U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

26–561 PDF 2017

CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM AND EFFORTS TO 

REDUCE RECIDIVISM 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT 

AND GOVERNMENT REFORM 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

JUNE 28, 2017 

Serial No. 115–28 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov 

http://oversight.house.gov 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

Trey Gowdy, South Carolina, Chairman 

John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee 

Darrell E. Issa, California 

Jim Jordan, Ohio 

Mark Sanford, South Carolina 

Justin Amash, Michigan 

Paul A. Gosar, Arizona 

Scott DesJarlais, Tennessee 

Trey Gowdy, South Carolina 

Blake Farenthold, Texas 

Virginia Foxx, North Carolina 

Thomas Massie, Kentucky 

Mark Meadows, North Carolina 

Ron DeSantis, Florida 

Dennis A. Ross, Florida 

Mark Walker, North Carolina 

Rod Blum, Iowa 

Jody B. Hice, Georgia 

Steve Russell, Oklahoma 

Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin 

Will Hurd, Texas 

Gary J. Palmer, Alabama 

James Comer, Kentucky 

Paul Mitchell, Michigan 

Greg Gianforte, Montana 

Elijah E. Cummings, Maryland, Ranking 

Minority Member 

Carolyn B. Maloney, New York 

Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Columbia 

Wm. Lacy Clay, Missouri 

Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts 

Jim Cooper, Tennessee 

Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia 

Robin L. Kelly, Illinois 

Brenda L. Lawrence, Michigan 

Bonnie Watson Coleman, New Jersey 

Stacey E. Plaskett, Virgin Islands 

Val Butler Demings, Florida 

Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois 

Jamie Raskin, Maryland 

Peter Welch, Vermont 

Matt Cartwright, Pennsylvania 

Mark DeSaulnier, California 

John Sarbanes, Maryland 

SHERIA CLARKE, Staff Director 

WILLIAM MCKENNA General Counsel 

SEAN BREBBIA, Senior Counsel 

SHARON CASEY, Deputy Chief Clerk 

DAVID RAPALLO, Minority Staff Director 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on June 28, 2017 ............................................................................... 1 

WITNESSES 

The Hon. Tim Scott, Senator from South Carolina 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 1 

The Hon. Cory A. Booker, Senator from New Jersey 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 4 

Mr. Bryan P. Stirling, Director, Department of Corrections, South Carolina 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 14 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 17 

Pastor Omar Jahwar, Founder and CEO, Urban Specialists 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 92 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 94 

Mr. William C. McGahan, Chairman, Georgia Works! 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 99 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 101 

The Hon. Alexander Williams, Jr., Center for Education, Justice and Ethics, 

University of Maryland 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 104 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 106 

APPENDIX 

July 13, 2016, CNN ‘‘Black Senator Describes Facing Unfair Scrutiny by 

Police’’ submitted by Ms. Norton ........................................................................ 140 

Representative Elijah E. Cummings Statement ................................................... 142 

Letter of June 28, 2017, from Justice Roundtable, submitted by Mr. Connolly . 144 

Letter of June 27, 2017, from Families Against Mandatory Minimums, submitted by Mr. Connolly ........................................................................................ 149 

Letter of June 28, 2017, from The Sentencing Project, submitted by Mr. 

Connolly ................................................................................................................ 151 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(1) 

CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM AND EFFORTS 

TO REDUCE RECIDIVISM 

Wednesday, June 28, 2017 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

Washington, DC 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 1:03 p.m., in Room 2154, 

Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Trey Gowdy [chairman of the 

committee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Gowdy, Duncan, Jordan, Amash, Gosar, 

Foxx, Massie, Meadows, Ross, Walker, Blum, Hice, Grothman, 

Hurd, Palmer, Comer, Mitchell, Maloney, Norton, Clay, Lynch, 

Connolly, Kelly, Lawrence, Watson Coleman, Plaskett, Demings, 

Krishnamoorthi, Welch, and DeSaulnier. 

Chairman GOWDY. The Committee on Oversight and Government 

Reform will come to order. This is a hearing on criminal justice reform and efforts to reduce recidivism. 

We are pleased to have two of our friends from the other side of 

the Capitol, and my friend from Virginia has graciously agreed to 

defer his opening statement so we can hear from you first. 

It is my pleasure to introduce first the Senator from South Carolina, and then the gentle lady from New Jersey will introduce Senator Booker. 

Senator Scott was sworn into the U.S. Senate in January 2013 

and has been a strong advocate for smart, effective criminal justice 

reform. He has supported a variety of criminal justice reform legislative initiatives and has launched his Opportunity Agenda, which 

is a new way forward that includes robust initiatives to give our 

students and workers a chance to succeed. 

Senator Scott, on a personal note, I want to thank you for everything you have done in this realm in South Carolina. It is not 

something we are often asked about back home, criminal justice reform, and for you to take a leadership role on this to both elevate 

it to a higher level of public consciousness and to advocate for it 

says a lot about your commitment to it and your character. 

With that, you are recognized; and then we will go to Ms. Watson 

Coleman for Senator Booker. 

WITNESS STATEMENTS 

STATEMENT OF TIM SCOTT 

Senator SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman; and to the members 

of the committee, it is good to be back on the upper side of the 

chamber. Thank you very much for allowing me to come back. It 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
2 

is good to see old friends that I had the privilege of serving with, 

particularly my friend Ms. Norton on the Rules Committee. We enjoyed our long hours working through the wonders of committee 

life in the House. 

I would also like to say to Chairman Gowdy congratulations on 

your chairmanship, and I am certain that you will make America 

proud as you search for the truth, wherever it may take us. 

I want to thank Senator Booker, who has been my friend and 

champion on a number of issues that we have both championed together, from my Opportunity Agenda, from working on ways to reinvest in distressed communities, to criminal justice reform, to apprenticeship programs. He has been a true champion for the people 

on a number of initiatives that go far beyond my agenda, and it 

is good to have him here with us today. 

Criminal justice reform is a critical topic facing our nation as a 

whole. Today’s hearing is focused on recidivism and reentry programs, and I would like to spend a few minutes on a broader topic 

first, the topic of incarceration as a whole. 

What is the best way for us to reduce recidivism? To ensure people from all walks of life and from every single community have access to opportunity. For too many, and specifically communities of 

color, this is simply not the case. The poverty rate among blacks 

and Hispanic Americans is between two and three times higher 

than the majority population. Nearly a quarter of the children who 

live in poverty do not graduate from high school, compared to just 

6 percent of those kids who never lived in poverty. Seventy-eight 

percent of those in prison do not have post-secondary education. 

They did not graduate from high school. 

What does that mean? In 2010, a person who did not graduate from high school had an income of around $19,000. The person who 

graduated from high school had an income of around $28,000. 

Graduated from college? Fifty-two thousand dollars. 

Black and Hispanic dropout rates are consistently higher from 

1963 to the year 2012. The annual black unemployment rate for 

this nation was around 11.6 percent. To put that in perspective, 

during all the recessions that happened during those 50 years or 

so, the average unemployment rate for the entire nation was 

around 6.7 percent. Very different patterns. 

More black and brown children grow up in poverty. More do not 

graduate from high school. More earn less and are oftentimes employed less. 

As you, Chairman, and so many others have heard my story as 

a kid growing up in a single-parent household who flunked out of 

high school as a freshman, I understand intimately and personally 

what these statistics translate to in the real world. It translates 

into a pipeline that too often leads to incarceration, a pipeline that 

too often leads to low expectation of oneself, and a pipeline that too 

often reinforces the negative stereotypes that are pervasive in our 

society. And the impact that it has on the human condition is tremendous, and it is consistently negative. 

I believe that those are some of the reasons why black men, men 

like myself, are incarcerated at a rate six times higher than men 

that look like you. This is an epidemic that we have to wrestle with 

as a nation, as one American family working together to find soluVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:36 Sep 14, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\26561.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
3 

tions that work for everyone in every place, no matter where they 

started. The concept of opportunity as a solution for incarceration 

is something that is real, it is measureable, and it is something 

that I have lived, thankfully, through. 

