In the criminal justice system, corrections is defined as the function responsible for the punishment, treatment and supervision of people who have been convicted of a crime. The correctional system serves four primary purposes which include: retribution, deterrence, incapacitation and rehabilitation. Each of these purposes is independent of the other. Retribution is punishment inflicted as a form of vengeance. Deterrence is the instillation of fear of punishment in a potential offender. Incapacitation in the context of corrections is setting punishments that prevent crime but not necessarily deterring it. Lastly, rehabilitation in corrections refers to the restoration of someone who is convicted back into society. Currently, the main focus of our corrections system is a crime-control model. The crime-control is a model of corrections based on the assumption that criminal behavior can be controlled by a greater use of incarceration and other forms of strict supervision. On the surface the crime-control model’s goal may appear to be to imprison a greater number of people and that it will not lower crime. However, when looking at official crime statistics this isn’t the case. The number of crimes, both violent and non-violent have decreased. Because of this the corrections system has maintained its goal of community protection. In maintaining their goal of community protection the incarceration rates have increased.
Over the past 20 years’ crime has been on a steady decline in America. With the exception of a few years, the past 20 years has seen crime steadily decline. For example, the reported violent crime rate per 100,000 in 1996 was 636.6. in comparison, the reported violent crime rate per 100,000 in 2016 was 386.3. the drop in crime is not limited to just violent crime. Property crime have steadily declined over the past 20 years as well. In 1996, the property crime rate per 100,000 was 4,451.0. In 2016 this rate sharply decreased to nearly half at a rate of 2,450.7. What has caused this decline in crime as a whole in America?
There is no one specific reason as to why crime has been decreasing in America. However, there have been multiple theories as to why. These theories include: the increased number of police officers in the 1990s, the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, rising incomes, the introduction of CompStat and the rising number of immigrants in America. The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is the largest crime bill in the history of the United States. It provided for 100,000 new police officers, $9.7 billion in funding for prisons and $6.1 billion in funding for prevention programs, which were designed with significant input from experienced police officers.
Oddly, since crime rates have dropped in the past two decades the incarceration rate has seen an increase. Between 1991 and 2012 the crime rate dropped nearly 50%. However, the incarceration rate has been on an opposite trend. In 2012, 710 people per 100,000 were imprisoned. The United States accounts for around 23% of the world’s prison population, while only accounting for about 4% of the world’s total population. Similarly, to the crime rate drop, there are a number of possibilities as to why the crime rate has increased. These factors include: tougher sentencing, the war on drugs, the greater number of prisons being constructed and increased arrests. Tougher sentencing goes hand in hand with mandatory minimum sentences. Mandatory sentencing polices are legislative efforts that enhance provisions for convicted criminal defendants.
According to Steven Nauman, “After more than twenty years of litigation, the United States Supreme Court finally determined whether California’s overcrowded prison system created a constitutional violation” (2013). Brown vs Plata was a supreme Court case that held that a court-mandated population limit was necessary to remedy a violation of prisoners’ 8th amendment rights. It was decided on May 23rd 2011, by a vote of 5 to 4. This holding basically stated that courts need to set population limits in prisons. If a prison exceeds the population limit they will need to release lower-level, lower-threat inmates. If the prison doesn’t adhere to this, it is a violation of the inmates’ 8th amendment rights. On the surface it may not seem as this is a cause to fairer sentences. However, looking deeper this ruling does lead to fairer punishments. As stated earlier this ruling held that if a prisons’ population becomes too large prisoners will have to be released. This leads to people who commit lower level crimes getting punishments less severe than prison such as probation. Before this ruling judges could just send those convicted to prison no matter the prisons’ population. Now the judge will have to balance if the crime was serious enough to send that person to prison of to give them a lesser sentence that was mentioned earlier.
While the incarceration rate in America is seeing an upwards surge in recent years we have also seen a new trend of prison alternatives. Many of these alternatives have been around for years while others are a newer for of punishments. For example, New York City, the largest city in the United States, has created important alternatives to incarceration (ATI) program for its prison system. Judges have the option of sending those with misdemeanors or felonies to this program instead of giving them a prison sentence. The program has four categories: general population, substance abusers, women, and youth. The program has a 60% success rate, which is relatively high. Offenders who fail the program receive a mandatory prison sentence, which gives them good incentive to succeed. Those who don’t succeed tend to have a past with incarceration. We have also seen an increase in the number of people sentence to probation instead of a prison sentence. 60% of the 7.5 million people in the corrections system are on probation or parole.
Why have we started handing out more probation and indeterminate sentences? Alternatives to incarceration save money and keep government small. Federal and cost over $28,000 per year per inmate. These alternatives to prison nearly all cost less than the $28,000 per year an inmate cost. In addition, cumulative costs resulting from prison overcrowding can be avoided, saving even more money. In comparison, a drug court system costs below $10,000 per year per offender. Less restrictions and better costs overall will overcome the cost of offering and managing multiple options, resulting in a more efficient economic system in total. Spending the full price as an inmate on each offender is more expensive than specialized options for each separate case.