Hearing of the House Committee on Government Reform: Confronting Recidivism: Prisoner Re-Entry Programs and a Just Future for All Americans

HEARING OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM: CONFRONTING RECIDIVISM: PRISONER RE-ENTRY PROGRAMS AND A JUST FUTURE FOR ALL AMERICANS

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. Cummings. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman; and I thank you for holding today's hearing on prisoner reentry, one
of the most profound challenges facing America today.

On any given day in America, as many as 2 million men and women are incarcerated in Federal and State prisons and local
jails, more than 80 percent of whom are involved in substance use. In 1996 alone, taxpayers spent over $30 billion to incarcerate these individuals, who are the parents of 2.4 million children. A fourfold increase in incarceration rates
over the past 25 years, largely a result of efforts to protect communities from drugs and violent crime, has spawned problems
and challenges of its own.

Each year, 630,000 individuals leave State and Federal prisons and return home. All too often, they are ill-equipped to fully participate and constructively as members of families and communities to whom they return. The reentry or reintegration into civil society of these individuals represents an enormous challenge that requires the involvement of multiple layers and sectors of society.

Inmates often leave prison with little preparation for life on the outside or assistance in their reintegration, increasing the likelihood they will be returned to prison for a new crime or parole violation. This cycle of removal and return of large numbers of young adults, mostly men, is especially pronounced in communities that are already experiencing enormous social and economic disadvantages.

The importance of prisoner reentry as a societal concern in my State of Maryland cannot be overstated. In 2001, 9,448
people were released from Maryland prisons. That is nearly twice the number released two decades ago. During 2001, 97
percent of all men and women released from Maryland prisons returned to communities in Maryland. Of those prisoners who
returned to Maryland, well over 59 percent returned to one jurisdiction in the State, Baltimore City. The flow of prisoners was further concentrated in a small number of communities within Baltimore City, many of them in my district.

A recent study showed that 30 percent of the 4,411 released prisoners who returned to Baltimore City returned to just 6 of
55 communities. These high-concentration community areas in Baltimore, which already face great social and economic disadvantages, may experience reentry costs to a magnified degree. In addition, while these numbers represent individuals
released from Maryland prisons after serving sentences of 1 year or more, it is important to note that approximately 5,000
additional inmates are released to Baltimore City each year after having served jail time, typically less than 1 year.

Release presents offenders with a difficult transition from the structured environment of the prison or jail. Many prisoners after release have no place to live, no job, family or social support. They often lack the knowledge and skills to access available resources for adjustment to life on the outside, all factors that significantly increase the risk of relapse and recidivism. In addition, legal measures designed to create disincentives for drug abuse and crime can complicate efforts to reestablish a foothold in society.

In recent years, the high rate of recidivism has generated broad-based interest in finding effective ways to address prisoner reentry issues across many sectors of society. For its part, Congress has authorized nearly $100 million for reentry initiatives involving various agencies.

Our first two witnesses today are colleagues who have worked on a bipartisan basis to produce legislation that will renew and improve Federal reentry programs. I would like to commend both Representative Rob Portman and Representative Danny Davis for their attention and commitment to this very serious issue of reentry and for your work on your legislation that has garnered support from many quarters. It is encouraging to see this problem, which affects my district so severely, being recognized so broadly and addressed on a bipartisan basis.

I supported H.R. 4676 as a cosponsor in the last Congress, and I intend to do the same when it is reintroduced in this
Congress. I would be remiss not to say, however, that there are serious impediments to successful reentry that are not
addressed in this bill. Some of them are of Congress' own creation. The Federal student aid ban, which denies education
aid to applicants who have been convicted of a drug crime, is but one of these. We have discussed it at length in this
committee. I hope that, as this bill moves forward, we can work together to make it as comprehensive as we can. A comprehensive approach to reentry will provide ex-offenders their best chance to become full and constructive participants in our society, while making our communities safer.

To help us understand the challenges of reentry and the strategies that are being employed to address them, we have a
diverse panel of witnesses who include representatives of government agencies, service providers, ex-offenders, mentors
and advocates. I would like to thank all of our witnesses for their participation in today's hearing and extend a particular
welcome to Mr. Felix Mata, who manages Baltimore City's Ex-Offender Task Force on behalf of our mayor, Mayor O'Malley.

I look forward to the testimony of all of our witnesses, Mr. Chairman, and, with that, I yield back.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. Cummings. I just have one question, since we are limited on time.

One of the things that, you know, as you all were talking, I was thinking--we had some witnesses come here on another issue, and they were talking about effective integration of services and not reinventing the wheel, not necessarily on this issue, but I was just wondering, in negotiation a lot of times we come in with programs, and there are already mechanisms.