While we must find ways to promote and lower recidivism rates, 

I want us to continue to focus on opportunity, improving our education system, encouraging entrepreneurs and small business owners to grow and invest in low-income communities. This can solve 

a lot of problems and specifically prevent the conversation of recidivism. 

I have had an opportunity to sit down with quite a few organizations to talk about reducing recidivism. I visited a few state prisons 

in South Carolina with Bryan Stirling, who I am happy to see, the 

Director of our Corrections Institute, will be on the next panel. One 

such program I visited is called Turning Leaf, located in Charleston, South Carolina, run by Amy Barch. She has a recidivism rate 

of 18 percent, when our national average is closer to 70 percent, 

and she deals with only the most difficult inmates. 

Another program is called Proverbs 22:6, which works throughout both South Carolina and North Carolina to help reconnect inmates with their families. My chief of staff and I visited both 

Kershaw and Lee County correctional facilities with Proverbs 22:6 

founder Cyril Prabhu, and what we experienced that day was the 

reconnection of inmates with their children with a program that 

transforms the life of the inmate and gives him a reason to believe 

that the future can be different. To watch the reunification of family after we served them lunch and spent a couple of hours talking 

with them was one of the most moving experiences I have had in 

my life, and I understood why the success of the recidivism program Proverbs 22:6 has been so powerful in the lives of these inmates. 

Here is a statistic that we should pay attention to, and this is 

why Proverbs 22:6 is so important: 82 percent probability for a 

child whose parent is in prison to end up in prison. Let me say that 

one more time. If a child has a parent in prison today, there is an 

82 percent probability that that child will end up in prison. Working to reconnect families is one of the ways that we can reduce recidivism. 

What is the recidivism rate for the Proverbs 22:6 program? Six 

percent. Six percent. Since 2012, the number of children in the program has gone from 800 to 5,000 children whose parents are incarcerated in 10 different prisons. 

I was in California last weekend meeting with programs in California, the Bridge Academy, that basically fills the gap. So they do 

not replicate any existing programs. They simply connect not the 

inmate but the entire family to the programs and resources that 

are already available. They make them aware of them, they make 

sure they attend, and through an 18-month process their recidivism rate is zero. 

There are ways for us to improve public safety, reduce recidivism, and restore families and the American Dream for people who 

have lost hope. I look forward to the national debate that must continue on this very important topic. I know that I am running out 

of time. As you know, we in the Senate cannot necessarily tell 5 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
4 

minutes of time. We anticipate that you will give us 10 minutes or 

an hour. That might be too long. 

Let me just say that your commitment, Mr. Chairman, the committee’s willingness to hear the testimonies, ask questions, is a 

very important part of what we can do to help restore the American Dream for so many people in so many dark places that have 

lost hope. I want to thank you again for holding this important 

hearing. My door will remain open to work with anyone from anywhere at any time to address this very important issue. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman GOWDY. Thank you, Senator Scott. 

We will now recognize Ms. Watson Coleman from New Jersey to 

introduce our friend, Senator Booker. 

Ms. WATSON COLEMAN. Thank you, Chairman, and congratulations on your appointment. I look forward to working with you in 

a bipartisan way on issues as important as this. 

Welcome, Senator Scott. It is good to see you, and it is my pleasure today to introduce my friend and fellow New Jerseyan, Senator 

Cory Booker. Senator Booker was elected to the United States Senate in 2013 and since then has established himself as an ally for 

what is right. As an innovative and bipartisan problem-solver, Senator Booker is committed to developing collaborative solutions that 

address some of our most complex challenges. 

He has fought for New Jersey resources, whether it is for Super 

Storm Sandy victims, the transportation system, or just to keep our 

community safe. He has been actively engaged in the pursuit of 

justice and opportunity for our citizens, particularly those who 

have been incarcerated and for whom we expect a second chance. 

As a member of the State Legislature, I worked with then-Mayor 

Cory Booker on many initiatives around criminal justice reform 

and second-chance opportunities, and I have witnessed his steadfast commitment to those issues here in the Senate. 

So it is a proud day for me to be able to recognize him, to welcome him to OGR, and to give him this opportunity to share his 

thoughts and his vision to this end. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Chairman GOWDY. Senator Booker? 

STATEMENT OF CORY BOOKER 

Senator BOOKER. Mr. Chairman, please know that this is a moment for me that I could not have dreamed of, that Bonnie Watson 

Coleman and I, when we were just local politicians, never imagined 

that she and I would be in the Capitol together serving as congress 

people together, and it is an honor to have that privilege, and I 

thank you for affording me that. 

Mr. Gowdy, I just want to put it out there right away, you have 

been a gentleman, somebody of honor in working with me on these 

issues. I have come to have a deep respect for you, and you are 

somebody who I now have on speed dial and have been just grateful for your interest in this issue and your willingness to work so 

hard on it. 

Please allow me a moment just to say my prayers are with Elijah 

Cummings. He is recovering, I know. There is no physical ailment 

that is tougher than he is, and I look forward to seeing him back 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
5 

in the chair. But, Mr. Connolly, I am grateful that you are standing 

in his place. 

I want this committee to know about my personal experiences. 

I grew up in an incredibly nice town in the Northern New Jersey 

suburbs as a result of blacks and whites, Republicans and Democrats who actually came together and fought for my family to be 

the first black family to move into town. We had to get a sting operation and have two white people pose as my parents after they 

were told the house was sold to actually get the house. On the day 

of the closing, the white couple did not show up. My father did, and 

a volunteer lawyer named Marty Freidman, the real estate agent, 

attacked my father’s lawyer, put a dog on my dad after a whole 

bunch of legal rigmarole. We were able to get access to this town 

and become, as my father affectionately called us, the four raisins 

in a tub of sweet vanilla ice cream. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator BOOKER. I grew up in this town—a town of affluence, 

this town of incredible opportunity and incredible public schools— 

until I was 18 years old, went off to Stanford University, Oxford 

University, Yale University, to the point where my father’s frustration told me, boy, you have more degrees than the month of July, 

but you ain’t hot. You have to do something for your country. 

I made a decision at that point to move, really following the calling of a great American prophet. Some of you may have studied 

him in graduate school, Chris Rock. I moved onto the south end of 

Martin Luther King Boulevard. Chris Rock says why is it that 

often the most violent street in many cities is named for the man 

that stood for non-violence? 

Martin Luther King Boulevard in Newark actually is a great testimony to King, even in the 1990s when I first moved there, with 

some of the greatest educational institutions New Jersey has. But 

the south end of that street was in very difficult shape. 

It has been 20-plus years. I still live in that neighborhood. I have 

99 colleagues—it sounds like the beginning of a rap song, but I 

have 99 colleagues, and I will tell you this, I might be the only one 

that lives in a community that is below the poverty line. The median income is $14,000 per household. It is a black, mostly black, 

majority black, black and Latino inner city. 

And I sit here with passion to the folks before me to let you know 

that I have witnessed this country’s failure to live up to its promise 

that is written on the Supreme Court wall that says ‘‘Equal Justice 

Under Law.’’ I have seen with my own eyes, experienced with my 

own friends, there is no difference in America between blacks and 

whites and Latinos and Asians in drug use, no difference whatsoever. When I was at Stanford’s campus there was a whole lot of 

drug use going on, but the drug laws in this country are enforced 

disproportionately against people of color. If you are black in America, you are almost four times more likely to be arrested for using 

marijuana, for using more serious drugs, or for dealing them. 

And I say this in the beginning of my remarks to make this understanding that there is something seriously wrong in this country 

that we have gone so far off the rails that we have defined ourselves as the greatest civilization in all of humanity for locking up 

its own people disproportionately for non-violent drug crimes, often 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
6 

for crimes that two of the last three presidents admitted to doing. 

Remember, they did not talk about just some marijuana usage. It 

was felony drug use and drug possession. 

