representatives.

    The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees represents the Texas corrections officers before the Legislature, but the labor union has no authority in Texas to negotiate a contract as some do in other states.

    So you’re right about the weakness of the Texas guards. For the moment. Sounds to me like California twenty-five years ago, before the guards learned to exercise their considerable political clout and divert so much of that state’s resources.

  • drug free, productive members

    I went to college back when drugs were pretty easy to find (e.g., across the hall). I really, tremendously, incredibly resent the implication that drug use leads to unproductivity. I knew plenty of people who worked hard during the week, and took drugs recreationally when their schedule allowed it. I knew other people who would clearly find some way to be unproductive, no matter if it was drugs (illegal), alcohol (then legal), dungeons and dragons (legal), or extracurricular activities (theater, athletics, pinball, radio, newspaper, you name it).

    The one and only thing that makes me think outright legalization would be a bad idea is the thought of the tobacco industry diversifying and marketing more inappropriate/dangerous stuff to our kids. If I were king, I’d regulate the corporations, not the citizens, but we apparently don’t get that option right now.

  • Indeed, regulate corporations, not people. Corporations are *not alive*, they are not people, they have no natural or human rights, since they are not human. They should not be protected by the Bill of Rights… and yet– due to a very bad Supreme Court decision in the late 1800’s– they are!

    Reverse Southern Pacific vs. Santa Clara, is what I say!

    Nevermind Roe v. Wade. If we desperately need any decision reversed, pronto, it is Southern Pacific.

  • I’m sorry you seem to miss the obvious.

    Incarceration went up because CRIME went up; particulary VIOLENT crimes such as rape, murder, armed robbery, and arson.

    Crime picked up in the late Sixties, when Liberals were in control, and thought that criminals were oppressed people needing rehabilitation instead of violent offenders who needed to be locked up for public safety. The worst was Lindsey who make the NYPD look the other way while crime was committed.

    Nixon, Reagan, and Bush were elected to lock people up. Remember the Kitty Dukakis question during the debates? Folks don’t like Child molesters, murderers, rapists, and other scum walking around.

    At a time when several notorious murderers are paroled or bail-jumping early-release child molesters, now is not the time to talk of letting folks out of prison unless you want to destroy the Democratic Party. The only good thing Gray Davis did was keep murderers in prison for their full terms. Joseph Duncan was required to post only 15K bail for child rape, as a multiple child rapist (he’d raped a kid at gunpoint and was released early). A soft-on-crime Liberal Dem Judge let him out … and he murdered Shasta Groene’s Mother, older brother, younger brother (and raped him) as well as raping Shasta.

    This is basically what you are talking about … letting Joseph Duncan and folks like him out early.

    Why not just jump the Democratic Party over a cliff and be done with it?

    Finally, every $ you save by letting a violent offender go free, will cost you three times that amount by the lives lost and ruined by the rapes and murders committed.

    Here’s a clue: the drop in the crime rate neatly correlates with oh I dunno … your graph showing lots of criminals being LOCKED UP. Criminals locked up can only victimize other criminals and sadly guards.

    Buro — you are clueless. Mercedes Benz opened a plant in Alabama. Which last I checked was in the South. Canada has historically had a much lower exchange rate than the US. That’s why Toyota is there (plus of course Canadian give-aways). They also have plants in the Northern State of Tennessee.

  • I dunno Rockford, it seems since you have retired from detective work that your deductive skills may be a little rusty.

    I spent a few minutes over at the US Dept of Justice website and the graph for drug related arrests on their site follows Ed’s graph pretty closely, I also notice that overall that violent crime rates are down for the same period, it also looked like property crimes rates had also declined for the same period, which I was surprised to see since I had made an assumption that a high percentage of property crimes would be caused by drug usage.

    I wouldn’t make the argument that violent offenders should be let off the hook easy, but we are losing the War on drugs almost as badly as the war in Iraq. Maybe we should think about a different approach.

    And Rockford come clean with us, are you really a right-wing troll?

  • Well I think that I had better back-track and make an apology if necessary.

    After searching a little further I found the following information for state incarceration rates.

    An estimated 246,100 inmates in State prison were held for drug offenses. Between 1995 and 2001 the largest growth of State inmates were violent offenders. During the period, the number of violent offenders grew 130,800, while the number of drug offenders grew 30,600. As a percentage of the total growth, violent offenders accounted for 63% of the total growth, drug offenders 15%, property offenders 2%, and public-order offenders 20%.

    I also found this information for federal incarceration rates.

    Prisoners sentenced for drug offenses constitute the largest group of Federal inmates (55%) in 2001, down from 60% in 1995. On September 30, 2001, Federal prisons held 78,501 sentenced drug offenders, compared to 52,782 at year end 1995.

    My apologies for the troll comment.

