Cash for Criminals
by Mike Kimel
Here’s a CNN story on “Cash for Criminals”:
And so Operation Peacemaker was born. Loosely based on an academic fellowship, the ONS program invites some of the most hardened youth into the fold: often teenage boys suspected of violent crimes but whom authorities don’t have enough evidence to charge criminally.
These fellows must pledge to put their guns away for a more peaceful life. They are hooked up with mentors — the reformed criminals-turned-city workers — who offer advice, guidance and support to get jobs. If the fellows show good behavior after six months, they can earn a stipend of up to $1,000 a month.
Since the fellowship started, the city has seen dramatic results, including a low of 11 gun homicides in 2014 — the fewest number of people killed in Richmond in four decades.The program has caught the attention of cities hoping to model programs with similar success, from Sacramento, California, to Toledo, Ohio, to Washington.
Later in the article:
Boggan believes the vast majority of youth in rough inner-city neighborhoods are inherently good and need to be exposed to new opportunities. With ex-felons as his change agents, he says, the teens are more likely to respond.
“That translates into trust on the street,” Boggan says. “And trust is a major commodity with what we do.”
At one point, he employed seven full-time mentors, but cutbacks reduced his staff to four full-time and two part-time mentors.
2015 saw gun homicides nearly double to 21, from the low of 11 in 2014. Boggan says staffing cuts may have played a role. “Less people touched, and the people touched are not being touched as often,” he says. “That’s certainly an impact.”
If I was designing programs to convert as many Democrats as possible into Republicans, I imagine something like this would come in near the top of my list. About the only changes I would recommend would be to run this program more broadly, and to increase the size of the stipends.
Mike:
Michigan pays roughly $32,000/years to house prisoners. There is a substantial dollar difference between a Level 1 prison and a Level 5 higher security prison. Although I will say Pugsley was for a short time one of the more dangerous prisons due to Michigan attempting to move prisoners to lower security prisons. It did not work as many of the them were lifers.
There is no reason not to use $12,000 to $16,000 annually to pay, house, and educate those who have a potential to end up in prison. It is a start to rehabilitate those who never got chance to excel. The only thing stopping Michigan from applying such a solution is the blatant racism many Michiganders display towards minorities and the discrimination towards classes below them. It beats housing them and gives them a chance which they would not have after prison.
One thing Michigan does is charges them $13/day for a tether for two years or ~$10,000, $5 for weekly classes at Catholic Charities, and another $20 monthly to see the Parole Agent. With those fees and minimum wage jobs, they have a tough time getting by which adds to recidivism. Good topic for a post.
I am kind of skeptical that a mere $1K a month would turn a criminal into a republican. You’d have to give them at least $80-120K a year to accomplish that.
Run,
They’re specifically targeting people who are expected to be likely to commit very violent crimes, and the article finds a rather nice way of stating that they are doing it by focusing on the folks suspected of committing those crimes. Put another way – we’re giving money to someone specifically because someone who has spent time behind bars for a violent crime thinks the recipient of the taxpayer dollars probably killed or tried to kill someone already and is likely to do it again.
If murder carried a longer sentence, perhaps recidivism wouldn’t be as much of an issue. And before you call it racism, are people who are horrified at how quickly murderers get back out on the streets truly less horrified if the murderer is white or wealthy and more likely to move in next-door than skid row?
Amateur Socialist,
Touche. Tres bien.
Mike:
Speaking from my own experience with the courts (up to SCOTUS) and prisons, I spoke of two identities minorities and lower classes, more specifically lower income classes which takes in whites. A large number of prisoners come out covered in tattoos and the tear drops at their eyes. In a sense, paroled prisoners are the state’s “bitch” and they are used for any number of revenue producing politics. Does a tether cost $13/day? No. Does the state need to fund Catholic Charities through the prisoners? No. Don’t pay and you could go back to prison or stay on parole. Get a bad write up from the Catholic Charities shrink and you could end up in prison again. Miss an appointment with a parole agent and you can go back to prison. There is no court and the agent and the board make the rules and the law in this case.