And what hurts me is that while we as a nation were 

disinvesting in our infrastructure—remember, we inherited from 

our grandparents the greatest infrastructure on the planet Earth. 

The World Economic Forum in my daddy’s age ranked the infrastructure of the United States the number-one in the world. Now 

the World Economic Forum ranks us out of the top 10. 

But there is one area—and I have traveled around the globe, like 

many of you have. There is one area that even leaders in other 

countries stopped and asked me about that we have built our infrastructure in that puts the rest of the world to shame. Between the 

time I was in law school and the time I became Mayor of Newark, 

New Jersey, we in this country were building a new prison every 

10 days, hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars, incentivized 

by us here in the Federal Government to build out the largest prison industrial complex on the planet Earth and to imprison more 

people within our country than humanity has ever seen, 4 percent 

of the globe’s population, one out of every five imprisoned people 

on the planet Earth. 

And the people we imprison is stunning. We take the most vulnerable people in our population, not the privileged who grew up 

in places like my home town, or the people who go to Stanford and 

Oxford and Yale, who use drugs at the same rates, but we imprison 

the most vulnerable. Overwhelmingly, we imprison the poor. Overwhelmingly, we imprison the mentally ill. Overwhelmingly, we imprison the addicted. Overwhelmingly or disproportionately—excuse 

me—we imprison people of color. 

And it was startling for me, jarring for me, having lived 20 years 

in places of privilege and 20 years in my phenomenal city, to see 

how the criminal justice system is tearing apart communities, enforcing poverty. 

There is a college study that came out, a university study that 

came out that said the United States of America would have 20 

percent less poverty, 20 percent less poverty today if we had incarceration rates just like our industrial peers. 

In fact, we know why. The American Bar Association points it 

out. Because that 17-year-old kid caught in Newark, New Jersey 

for doing things that maybe a third of Congress has done, who 

pleads to a felony count—and, by the way, our criminal justice system is no longer—and you know this, Mr. Chairman—is no longer 

juries, no longer judges. Ninety-eight percent of our criminal convictions are now done by plea bargain. So a kid who is now facing 

mandatory minimums stacked on top of each other versus taking 

a plea and getting right out of jail, now that 17-year-old faces, according to the American Bar Association, 40,000 collateral consequences, cannot get a Pell Grant, cannot get a business license, 

cannot get a job, cannot get food stamps, cannot get public housing, 

in many places cannot vote. 

So we have a system now that is so broken that it has nothing 

to do with the ideals we hail of liberty and justice, and that is what 

frustrates me, because now I found partnerships with people all 

across the political spectrum who understand that this is an AmerVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:36 Sep 14, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\26561.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
7 

ican shame. I never thought when I came to Washington that the 

Koch Brothers’ general counsel would become a dear friend of 

mine, Mark Holden, because of our partnership on these issues; 

that Newt Gingrich, Grover Norquist, Christian evangelical leaders 

across the country, libertarians, fiscal conservatives, even the other 

bald black guy in the Senate, Tim Scott. 

We are united in this cause to see that this is one of the great 

shames in our country, and it is crushing communities like the one 

in which I live, like the one in which the congresswoman is from. 

And if there is injustice that Langston Hughes called what happens 

to a dream deferred, what happens when certain communities do 

not benefit from the liberties and the ideals of this country in ways 

that they themselves begin to lose faith in the promise of America? 

I will tell you this: I was in yet another Federal lockup. It was 

a women’s prison in Connecticut, just last month, and I walked in 

and I asked the warden, this strong, great leader, I asked her what 

percentage of the women in this prison have been victims of sexual 

trauma, of sexual assault, of violence? And this warden turns to me 

and says about 95 percent of the women are victims of sexual assault. 

I visited a Federal prison in New Jersey and I asked the warden 

there how many folks here have been here too long, are no threat 

to our society, our taxpayers are wasting their dollars on, and he 

just started laughing. He said, Cory, too many to count. 

You see, we have lost our way. It is not like we are looking for 

restorative justice. It is not like we are looking for the ideals of this 

country. Our criminal justice system is built up for retribution. And 

the beauty of this moment in American history is that there are 

enough examples—you heard them from Senator Scott—that show 

us a different way. 

We see state after state demonstrating the truth. We can actually make our states safer. Public safety should be number one. 

There are ways to make our states safer, save taxpayer dollars, elevate human potential, take care of the weak, and drive what we 

should be driving toward in the society, where we give our children 

more solid ground on which to thrive. 

So in the United States Senate, I am proud that we cobbled together a bill. Chuck Grassley and Dick Durbin together on a bill, 

Mike Lee and Ted Cruz and myself and Senator Whitehouse together on a bill. What worries me is that my colleague, a man 

whose character I have never maligned, a man, Jeff Sessions, who 

served with dignity, a man who I stood with and gave medals with 

to the marchers on the Edmund Pettis Bridge, that on this issue 

he is so wrong. He wrote recently that we should turn back the reforms we were starting to make in the Justice Department, and 

that we should go back to punitive sentencing, the most harsh possible. 

Well, that will cost taxpayer money. That will not be a pursuit 

of justice. It may be law and order, but everyone here who loves 

and savors democracy has seen enough totalitarian states establish 

law and order but lack justice. 

So I call upon this committee, my brothers and sisters who savor 

liberty as much as I do, who love this country and her ideals as 

much, if not more, than I do, let us not let this dream be deferred 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
8 

in our country any longer. I want to tell you right now that there 

is the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act, but there are other 

things as well. 

I had my first-ever bipartisan, bicameral bill done with this committee. Elijah Cummings and Darrel Issa joined me and Ron Johnson in the Senate on just a simple step. We reintroduced the bipartisan Fair Chance Act, a bill that would make a dramatic difference in just someone coming out of prison getting a job. We call 

them Ban the Box bills that have been done all across this nation, 

so-called Red States, so-called Blue States. In fact, Walmart, Home 

Depot, Starbucks have all done this. But the biggest employer in 

our country, the Federal Government and its contractors, has not 

done this. 

This is about making sure that it is striking the right balance. 

It is a bill that allows returning citizens to get their foot in the 

door and be fairly considered for jobs, while allowing employers to 

know who they are hiring. 

There are so many brilliant ideas out there. Senator Scott pointed them out. We did them in shoelaces and bubble gum in Newark 

where we showed that we can drive recidivism down, elevate 

human life, bring the wardens in from our Federal penitentiaries. 

The ones who I have gone around and talked to all know what we 

are doing is terribly wrong, all know commonsense things that we 

can do to make it right. 

So I encourage this committee. The worst type of privilege in 

America, the most insidious type of privilege, is to know that there 

is a serious problem out there that is tearing apart communities, 

that is hurting Americans. The most insidious type of privilege is 

knowing that there is a serious cause out there but it does not affect me or my family, and therefore it is not that important or urgent. The biggest cancer on the soul of our country right now is the 

American criminal justice system, and we can make it right. 

I want to end again with Langston Hughes. He said very simply 

that there is a dream in this land with its back against the wall. 

To save the dream for one, we must save the dream for all. I do 

not know what Leader McConnell’s plans are this week, but I will 

probably be going back to Newark on Thursday evening. On my 

block there are incredible kids, kids with the same amount of genius and potential—in fact, more so—than I had growing up in a 

very different community. It is hurtful that I know the percentages 

for those children. 

If you are black born in America today, you have a one in three 

chance of going to prison. That is a stunning statistic. And even 

worse than that, if you are a black kid in America—you heard the 

data—your chances of having an adult in prison, a parent in prison, is dramatic. In fact, for all kids it is one in 28 of your children 

right now have a parent that has served in prison. 

This is not the America for which we dream. This is the dream 

with its back against the wall. We can do something about this. We 

must do something about this, and I know my colleagues, with a 

sense of urgency and patriotism and, dear God, with a sense of 

love, I know this Congress in this bipartisan way, that we the people can change our country and make, as my dear brother says in 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
9 

Bible study, we can make justice roll down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream. 