For example, in the city of Baltimore, we have job-finding agencies. And sometimes folks are so busy trying to reinvent the wheel that they go past these various entities instead of trying to, you know, bring them all together.

I guess the thing I am concerned about is what the chairman was just referring to. If I could spend, you know--if I had an unlimited budget, I would like to have one for this because it is just that important. But I am just being realistic, looking at our fiscal restraints in this time that we are in.

I was just wondering whether you all had--is the program aimed also at pulling in agencies, State and Federal, even private, that might already have these things that are important, and them being a part of the process, as opposed to trying to reinvent the wheel, you come up with a nice new wheel, but the effectiveness, because you have to spread the money so far, is not as great as it could be when those pieces are already out there.

Mr. Davis of Illinois. Well, I think it speaks to the issue of coordination, and I would agree with you that there are many disparate programs that exist. But I think this helps to bring those programs and centralize them so that everybody, and if not everybody, many people now know what is, in fact, available.

But I think the other thing that it does, as we continue the discussion, the big problem is you can have a program to find jobs, but if companies won't hire anybody, you just got a program.

And my point is that it helps raise the level of awareness to the extent that potential employers begin to understand that it is also in their best interest to find ways to help put some of these individuals to work.

Mr. Cummings. One of the things I had established long before I came to Congress, a volunteer program to help inmates coming out of our boot camp. We found that they were very--the boot camp seemed to be very effective. But once they got out of the boot camp, they went back, as I think Congresswoman Norton was saying, to the same neighborhood, hanging with the same people, doing the same thing. So they went back.

One of the things that we discovered, though, was that if we could redirect, you know, the people that they hung with and
the things that they did, and could find them jobs--and we also had some volunteers that come in and do counseling, basically the kinds of things you are talking about--it could be very effective. But it was very effective. I was so glad to hear you talk about jobs, both of you, because without a job you go right back to the same old things.

On that note, Congressman Davis, one of the things that happened is that as people began--companies began to hire people from our little program, they did--the guys went out and ladies went out there and did just such a great job, they started asking us for the folks that were in the program, because, you know--so one thing led to another. So there is a rainbow out here, we just have to make sure we can reach it.

Mr. Davis of Illinois. Especially if we train them well.

Mr. Cummings. Right.

Mr. Davis of Illinois. Work ethic. All of the things that go with it. It is kind of a two-way street. You have to meet the individual halfway if the individual is ready to do that. That's what we have to attempt to do.

Mr. Souder. We only have 5 minutes left in the vote. I am going to dismiss the first panel.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. Cummings. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

What you were just saying, as I sit here, I couldn't help but say to myself that trying to get the public to realize that people can do their time and then go out into the world and be productive is so very, very hard; and that, as testimony, has been stated over and over again in this hearing here today, that a prison sentence--or not necessarily a sentence, a conviction dooms a person for a lifetime.

Mr. Williams, I just want to go to something that you said, and I am so glad you brought this out. I actually in my law practice and when I was a State delegate, hired former inmates to give them a chance. One of the things that I realized early on is that prison does take more away from a person than their freedom. I noticed just the whole being on schedule, time, coming to work on time was a problem. It is like they had to readjust.

I noticed another very interesting thing that came up not long ago. We had a fellow in Maryland who was wrongfully accused and served 27 years and got out, and his fiance said that even after he got out, he would stay in the basement and
wouldn't come out. She said she could hardly get him to come out of the basement, and he would just sit there.

I think a lot of people don't realize. They think about just the physical incarceration. They don't think about the fact that it really does something to a person. It takes them out of society. And that reintegration thing is so significant.

I was talking a little bit earlier about the program that we had in Baltimore. When you talk about integration and you talk about family, I think you said church.

Mr. Joseph Williams. And employment.

Mr. Cummings. And employment. One of the things that we noticed--take for example with family, fellows, the volunteers who had done pretty well in life would come on Saturdays, and we would have like a 12-step program where people sit around and talk about their lives or whatever. But they would open up into social activities with folk who had been in prison and want their families together, and it made a world of difference, because then they became more attached to the family.

We also had a fatherhood piece, where fathers could reconnect with their children. So that gave them something to hold onto as opposed to the streets. It gave them somebody kind of looking over their shoulder, and somebody else to disappoint if anything went wrong.

The same thing with work. I think a lot of people don't realize how significant work is. A lot of jobs create a whole new set of family members, because they found they begin to socialize with these folks, they became a team at work, depending on what kind of job it was, a team at work, and had new people, new people getting up at 6 a.m., maybe getting off at 5 p.m., and talking about things other than committing a crime; and they had something else, they had hope.