Truly you are more readily identified if of a different skin tone; but even so, state’s have their way of identifying parolees and x-convicts. It is not that easy to escape detection. Consider too, imprisoning people is a business. It provides jobs in areas devoid on jobs. Typically prisons are located in rural areas in Michigan. Close a prison and a 100 or so people are out of work and the local economy withers.
It is not just about murder and ~50% of the prison population is non-violent as I identified here: http://angrybearblog.strategydemo.com/2010/08/one-in-31-adults.html and still is. The better question to ask is whether longer sentences would reduce murder rates and crime?
Of course, we could sentence more to natural life (still cheaper than murdering them); but, at what cost? $32,000 per year to imprison them is higher than 133% FPL and $1000/month is FPL for an individual. Which is the better deal for the state, parolees, those on the edge pre-prison, and those who may murder again.
If you are really into this; pick up “Violence: Reflections on a National Epidemic” Dr. James Gilligan (prison psychiatrist). A short and well-worth-it read.
I do agree with the idea you are proposing unless I misunderstood your intentions.
Mike, I too wondered about the politicization indicated by your comment re: converting Dems to Repubs. OTH, I do agree with: “If murder carried a longer sentence, perhaps recidivism wouldn’t be as much of an issue.” coupled with improved/expanded policing.
My own experience with the LEAA grants to local policing organizations, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enforcement_Assistance_Administration in the early 70s actually confirmed this position. This link: http://www.jrsa.org/projects/Historical.pdf particularly the charts on pages 37 & 43 may show some caused and effect results from this legislative effort. The actual cause, increased drug use/arrests, of the increase in both arrests and crime is shown in the charts on the pages 39 – 43.
The argument to incarcerate versus rehabilitate was big in the 70s, and which also created some of the more successful prevention programs. Scared stiff, and its spawn, also comes to mind.
There is no basis for what you or they are saying. “Here’s another surprising fact: The most violent prisoners are actually the least likely to end up back in jail. And they’re very unlikely to commit the same crime again (see figure 2).”
”
Figure 2.
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics
“One percent of released killers ever murder a second time, while over 70 percent of robbers and burglars commit the same crimes over and over.” https://www.themarshallproject.org/2014/12/04/the-misleading-math-of-recidivism#.qoURIjJRA
“I am kind of skeptical that a mere $1K a month would turn a criminal into a republican. You’d have to give them at least $80-120K a year to accomplish that.”
No, the majority of government employees are democrats — especially at the GS-15 and SES levels. They want that government gravy train to keep rolling.
“Top-level management is more likely to lean to the left, with 49 percent of GS-15 and Senior Executive Service employees identifying or leaning Democrat and 40 percent Republican. Respondents serving as GS-14s and below saw a 44/38 split toward Democrats.”
http://www.govexec.com/oversight/2015/08/there-are-more-republicans-federal-government-you-might-think/119138/
“I too wondered about the politicization indicated by your comment re: converting Dems to Repubs.”
Dems commit more violent crime.
Hi Mike!
All it took to make me think go Trump was another Clinton. And dumping Cruz.
An observation from 35 years ago. I observed 3 airmen referred by inner city judges to the AF. One of them was with no extra attention a “good troop”. One had emotional issues which may have been helped by the service, and one needed discipline/mentoring if we had a good mentor. Did not stay for long term results.
A bit earlier in a different type unit we had a similar airman whom we thought set up a drug pipeline and was dealing.
Billions for jails and SWAT are not working!
ilsm,
“Billions for jails and SWAT are not working!”
This (http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/PSATSFV.PDF) is a couple of decades old, but at the time it was written, the average time served for a violent felony was 43 months. That’s an average – who knows what the standard deviation is, but it seems pretty clear a lot of people are getting out in much less time than that, and those are only the folks who actually get caught and convicted. So the expected penalty for a violent crime is pretty low – of course it won’t have much of a deterrent effect.
I note we can make the same argument for many white collar crimes: the expected cost of committing the crime is too low to deter people who have both an inclination and an opportunity to commit the crime.
warren,
“Dems commit more violent crime.”
I keep hearing that from Republicans. I’d like to see where this comes from, how “Dems” are counted (in particular, ex-post or ex-ante since that can skew results tremendously). My own prior is that people who commit violent crimes probably don’t care much about politics, but that Democrat-type views are more likely to lead to earlier release and so get internalized by the kind of opportunist that ends up behind bars in the first place.