Thank you. 

Chairman GOWDY. On behalf of all of us, we want to thank Senator Scott and Senator Booker not just for your public passion but 

also for your private commitment that has demonstrated itself over 

the course of the last several years. So, thank you. 

We will stand in recess —— 

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman GOWDY. Yes, ma’am? 

Ms. NORTON. A point of personal privilege. I would like something to be entered into the record. I want to thank both senators 

for coming. 

Senator Tim Scott never spoke of an incident or incidents that 

are relevant to this hearing because that is typical of him not to 

speak of something that is relevant that relates to him even though 

it relates to everyone else. And I am going to ask to be put into 

the record an article from CNN.com, ‘‘Black Senator Describes Facing Unfair Scrutiny by Police,’’ where Senator Tim Scott did something that he said was the most difficult when he gave a speech 

because it was the most personal. 

He described how he had been stopped seven times by law enforcement here, I believe, in the District, on Capitol Hill. It was my 

friend, Mr. Clay, who brought this to my attention. He said but the 

vast majority of the time I was pulled over for nothing more than 

driving a new car in the wrong neighborhood or some other reason 

just as trivial. 

Mr. Scott has been pulled over for stealing the car, accused of 

stealing the car he was driving in. He described the plight of a 

former staffer who sold his ‘‘nice car’’ because he was so tired of 

being targeted by suspicious police. In the same speech on the Senate floor, Senator Scott praised the police for the dangerous lives 

they lived and complimented them on the work they do. That is the 

kind of man Senator Tim Scott is, and I ask that that be put into 

the record. 

Chairman GOWDY. Without objection, and obviously I agree with 

everything you said, Ms. Holmes Norton. I think he is planning on 

including that in his memoir, and so he was hoping that you would 

buy the book and read those stories as opposed to doing it in a 

newspaper article. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman GOWDY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I just want to thank our two witnesses. I have 

not heard more eloquent statements, and bipartisan, about our 

criminal justice system and its many failures and the consequences 

in human lives, and the scar on our country. I want to thank you 

both because I think it is a great way to begin this hearing. Thank 

you. 

Chairman GOWDY. I thank the gentleman from Virginia. 

They called votes. 

Thank both of you. 

We will be in recess, subject to the call of the Chair. 

[Recess.] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
10 

Chairman GOWDY. The Committee on Oversight and Government 

Reform will reconvene. Without objection, the Chair is authorized 

to declare recesses at any time. 

I want to thank our four witnesses for your patience with our 

vote series. The gentleman from Virginia and I will give our opening statements, and we will recognize each of you for your opening 

statements, and then we will start the questioning. 

This hearing is on one aspect of our criminal justice system. I 

want to say another thank you to our two senators who were with 

us, and I want to thank two people who are not with us today. One 

is Elijah Cummings, for his commitment to criminal justice reform, 

which is a commitment that has spanned three decades. Mr. 

Cummings and I have spoken about today’s hearing several times, 

and he very much wanted to be here. He will be back soon, and 

we will continue to explore this topic particularly within the jurisdiction of intergovernmental cooperation. 

I also want to thank Bob Goodlatte, who is the Chairman of the 

Judiciary Committee. Criminal justice reform is ostensibly an issue 

within the jurisdiction of that committee. Chairman Goodlatte has 

been very gracious and accommodating in allowing us to go forward 

even as he and his committee do the very same. And the reason 

is there are at least two committees in the House that are exploring our criminal justice system, because it is so vital to the 

strength and longevity of our republic. 

Our justice system must be both respected and worthy of respect. 

Our justice system must both be fair in reality and perceived as 

fair. Our justice system must be proportional. It must protect the 

innocents. It must punish those who have not conformed to societal 

norms, with those societal norms being reflected and codified in our 

law. 

Fair, evenhanded, proportional, just, equal in intent and application. Those are not merely aspirations, those are expectations. They 

are our expectations for the world’s most envied justice system. 

I guess ‘‘blind’’ is the word that most of us use to associate with 

justice. Justice is blind. It is blind to race. It is blind to gender. It 

is blind to status. It is blind to wealth. It is blind to everything 

other than the merits of the relative arguments. 

In reality, Lady Justice, who is the mythological personification 

of our aspirations and expectations, is not blind. She is blindfolded. 

She can see. She just affirmatively chooses not to see who or what 

is before her. That is really hard. That requires discipline. It requires restraint. Lady Justice may not look, but that should not 

keep us from doing so to make sure that our justice system is as 

perfect as mortals can make something. 

A significant percentage of our fellow citizens have some criminal 

history. And the overwhelming majority of those currently incarcerated will be released from confinement when the sentence is completed. What do we do when the sentences imposed have been 

served, the debt to society paid, the offender is reentering society? 

There are familial obligations to be met. There are societal obligations to be met. There may well be restitution owed to the victims 

of the previous conduct. And what we owe most to the victims is 

to lower the chance that they will be victims again. It is in all of 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
11 

our interests these reentries be successful. It is in all of our interests these transitions back into society are successful. 

Those leaving incarceration for reentry will often find society has 

changed, sometimes dramatically. There will be educational deficits 

and skills deficits in addition to the challenge of overcoming the 

stigma of a conviction. 

Our penal system has several aspects to it. There is a punishment aspect. There is a separation from society aspect. There is 

also a rehabilitation aspect, a restoration, if you will, a correction. 

We ask the prisons at both the state and Federal level to do a 

lot of things. And as I tell one of our witnesses who is my friend 

and the Director of the Department of Corrections in South Carolina, Bryan Stirling, he has the hardest job in all of law enforcement. Keep those confined who are supposed to be confined. Protect 

the safety of the women and men working in the prisons. Protect 

the safety of other inmates. Provide health care, meals, and make 

sure those incarcerated are ready for reentry. And, oh, by the way, 

you will only make the news if something goes wrong or if there 

is an escape. 

Today is not about what has gone wrong or escapes. It is about 

hearing what works with respect to reentry, and it is about hearing 

how we can best serve the broader society by lowering recidivism. 

The lower the recidivism rate, the fewer the victims there are. The 

lower the recidivism rate, the lower the cost to society. 

Tim Scott is not with us right now, but I want to say what I said 

about him earlier. It is not easy to talk about criminal justice reform back home. We are, frankly, not asked about it a lot. So for 

him, it is the dual challenge of both elevating an issue to the level 

of public consciousness and then addressing the merits in a respectful way. It takes courage to do that, and we are lucky that 

Tim has that in abundance. 

And I will say this on behalf of Senator Booker, who was with 

us earlier: he not only talks about criminal justice reform in open 

congressional hearings, he talks about it at corner tables of restaurants with no one else around. He talks about it in private conversations when there is no attention to be had. He even talks 

about it with people with whom he may not agree on any other 

issue, which demonstrates a level of commitment that is necessary 

to effectuate change. 

There is nothing more disheartening than to hear our fellow citizens express distrust or disrespect for our justice system. When all 

the other institutions of society are challenged, the justice system 

should be the one that we can run to. To paraphrase from an old 

hymn, the ground at the foot of the courthouse is level. We should 

have confidence in the justice process from the moment we enter 

the courthouse until the debt is paid and the correction is complete. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today on how we 

can help those reentering society, what works, what does not work, 

and how we can bolster confidence in this realm of our justice system. 

And with that, I will recognize my friend from Virginia. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, let me 

congratulate you and welcome you in your debut as our new chairman. I think speaking for all of the Democrats, we look forward to 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
12 

working with you and trying to find common ground as much as 

we can. 

Parenthetically, let me make a note, however. House Rule 10, 

Clause 4, authorizes this committee to, quote, ‘‘at any time, to conduct investigations on any matter without regard to the jurisdiction 

of another standing committee.’’ Under the Obama Administration, 

God knows, this committee never hesitated to exercise its proud 

authority, from Operation Fast and Furious to Benghazi—by the 

way, we even sent the retiring chairman to Libya on the Benghazi 

investigation by this committee—the IRS, or Secretary Clinton’s 

emails. We conducted these investigations while there were parallel, ongoing criminal investigations in some cases, and when 

other committees had full-blown investigations that were overlapping jurisdictional authority. 