Because a lot of these jobs had opportunities for them to move up in life. Things that are very basic to those who may not have gone through the system, but we take them for granted. But the fact is that all of that I think is needed to make a person whole. And certainly church.

As the son of two preachers, I found a lot of the people in our church will come. They will have, again, a reintegration, a
whole other family to connect with, and a family that is not dealing with drugs, a family not committing crime, a family where the norm is to do the right thing.

So it is just a whole lot. But I am glad you brought that aspect. And I didn't hear your testimony, Mr. Nolan. Maybe you hit on that, too, and others. But I just think that is a part, no matter what we have to do, we have to deal with that piece.

Any comments, sir?

Mr. Joseph Williams. Yes, I wholeheartedly agree with you.

Back in 1981, when I was making the transition from a life of crime to one of being productive in the community, the greatest challenge I faced--many times people ask me what was the greatest challenge I faced, was it struggling with the addiction issue or the lifestyle issue? But it was loneliness. Because for 13 years, most of my teenage years and all of my adult years up to that point, all of my associations and friendships were with criminals and drug addicts.

And so, now, I was drug free. I wanted to do the right thing, but I was very lonely. And I heard that Mother Teresa was quoted as citing--she was asked, what was the greatest disease that she had ever seen, the most devastating disease she had ever seen? And she cited it was loneliness. And that loneliness, because I didn't have the kinds of people, the pro-social types of people to fellowship with and to direct me in the right way, was a danger of driving me back to my old associates and back to the old behaviors. And I wonder, with the other two former inmates who testified earlier, that had I not been able to, through my church, make all those new associations through friendships and through school and through employment, that I would not be here today.

Mr. Cummings. How does government--and this is my last question--how does a program like the one we are talking about, how do we in government--we can only do but so much. But what do you see us doing, or you all see us doing, and I assume we pretty much all agree that's a big part of it, to get people more socially integrated?

I mean, what do you see government's role in that, if any?

Mr. Joseph Williams. Yes, and I don't think that it is something that the government can do per se, but I think the greatest role that government can take on is to build the capacity of organizations such as Transition of Prisoners and these organizations who have been committed to this cause for a number of years.

And unfortunately, what happens is, you know, we have thrown around some figures of some $300 million and $100 million, and so a lot of nonprofits will develop a desire to go into re-entry because of that. But there's been a lot of organizations that have been out here for years and have been committed to it, and they are going to do it whether the funding is there or not. But they don't have the capacity to really do it at a large scale.

So I think that the best thing that government could do is to build the capacity of community-based and faith-based organizations as we build the capacity of the churches. And that way, I believe that we will be able to sustain our programs. And we know that the funding will not be there forever, but we need a way to build our capacity so that we could continue to do this work after the funding is gone.

Mr. Nolan. If I could answer, too, the government could also view churches as a partner. Justice Fellowship sponsored a conference and the head of transition services from New Mexico attended it, and he said it never occurred to him to look to the churches for mentors.

He was in charge of finding mentors, and he was going to all of these community groups and not having much success. And
it never occurred to him to go to churches. And so he called me when he got home, and he said, half of the folks in New Mexico are Catholics. And I am not a Catholic. What do I do?

And I knew the bishop there, and the Catholic Church provided a nun full-time to organize parishes to recruit mentors. And the Protestants, several churches got together and hired somebody half-time. And all he had to do was just be open to that. And, frankly, a lot of government officials aren't open to that.

They think it's improper to have a relationship. Again, they view churches as maybe providing an education program, or it's programmatic as opposed to a partner. Then a lot of States have policies that put up barriers. Many States have a policy that says, if you mentor someone in prison, the prisoner is prohibited from being in a relationship with you when you get out of prison. The Federal Bureau of Prisons has that policy. If a volunteer comes in and mentors you in prison, you are prohibited from being in touch with them when they get out. Texas had that policy. IFI had----

Mr. Souder. Would you elaborate on that? I don't understand.

Mr. Nolan. Yes. The idea is that the inmates are all cons and, therefore, will take advantage of these volunteers when they get out; that the volunteers would be victims of the offenders when they get out, and so they have to sever that relationship.
Most States have that policy, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons has that policy. Texas had that policy, and IFI had to have an exemption. Texas still has that policy. And IFI is exempted from that policy.

Let me say one last thing. Now, Director Wilkinson is definitely an exception to this. But most prison systems are built on or structured around what is convenient for the system. If nobody riots and nobody escapes, they are a good warden. If somebody riots and somebody escapes, they are bad.