Pretty good article here dealing with Life sentences. http://sentencingproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Life-Goes-On.pdf
Warren,
Just read Mike reply.
A huge lot more in the wretched US ‘system’ needs fixed before you dump on the billionires’ feckless Schultz/Clintonistas, while they do grievously deserve dumping on.
This made sense to me: “…while over 70 percent of robbers and burglars commit the same crimes over and over.”
A prison sentence probably gives thieves more opportunity to learn how to be more successful. Murderers, probably not so much.
AS:
Going to prison is not like going to school to learn a trade such as stealing. I have not seen such or heard such. If anything the paroled come out harder than before. If they return, the system no longer has the same impact on them.
Consider for a moment state imposed fees such as $13/day tethers, $5 per meeting with Catholic Charities, another $20 a month for the Parole Agent, two years of parole, and then miss a meeting, or your tether dies, of you miss curfew, or you are late for a parole meeting, the shrinks at CC give you a bad write up, etc. The parolee is in violation and sent back to prison. That is a common reason for recidivism.
AS & ILSM,
Have to be careful. It may be that the relationship between violent crime and being arrested or convicted is similar to the relationship between taxable income as understood by the IRS and actual earnings.
I am going to guess that people who engage in burglary do so more frequently than murderers kill people. a burglar is also more dependent on burglary than a murderer is on murdering in order to keep body and soul together. So if anyone can “improve” in terms learning to take their time, being patient, plan better, wait for the right opportunity, etc. in order to avoid being caught again, it is more likely to be the killer, not the burglar.
“…it is more likely to be the killer, not the burglar. ” Uh… No.
1> Context of comment was regarding the influence of *incarceration* on becoming a more skillful criminal. Prisons are likely to provide more mentoring regarding thievery than murder.
2> Habitual murder tends towards psychopathy which is (thankfully) a relatively rare condition. War mongering politicians may constitute cases of course.
If this was effective, how much more effective would “basic income” be?
This would be something interesting to test.
“[The] average time served for a violent felony was 43 months. That’s an average – who knows what the standard deviation is….”
There isn’t one. It’s a Chi-squared distribution, not a Gaussian.
You could get the standard deviations of the Gaussian distributions which are squared and added in, but it would not mean much.
“‘Dems commit more violent crime.’
“I keep hearing that from Republicans. I’d like to see where this comes from….”
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/jail-survey-nearly-34-felons-register-as-democrats/article/2541412
And where are the high-crime areas? Are they seething hotbeds of conservatism, or are they reliably voting for democrats?
“A prison sentence probably gives thieves more opportunity to learn how to be more successful.”
In which case they would not get arrested again.
But there are probably two things in play. First, murder is often an act of passion — killing the ex in a fit of jealousy, killing the manager who fired you, etc. Second, murderers generally get longer sentences, so they are much older when they get out.
Warren,
This guy (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/08/21/atheists-now-make-up-0-1-of-the-federal-prison-population/) obtained data on religious denominations of prisoners in the US. Here (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/07/16/what-percentage-of-prisoners-are-atheists-its-a-lot-smaller-than-we-ever-imagined/) he even shows a list he obtained from the BOJ in response to a FOIA request. The upshot – somewhere well over 99% of the of prisoners are members of a religious denomination. That’s somewhat of a stronger relationship than the one you cited with a bit more support to it as well.
Now, I am going to guess that the mechanism for how this relationship that I cited comes about is the same as the mechanism for how violent crime prisoners being largely Democrats comes about (i.e., if you’re born into a demographic that votes a certain way, or tends toward a certain denomination, you stay that way through much of your life, if only nominally).
To state what I noted upthread more strongly – nominal affiliation (to a political party, to a faith) is not the relevant question. The question is – do people who pay more than lip service to X commit more crimes than similarly situated people (i.e., same demographics, income level, etc.) who aren’t affiliated with X or aren’t willing to do more than pay lip service to X?
I’m not the one who said it was trying to convert Democrats into Republicans. Take it up with Mike Kimel.