I do not think this committee can unilaterally give up its oversight responsibilities with respect to the Russia thing, conflicts of 

interest, or any other matter involving a new administration that 

may come to its attention. Oversight is not a matter of our personal 

or political preferences. It is a constitutional and institutional duty. 

Having said that, turning to the subject at hand, I want to acknowledge what the Chairman just did, our ranking member. He 

has been a leader on this issue. This is a passion for him about 

criminal justice reform. He sends his regrets but he is recovering 

nicely and he will be back with us, we hope, after the recess in 

July. The Chairman was gracious enough to schedule a second 

hearing, which would then allow Ranking Member Cummings, obviously, to participate. 

From my point of view, there are four key principles that ought 

to guide our efforts to ensure that punishments fit the crime and 

that ex-offenders have a real chance to turn their lives around. 

First, as Ranking Member Cummings has written, we must acknowledge ‘‘that each person’s ability to be self-sufficient in a lawabiding way is a core pillar of public safety. Expanded educational 

and economic opportunity will make us not only more prosperous 

but safer as a society.’’ 

Not surprisingly, lack of education and opportunity will significantly increase the risk of imprisonment, as we heard from our two 

colleagues in the U.S. Senate. An African American man without 

a high school diploma has a nearly 70 percent chance of being imprisoned sometime in his mid-30s. In some states, more is being 

spent on prisons than on higher education. 

The President’s 2018 budget initiates a unilateral retreat on public funding for education, unfortunately. It cuts the Department of 

Education by $9.2 billion, or 14 percent. It eliminates teacher instruction grants; enrichment and remediation programs that provide extended learning time; the public student loan forgiveness 

program, which helps our teachers, firefighters, and public servants 

repay student loans; raids the Pell Grant program and ends Federally-subsidized student loans. These cuts will hurt our ability to 

fight crime by creating economic and educational opportunities. 

Second, we should not fill our prisons with non-violent drug offenders who are no threat to the safety and well-being of our communities. When mandatory minimum sentences force judges to sentence non-violent offenders, in some cases for decades, they not 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
13 

only lose their livelihoods, their children and communities bear a 

devastating loss as well, and we heard that kind of testimony from 

our two colleagues in the Senate earlier. 

Alternatives to detention like the Veterans Treatment Docket, 

which I helped work with my local court in Fairfax County, have 

demonstrated success diverting individuals into community-based 

rehab programs, as opposed to automatic, rigid jail sentences. 

Third, we must ensure that once individuals have served out 

their sentences, they truly have a second chance to get back on 

their feet. Too often, post-release restrictions leave men and women 

with few opportunities to provide for themselves and their families. 

I commend my own governor in the Commonwealth of Virginia, 

Terry McAuliffe, for actively restoring the fundamental right to 

vote for 156,000 ex-offenders in Virginia. He personally signed the 

orders restoring those rights for every one of those people. I hope 

Virginia can be a model for other states to remove impediments 

that punish ex-offenders long after they have served their debt to 

society. 

Finally, we must acknowledge that our criminal justice system 

has disproportionately had an impact on Americans of color. African American men are more than six times as likely as white men 

to be incarcerated. Approximately 37 percent of the men in state 

and Federal prisons are African American men, even though the 

African American population is 13 percent of our total population. 

Recognizing the devastating impact of policies like mandatory 

minimums on entire communities, the Obama Administration 

worked to give prosecutors more discretion on charging decisions 

and to commute the sentences of non-violent drug offenders. Unfortunately, our new attorney general, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, 

seems to want to turn back the clock on policies we feel failed in 

the past and reimpose the imposition of extreme sentences for lowlevel and non-violent crimes. From what he labels being ‘‘soft on 

sentencing,’’ the Attorney General has argued for so-called timetested criminal justice practices. The reality is that mandatory 

minimums and other harsh measures have been tested, and they 

have failed. 

The Trump Administration’s budget would also slash the Bureau 

of Prisons, ironically, by a billion dollars, exacerbating overcrowding, eliminating nearly 2,000 prison guards and 6,000 administrative staff, which I think could jeopardize the physical safety of 

both guards and inmates. 

We do not have to choose between being just or compassionate. 

Smart policies, like those we heard advocated for a little earlier in 

this hearing from our two senators and by Congressman Cummings 

and others on this committee, allow us to do both. We can take immediate positive steps for exactly that kind of bipartisan reform. 

Ranking Member Cummings and Congressman Issa of our committee have a bipartisan, bicameral bill called the Fair Chance Act. 

It is within the committee’s jurisdiction, and I hope we can mark 

it up in the near term in one of the markups planned by our new 

chairman. 

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for considering the request. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today and look forward to cooperating with you on this very important topic. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
14 

Chairman GOWDY. The gentleman from Virginia yields back. 

We will hold the record open for five legislative days for any 

members who would like to submit a written statement. 

We will now recognize our second panel of witnesses. I will introduce you and administer the oath en banc, and then I will recognize you individually for your 5-minute opening statements. 

We are pleased to welcome Mr. Bryan Stirling, who is the Director of South Carolina Department of Corrections; Pastor Omar 

Jahwar—and if I mispronounce anyone’s name, forgive me—Founder and CEO of Urban Specialists; Mr. William McGahan, Chairman 

of Georgia Works!; and the Honorable Alexander Williams, Jr., 

former United States District Court Judge for the District of Maryland and currently at the Center for Education, Justice, and Ethics 

at the University of Maryland. 

I would ask all of you to please rise and let me administer an 

oath, pursuant to committee rules. 

Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you are about to 

give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, 

so help you God? 

May the record reflect all the witnesses answered in the affirmative. 

There is a clock or a color scheme that will alert you. Just keep 

in mind that all members have the full body of your opening statement, so to the extent that you can summarize it in 5 minutes, that 

will allow members more time for the question and answer session. 

With that —— 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman GOWDY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Sorry. Just a unanimous request. I should have 

asked earlier. I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a 

statement by Elijah Cummings on this matter, and letters from 

Justice Roundtable, Families Against Mandatory Minimums, and 

the Sentencing Project, for the record. 

Chairman GOWDY. Without objection. 

Chairman GOWDY. With that, Director Stirling. 

STATEMENT OF BRYAN P. STIRLING 

Mr. STIRLING. Chairman Gowdy—I am used to calling you Solicitor. But Chairman Gowdy, congratulations on your new position. 

Ranking Member Cummings, we wish you a speedy recovery. Other 

distinguished members, Mr. Lynch. My grandmother was actually 

born and raised for a time on Dent Street, so a lot of my family 

members are still your constituents to this day. Thank you all for 

this opportunity and your interest in criminal justice reform. 

As someone who has spent close to a decade in this arena, first 

as a Deputy Attorney General for the State of South Carolina, and 

now going on three-and-a-half years as the Director of South Carolina Department of Corrections, it is encouraging that Congress is 

focused on improving outcomes in our criminal justice system. 

I would like to recognize two people that are with me today. First 

of all, behind me is Sandy Barrett. She is in charge of programs 

and services, a lot of the recidivism things. And then I have Warden Nena Staley of Manning Correctional. I am going to talk about 

her program in a little bit. Warden Staley is also, to brag a little 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
15 

bit—Representative Duncan earlier talked about Clemson, the national championships. I want to talk about South Carolina’s a little 

bit. She is sister-in-law with Dawn Staley, who is a national championship women’s basketball coach at USC. 

I would also like to recognize Mike McCall. He has been a warden at several of our prisons around the state, at Lee and other 

places. He has done some great work with recidivism. 

And really I want to recognize all the correctional officers and 

staff from around the country, from South Carolina and around 

this nation who work really hard every day in very difficult environments, very under-appreciated, very stressful, in my state very 

understaffed, to keep us safe at night, and also to rehabilitate. 