  • Mark, you were right the first time: Jim’s a troll. Or at least quite careless about his arguments.

    According to the DOJ site to which you pointed, violent crime rates were virtually flat from 1973-1993, with only small spikes around 1980 and 1990 (corresponding to economic downturns if memory serves) and then tapering off rapidly.

    Arrest rates, crimes-reported-to-police, percentage of prisoners convicted of this or that crime all have significant sources of error: underreporting due to social pressure, wrongful/mistaken arrests, plea bargaining, arrest and/or conviction for a minor crime in the absence of sufficient evidence of more erious wrongdoing (think Al Capone and tax evasion) and so on.

    Victimization rate has it’s problems too, of course, but near as I can tell they’re less significant (or at least less obvious) than other rates.

    So, Jim, anecdotes make great emotional appeals but that really doesn’t seem to tell much about what’s happened over the last thirty years, does it? Looks like that hockey-stick did bupkis to violent crime rates until 1993. What happened then? A change in the way the data was collected, which has (ostensibly) been corrected for in the older figures. Other than that…?

    If keeping more people in prison genuinely reduces crime, why did it take 20 years of increasing prison populations to have an effect?

  • One of the main ways Dems should push an end to the “War on Drugs” is to push it as a government spending reduction program

    I’ve seen no evidence Dems are any more enlightened than their Republican masters on this issue. On the whole, the political establishment uses drug policy and the lives of drug users (whether recreational or habitual) as currency for their tough on crime credentials. Among them, there are those who know better – that the War on Drugs is an utter farce – and there are those who are just as brainwashed as their constituents.

    As a raging Lefty who would love to lay this mess at the feet of the Republican Party, I cannot do so in good faith. Both parties have rejected and continue to reject sound public health policy for a harsh punitive criminal justice approach that wastes badly needed resources and – due to prohibition’s damage to real drug education and harm reduction – ultimately costs a lot of people their lives, livelihoods, families, etc. The social costs of prohibition are quite literally unimaginable.

    Also, it bears mentioning that the War On Drugs is the most significant policy mechanism behind Americans’ casual acceptance of our loss of civil liberties. I understand the Right’s well-established viciousness in all areas of criminal justice, but it was the Left who just shrugged and said “Well, okay,” and even bought into much of this hysteria that now passes for conventional wisdom. As much as people hate assuming responsibility for injustice, the fact is 99+% of us are far from blameless.

  • Jim Rockford: Clueless is my daily default status. You are correct and I regret that.

    Regarding the auto plant, this CBC piece http://www.cbc.ca/cp/business/050630/b0630102.html expands on the theme of Toyota being reluctant to locate in the U.S. South because of percieved training difficulties and not liking the U.S. North because of high health care costs, (an issue offset in Canada by their health care system).

    The plant will open in Woodstock, Ontario in ’08 and will be a $800M U.S. investment. They apparently don’t feel it’s necessary to make as many symbolic gestures to the American market by locating plants here to sell cars.

  • What do Reagan, Nixon, or any president for that matter have to do with those statistics? State prison populations GREATLY overshadow Federal – even though that chart combines them. Other than drug possession, which I agree shouldn’t be a crime, the 3-strikes philosophy implemented by many governors and state legislatures of both Dem and Rep parties seems very reasonable to me. Violent crime rates have fallen substantially as prison populations grew. Hard to explain that away as coincidence.

  • And before anyone repeats red herring that violent crime was flat from 1973-93, the point is that the steepest increase in imprisonment has been SINCE 1993 – the same timeframe of the drop in violent crime. Most 3-strikes laws and similar sentnece toughening occurred in late 80s and early 90s. Cause-and-effect looks pretty clear.

  • As a retired chief actuary for a national life and
    health insurer, naturally I find this subject
    fascinating. And the latest reports only confirm
    that the trend continues.

    What does it all mean? Alas, that is the question.
    I’ve long been aware that the United States is drifting further and further from other advanced
    countries when it comes to the incarceration of its
    citizens. Almost ten-fold the rate of our peers.
    Why?

    A proper analysis requires the gathering of a great
    deal of information before any conclusions can be
    drawn, although I have a number of suspicions and
    hypotheses, none of which flatter our national
    policy. But I could very well be wrong, too.

    It’s not my field, but the statistics, on the
    surface, are alarming. And it is common sense that
    the longer one holds inmates in prison, the more
    dysfunctional and bitter they become when they
    are released. Still, . . .

    So it is probably time that an exhaustive study
    be performed in this area. But how do we do this in
    this day and age when the right wingers will simply
    scream and accuse and throw tantrums and convince
    the American people that any efforts to understand or ascertain the truth come from the spineless girlie men who don’t have the guts to be tough, and
    offer only handholding and therapy for all the evil forces in the world of George Bush?

  • Comments are closed.