Therefore, volunteers, religious volunteers and mentors are a threat to their careers, because every time a volunteer comes in, there might be contraband there; there might be something there, and so it's easier to exclude those volunteers. They are a pain in the neck. They are more work to the people with that attitude.

Institutional security is more important than--and, in fact, one warden said to me that the way he was trained--now he's different in this. But the way he was trained in Oklahoma was that, if nobody rioted and nobody escaped, he was a good warden. If that prisoner walked out of prison 1 block and raped or murdered somebody, that was still OK because they hadn't
done it on his watch.

And we need to change that attitude to where corrections people view public safety as their role.

And that whole mindset--if public safety is a role, then you welcome religious volunteers and mentors. And Burl Cain--you know, I have been to Angola. It is a different atmosphere. The inmates look you in the eye. They have hope even. The reason that 88 years is the average sentence is because most of them are going to die in prison there. And Warden Cain has changed it so they are buried with dignity. The choir sings. They can make their own casket or another inmate can.

They have created a carriage with horses to draw it. They have a ceremony to bear them. They used to be just buried in cardboard boxes in paupers' graves. Now there's a ceremony to honor their life with their friends. They are treated like human beings whose lives matter.

And you see it in the way that the inmates talk--outsiders the way they talk to each other, the respect with which they treat each other and are treated by the staff.

Mr. Cummings. I just have one other thing.

Mr. Nolan, as I listened to you talk, I have to tell you, I became a little bit depressed when you talked about them, you know, the caskets and everything.

I guess one of the things that I am--and maybe nobody else will say this, but I am going to say it--you know, there are so many people in my community who come upon the Earth, and because of circumstances, a lot of times, and some poor decisions sometimes, they don't believe that they can live the kind of life that other people live.

And I will never forget one time when I went to speak at a prison, and I looked around, and I was speaking at a graduation. And if you did not see the guards in the room, I would have sworn you were at a church. I guess my point is that, you know, some kind of way--I want to see people believe that they don't have to--the prison doesn't have to be a part of their lives.

Mr. Nolan. Right.

Mr. Cummings. And I don't want to get to a point where--and I am not knocking anybody who has gone through that process--but, I tell you, I want people to have hope. I don't necessarily talk about coping skills; I talk about hoping skills. Because I think when you lose hope--and that my hope is to have a nice funeral in a prison, and a fellow inmate is making me a casket, to me that ain't no hope. That's not hope to me. That does not excite me.

What does excite me is trying to--although some of these gentlemen and women, perhaps, may not ever get out, but for them to know that, every day, they can be better than they were the day before, that's hope under those circumstances. It's hope knowing that they can perhaps counsel a younger inmate and try to show him or her the path to that, when they get out, to how you have things that they want to consider, things of that nature.

And I don't want--I tell you, I don't want us to adopt a philosophy--you know, one of the things I say all the time is, we have one life to live, and this is no dress rehearsal, and this is the life.

And sometimes I think that when we get into scenarios like that, like, you know, the big deal is to be able to make a casket, and what that reminds me of, one of the guys in my neighborhood, because I live in the inner city, Baltimore, who believe they are going to die before they are 18.

So what is their, I mean, so--committing a crime is not as big of a deal because they don't expect to be here.

What I am saying to you is that we have to, no matter what we do in our prison systems, I think we have to create a sense
of hope.

And I know, I am not sitting here trying to sound like somebody who is some flaming liberal who thinks he is supposed to be paying for people who commit crimes. I know what it is to be a victim of a crime. I know what it is to have a gun, sawed-off shot gun, two of them, pointed at my head at 2 a.m. I understand it.

But at the same time I don't want us to move to that point where we think that it's nice that somebody can make a casket for me in prison and bury me on prison ground. I don't think that sends a very powerful message at all, to be frank with you.

Mr. Nolan. I didn't want to send that message. I wanted to say they are treated with dignity so they can live a life of consequence even if we are never going to let them out. That is what Warden Cain has done and the seminary where they can do exactly what you said, spread hope to the other prisoners. They even have a culinary class. They even have the chefs from New Orleans come up and teach them to create terrific, you know, high-level cuisine for the other inmates.

Mr. Cummings. But, see, the thing is that I know for a fact, once, one little decision in my life could have put me in the same position as a lot of those folks that find themselves in prison. Mr. Nolan. And one of the things we want to work with you on is sentencing, because these long sentences are horribly cruel in many cases.

Mr. Cummings. Right, there you go.

Thank you.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_house_hearings&docid=20377.wais