I would like to give a quick overview of the South Carolina prison system. As of Monday, we had 20,256 folks incarcerated; 3,404 

of those folks are mentally ill. That is 17 percent of our population. 

I am going to get back to the mentally ill in a little bit. 

That number is the lowest since 1997. I know there are some 

folks from Dew here. Senator Malloy in South Carolina and others 

on the Sentencing Reform Committee are responsible for that work. 

Representative Sanford actually signed that into law in 2010. In 

2016 we admitted 8,798 offenders. We were down 30 percent from 

2010. Our recidivism rate is almost at an all-time low of 23.1 percent. We have closed six prisons, and Pew has estimated that we 

have had a cost avoidance of $491 billion. We moved from 11th in 

incarceration per 100,000 to 20th. Our crime rate is down. 

A lot of the work that has gone into this has been done by Pew, 

Senator Malloy, Governor Sanford, the innovative programs that 

we have. I will say this: Justice Brandeis did write at one time that 

states are the laboratories for democracy. So some of the things I 

am going to say here may translate to the Federal system, and 

they may not. That will be up to the committee to look at in the 

future. 

One thing I always say, I look at it, is 85 and you. Eighty-five 

percent of the folks who are incarcerated serve under five years. So 

you have a choice, we have a choice as a state. I want you to think 

of a loved one, a family member. Who do you want sitting next to 

them at a coffee shop? Who do you want sitting next to them in 

church? Who do you want sitting next to them at school? Someone 

who has been warehoused for three to five years and fed three 

times a day and given constitutionally adequate medical care, or do 

you want someone who has been connected to their family, mental 

health treatment, has the skills, has a job, they know how to deal 

with anger issues and know how to perform as a citizen? That is 

a choice we have as a state. That is a choice we made in South 

Carolina. I think you are seeing the results of it now. 

A couple of programs. We do CIU, Columbia International University, associate arts degree. We have Northeastern Tech. We 

have a lot of jobs coming to South Carolina, a 4.1 percent unemployment rate, which makes it difficult to hire correctional officers, 

but it makes it really easy to get folks hired. 

SC Thrive. We try to hook people up with services when they 

leave. 

One of the things Governor Haley and Director Cheryl Stanton 

of DEW said to me is these folks are coming out, we need to get 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
16 

them jobs, jobs agency corrections, 900 people a month are leaving. 

So now our program at Dew—and I texted this to Chairman Gowdy 

earlier—people that go through that program, 75 percent after 18 

months are still employed. It teaches employability skills, how to 

write a resume, how to explain incarceration, Federal bonding, 

Federal tax credits. 

Also, we have the Second Chance program where everybody that 

leaves the Department of Corrections under DEW is signed up. 

They know where their services are, they know where their office 

is. They also have an opportunity where a couple of days a week 

there is someone who knows how to interact with someone who has 

been incarcerated, because sometimes they are intimidated by the 

government process helping them find a job. 

We do WorkKeys, apprenticeships, on-the-job training, the YOA 

program, and I will be quick on this one because I see I am out 

of time. Seventeen to 25-year-olds, 50 percent were coming back to 

prison, 50 percent. It was a failure, and they were coming back for 

a lot longer. Judge William Byars, who is a judge, family court 

judge, took over corrections, and Ginny Barr are doing great work 

with this. 

The recidivism rate right now, they are held to a standard, is 22 

percent. They have a mentor. It is not someone who is there to take 

them to prison. That is what law enforcement is for. What they do 

is they are mentors and they try to hook them up with services, 

but they do have graduated responses. 

One quick story, and I will leave on this. We had one young man 

who kept on getting in trouble, kept on getting in trouble. One of 

the requirements for the YOA program is to have a job. So we took 

him down to fill out an application, and we thought he had a literacy problem, thought he could not read. Well, he could not read 

because he could not see the paper. So we took him to a free clinic, 

we got him glasses, and we will never see him again, and he kept 

on getting in trouble because he could not read. 

I am happy to answer any questions, and I want to thank Governor Haley and Governor McMaster for the support they have 

given us. Governor Haley visited three or four prisons while she 

was there and really worked on workforce development, and she 

knew that these folks were getting out and that they needed the 

services when they left. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and committee members. 

[Prepared statement of Mr. Stirling follows:] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
17 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 1 here 26561.001

Director's Verbal Testimony 
18 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 2 here 26561.002

Director's Talking Points 

Sentencing reform legislation, reentry programs, training and education is how the South 

Carolina Department of Corrections has found success in reducing recidivism. 

South Carolina's Prison Population Generally 

• At approximately 20,200, SCDC' s prison population is at its lowest since 1997. 

o Admissions to SCDC are at near record lows. 

o Annual total admissions for FY2016 totaled 8,798, a 30% decrease in admissions 

since 2010. 

• As of June 30, 2016, SCDC's prison population was 61% African American, 36% White, 

and 3% Other. 

• As of June 30, 2016, the largest percentage of offenders (41%) are between the ages of36 

and 55, followed by 34% of offenders who are between the ages of26 and 35. 

• The current offender population is more violent. As of June 30,2016, 66% of offenders 

had been convicted of a violent crime. Compared to 2002, when 46% of offenders had 

been convicted of a violent crime. 

• SCDC's three-year recidivism rate is currently 23.1 %, which is close to an all-time low 

for the agency. 

o The overall recidivism rate for offenders under age 25 is 31.8%. For offenders 

ages 25-30 it's 23.1%. However, among offenders who earned their GED during 

their incarceration with SCDC, the recidivism rate is 21. 7%. 

• Between 2010 and 2015, the number of parole revocations for technical violations of 

conditions of supervision that resulted in admission to prison decreased 46%, from 3,293 

to 1,788. 

Institutional Programs 

Partnered with numerous non-profits to offer services within the institutions. Organizations like 

Catholic Charities offer the offenders a number of services that aids in their return to the 

community. 

o Evidence Based Programs have been implemented to aid the offender and teach skill 

sets the offender can utilize at re-entry. Programs such as Violence Prevention, Parenting 

Inside Out, Impact of Crime, 7 Habits on the Inside, and the Athena: Leading from 

Within project are offered. Each of these programs assist the offender in making 

significant changes in behavior. 

o Toastmasters International has been established in two prisons, teaching leadership and 

communication skills to the offender population. Communication is vital for offenders to 

master for job interview techniques. 

o Partnership with RMS America 

SCDC partners with RMS America who hires ex-offenders to work at a large tire maker 

in South Carolina. RMS America will donate forklifts in July of2017, to the Manning 

Re-entry/Work Release Center to assist with the training of offenders prior to their 

1 
19 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 3 here 26561.003

release. It is their hope that when they receive new formerly incarcerated employees, 

they are already trained on use of the forklifts. Then, if hired elsewhere the ex-offender 

will have this skill set. 

Post-Secondary Education 

SCDC has partnered with technical colleges to provide the following: 

• CIU (Columbia International University) provides educational classes for inmates at 

Kirkland Correctional Institution to provide an Associate of Arts Degree to Participants 

in Religious Education. 

• Northeastern Technical College was selected as a pilot site for PELL GRANTS for 

offenders. The college sends instructors to Evans Correctional Institution to provide 

instruction in Business Management. The first semester there were 20 enrolled in 

college. At the end of the first semester, four inmates were named to the Presidents List 

and six made the Dean's List. 

SC Thrive 

• The SC Thrive program connects soon-to-be released inmates with state and federal 

assistance programs such as SNAP, Medicaid, Welvista, military and veteran's benefits, 

job assistance, and the Medically Indigent Assistance program. SCDC enlisted SC 

Thrive two years ago to train SCDC employees on taking applications to determine 

eligibility for programs that might assist the returning inmate. This program has been 

extremely successful in providing assistance to returning citizens in a timely manner. 

SCWORKS 

• In August, 2016, we partnered through the South Carolina Department of Employment 

and Workforce (DEW) in conjunction with SCWORKS for employees to come to every 

institution on a monthly basis and provide a workshop on information that would be 

helpful for returning citizens in the community. Each person scheduled for release is 

registered into the SCWORKS system. The offender is given a name of a person to ask 

for when entering the SCWORKS office in each county of release. The offenders are 

given an idea of what jobs are available in their county of release. 

• In the midlands area where our state wide pre-release is located, we now go to 

SCWORKS two times per month to help work with the ex-offenders being released into 

the community. Our role is to help the offender feel more at ease and to walk him/her 

through the system and ensuring they are not lost or do not get frustrated in the process. 

• The Governor's Summit was a collaboration \vith DEW where SCDC was allowed to 

highlight the skill sets of offenders being released into the community. Business people 

from around the state were invited to hear then Governor Nikki Haley talk about the 

community's need to not overlook this group of potential employees. This had a positive 

impact on hiring the ex-offender. 

2 
20 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 4 here 26561.004

Second Chance Program 

• A partnership between SCDC and the South Carolina Department of Employment 

and Workforce (DEW) 

• The men's program started at Manning Re-Entry/Work Release Center in 

November 2014. The women's program began at Camille Griffin Graham 

Correctional Institution in May 2017. 

• Offenders who have earned their GED or high school diploma and have a 

WorkKeys certificate enter the program 90 days before their release. 

• DEW employees teach these offenders "soft skills" training, employability skills 

training, and job search techniques, including resume writing. 

• DEW employees conduct mock interviews with participants. 

• Thirty days prior to release, participants begin searching for jobs, completing 

applications, and when possible, interviewing for positions. 

• All program participants are registered with the SC Works program, which allows 

them, once released, to seek job search assistance at any SC Works office. 

• The goal of the program is for participants to have a job lined up upon release. 

• Currently, the men's program at Manning has an employment rate of75%. 

Sentencing Reform 

• The Omnibus Crime Reduction and Sentencing Reform Act of 2010 

o Passed by the S.C. State Legislature and signed into Jaw by former Governor 

Mark Sanford. 

• The legislation increased diversion options for some less serious drug 

offenses and reduced the sentencing ranges for lower-level offenses. 

• Resulting in decreasing the prison population by 14% since 2010 and 

averting all projected growth. 

• The decreased prison population has resulted in a total cost savings 

of at least $491 million since 2010, including $174 million in 

operating costs and $317 million in capital costs. 

o In September 2015, PEW Charitable Trust issued a report on imprisonment and 

crime rates. According to PEW, South Carolina is among the top 5 states in the 

nation experiencing the largest decrease in imprisonment rates while also seeing a 

significant reduction in crime rates. 

~curriculum was implemented in January 2016 at several institutions within SCDC. 

This has been very successful at certifying imnates for work in the restaurant business upon 

release. To date, we have certified approximately 300 inmates in Servsafe, making them highly 

marketable upon release from prison. 

3 
21 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 5 here 26561.005

WorkKeys/GED/ Apprenticeship/On the Job Training 

• Offenders who receive their GED, Work:Keys, and/or Vocational certificates are 

equipped with the skills and credentials to secure employment, and are therefore less 

likely to re-offend. 

• A 2013 recidivism report compiled by the RAND Corporation (supported by the U.S. 

Department of Education and Justice Department), found that: 

1. Offenders who participate in correctional education experienced a 43 percent 

reduction in recidivism. 

2. Offenders exposed to computer-assisted instruction; 

a) learned slightly more in reading 

b) substantially more in math 

3. Every $1 spent of correctional education reduces incarceration costs by $4 to $5 

• W orkKeys is a system of assessments and curriculum that build and measure essential 

workplace skills that can affect your performance and increase opportunities for career 

changes and advancement. Business and industry utilize this system to determine what 

essential skills are needed to be successful in a particular job. A large majority of 

businesses require a WorkKeys certificate to be submitted with their application for 

employment. 

• Students take WorkKeys in the following areas: Applied Mathematics, Locating 

Information, and Reading for Information. The levels of certificates that they can earn are 

(least to greatest): Bronze, Silver, Gold, and Platinum. 

• Apprenticeships are recognized by the Department of Labor as someone that has spent at 

a minimum 2000 hours training and can demonstrate competencies in specific job tasks. 

This certificate allows employers to know the applicant has been trained to perform the 

functions for which they are applying. It provides an employer the opportunity to hire 

trained employees who are DOL certified. 

• The On the Job Training program participants are given a certificate indicating 

proficiency in core job skills associated with a specific job. Individuals spend at a 

minimum of200 hours learning job proficiencies and then must demonstrate their ability 

to complete a specific task to their instructor prior to being awarded a certificate. The 

certificate can then be used upon release when applying for employment. This will assist 

the offender in securing employment at the point of re-entry. 

• SCDC Division of Facilities Management began our first paving project in 2015. To 

date, the division has completed four paving projects to include: perimeter roads and 

parking lots. The Division of Facilities Management conducts on the job training for 

many trades to include: asbestos competencies, construction carpentry competencies, 

custodial services competencies, fork lift competencies, heavy equipment competencies, 

HV AC/commercial refrigeration competencies, masonry competencies, metals 

fabrication competencies, plumbing competencies and roofing competencies. The 

Division of Facilities Management met with a representative from the South Carolina 

Asphalt Pavement Association, and SCDC is developing a certificate program for the 

proficient inmates. For each project completed, we train a new crew. There are four (4) 

supervisors with over fifty (50) years combined experience in asphalt paving. The intent 

of this program is to train inmates in all aspects of asphalt paving, to include operating all 

the necessary equipment and tools. 

4 
22 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 6 here 26561.006

Current YOPRs data 

Youthful Offender Parole and Re-Entry Services (YOPRS) 

• Under the leadership and direction of fonner SCDC Director Judge William Byars, 

SCDC implemented a new evidence-based parole service for Youthful Offenders, called 

Intensive Supervision Services (ISS). 

• Youthful Offenders, ages 17-25, previously had a recidivism rate of at least 50%. 

• Since implementation in 2011, the recidivism rate for participants of the YOPRS 

program is much lower at 22.9%. 

• Since implementing this program, the daily population of Youthful Offenders has 

dropped from 1,333 in FY2010, to 661 in FY2016. That's 50% fewer Youthful 

Offenders in SCDC custody. 

• ISS is based on the nationally recognized Intensive Aftercare Program (IAP) 

Model that utilizes evidence-based practices proven to: 

• Ensure the successful reentry ofY outhful Offenders back into the 

community 

• Assist in the reduction of recidivism 

• Improve family and individual functioning 

• Ensure community safety 

• Reduce victimization 

• The success of this program is attributed to the dedicated Intensive Supervision 

Officers (ISOs) who serve as case managers and mentors for a caseload of20-25 

offenders, both while incarcerated and upon release. 

While incarcerated, ISOs meet with offenders once a month, complete at 

least three onsite residential assessments to ensure proper placement once 

released, complete a GRAD 90 Risk/ Asset Assessment, prepare an 

individualized Case Management Plan, and develop a Community ReEntry Team that meets regularly to assist the offender upon reentry. 

• Upon release, ISOs meet with offenders three times during the first week, 

then weekly after that. ISOs ensure that offenders meet their parole 

conditions, including restitution payments. 

ISOs use a series of graduated/escalating responses to address violations, 

including electronic monitoring, curfew, drug testing, and service 

referrals. 

• ISOs also use incentives to reward and encourage positive behavior, 

including academic recognition, certificates of achievement, extended 

curfews, gift cards, and reduction in levels of supervision. 

ISOs assist offenders in finding a job, signing up for school, social 

services, mental health, and drug treatment programs as needed. 

• ISOs review and update the offenders' Case Management Plan as needed. 

• There are a total of 1,160 youthful offenders assigned to 61 ISOs, for an average of 19 

offenders per ISO. 

o 71% (or 828) offenders are now under supervision within their community. 

o 29% (or 332) offenders are still in SCDC custody, working towards release. 

5 
23 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 7 here 26561.007

o 359 offenders are gainfully employed. 

o 69 are enrolled in or have completed their GED. 

o 17 offenders are enrolled in higher education. 

o 16 are enrolled in Alternative education. 

o 4,567 community service hours have been completed by youthful offenders 

within their communities. 

o Over the life of the program, 244 paroled youthful offenders have been returned 

to custody for "technical" violations such as absconding, missing curfew, or 

failing a drug test. 

o Over the life of the program, 196 paroled youthful offenders have been returned 

to custody for new convictions. 

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the committee for inviting me to speak. Also, I 

would like to thank former Governor Haley and Governor McMaster for their work on Criminal 

Justice Reform. 

6 
24 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 8 here 26561.008

Director's Written Testimony 
25 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 9 here 26561.009

Director's Written Testimony 

Basic Agency Information/Prison Population (20,215) 

The prison population is at its lowest level in 19 years-since October 1997. The declining trend 

in the prison population is the longest in SCDC history. The three year recidivism rate (23 .1%) 

is one of the lowest since SCDC has been keeping records. Admissions to SCDC are at near 

record lows. 

Overall Recidivism 

• SCDC has an overal13-years recidivism rate of23.1 percent, which is one of the lowest 

recidivism rates of Departments of Corrections in the U.S. 

• Among all males, the rate is 24.1% and, among females, it is 15.2%! 

• Our Prison Industry and other work programs result in some of our agency's lowest 

recidivism rates. Our Prison Industry program has a 13.5% recidivism rate and our PreRelease program has a recidivism rate of20.8%. 

• Our youngest offenders, i.e., those under 25 years of age, have the highest recidivism rate 

at 31.8%; however, those young offenders who participate in the YOA program have a 

MUCH lower recidivism rate of 22.9% 

Institutional Programs 

Partnered with numerous non-profits to offer services within the institutions. Organizations like 

Catholic Charities offer the offenders a number of services that aids in their return to the 

community. 

o Evidence Based Programs have been implemented to aid the offender and teach skill 

sets the offender can utilize at re-entry. Programs such as Violence Prevention, Parenting 

Inside Out, Impact of Crime, 7 Habits on the Inside, and the Athena: Leading from 

Within project are offered. Each of these programs assist the offender in making 

significant changes in behavior. 

o Toastmasters International has been established in two prisons, teaching leadership and 

communication skills to the offender population. Communication is vital for offenders to 

master for job interview techniques. 

o Partnership with RMS America 

SCDC partners with RMS America who hires ex-offenders to work at a large tire maker 

in South Carolina. RMS America will donate forklifts in July of2017, to the Manning 

Re-entry/Work Release Center to assist with the training of offenders prior to their 

release. It is their hope that when they receive new formerly incarcerated employees, 

they are already trained on use of the forklifts. Then, if hired elsewhere the ex-offender 

will have this skill set. 

1 
26 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 10 here 26561.010

Post-Secondary Education 

SCDC has partnered with technical colleges to provide the following: 

• CIU (Columbia International University) provides educational classes for inmates at 

Kirkland Con·ectional Institution to provide an Associate of Arts Degree to Participants 

in Religious Education. 

• Northeastern Technical College was selected as a pilot site for PELL GRANTS for 

offenders. The college sends instructors to Evans Correctional Institution to provide 

instruction in Business Management. The first semester there were 20 enrolled in 

college. At the end of the first semester, four inmates were named to the Presidents List 

and six made the Dean's List. 

SCThrive 

• The SC Thrive program connects soon-to-be released inmates with state and federal 

assistance programs such as SNAP, Medicaid, Welvista, military and veteran's benefits, 

job assistance, and the Medically Indigent Assistance program. SCDC enlisted SC 

Thrive two years ago to train SCDC employees on taking applications to determine 

eligibility for programs that might assist the returning inmate. This program has been 

extremely successful in providing assistance to returning citizens in a timely manner. 

SCWORKS 

• In August, 2016, we partnered through the South Carolina Department of Employment 

and Workforce (DEW) in conjunction with SCWORKS for employees to come to every 

institution on a monthly basis and provide a workshop on information that would be 

helpful for returning citizens in the community. Each person scheduled for release is 

registered into the SCWORKS system. The offender is given a name of a person to ask 

for when entering the SCWORKS office in each county of release. The offenders are 

given an idea of what jobs are available in their county of release. 

• In the midlands area where our state wide pre-release is located, we now go to 

SCWORKS two times per month to help work with the ex-offenders being released into 

the community. Our role is to help the oftimder feel more at ease and to walk him/her 

through the system and ensuring they are not lost or do not get frustrated in the process. 

• The Governor's Summit was a collaboration with DEW where SCDC was allowed to 

highlight the skill sets of offenders being released into the community. Business people 

from around the state were invited to hear then Governor Nikki Haley talk about the 

community's need to not overlook this group of potential employees. This had a positive 

impact on hiring the ex-offender. 

Second Chance Program/DEW 

SCDC is committed to turning out a better citizen than received for incarceration. We have 

expanded our Vocational Programming within Palmetto Unified School District to provide 

improved skills to market for employment. In addition, we provide Work Keys programming 

and testing. 

We have a six month pre-release program designated for offenders who, within the next six 

months, will be released from prison. Upon arrival at Manning Correctional Institution, our 

2 
27 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 11 here 26561.011

designated pre-release center for the state, the offenders are assessed and provided a 

programming schedule which includes education, vocation, soft skills training, resume 

preparation, and OJT certification. For those offenders who are in possession of aGED and 

Work Keys certificate, they are signed up for the DEW Work Ready Initiative. A DEW 

Representative works with the participants for a two month period on employability skills, 

resume preparation, interview techniques, and then, in the last thirty days of incarceration, the 

offenders are taught how to search for employment. Resumes are sent out and applications filed 

for specific job openings. Each participant is given a DEW work center and contact person to 

make for a smoother transition from offender to citizen. 

We also are working with intemaljob placement training sites to provide APPRENTICESHIP 

CERTIFICATES for training that meets the requirements. Our Prison Industries Division also 

provides job training opportunities and skills/ certification training that can be utilized in 

employment opportunities once released .. 

THE PROBLEM: 

Each year, approximately 9,000 offenders are released from South Carolina prisons. Far too often, 

offenders are released into the same enviromnent from which they carne, still lacking the education 

or skills needed to succeed outside of prison. 

OUR RESPONSE: 

In response to this problem, in 2014, the S.C. Department of Corrections (SCDC) partnered with 

the S.C. Department of Employment and Workforce (DEW) to develop a program where a case 

manager from DEW is placed on site at correctional facilities with laptops and materials to assist 

eligible offenders. (NOTE: only non-violent offenders are eligible) in work and skills training.) 

THE PROCESS: 

Ninety days prior to release, these offenders are taught employment skills in a class each day, 

including resume assistance, mock interviews, basic computer skills, job search tactics, and an 

introduction to the SC Works system, which has centers located in every region of the state and 

provides jobseekers with career counseling, job referrals, testing and training services, and resume 

writing assistance. 

The last thirty days before release, the DEW case manager focuses on preparing these individuals 

for life outside the facility, utilizing one-on-one sessions to discuss particular issues, providing 

guidance and information about resources they may need post-release, and registering them in the 

SC Works system so that they can begin to apply for jobs online. 

At the time of release, each participant receives a folder that includes a Federal Bonding letter, 

several copies of their resume, a letter of explanation that explains their personal situation, 

information on the SC Works centers across the state, and any other information they need 

regarding other available resources. 

POST RELEASE: 

Each month after release day, the names of these returning citizens are sent out to the SC Works 

staff in the field so they may reach out to the individuals in their area to offer continued support. 

3 
28 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 12 here 26561.012

OTHER OPTIONS: 

In addition to the Second Chance program, SC Works also provides monthly assistance by 

conducting informational sessions in each correctional facility for those who are set to be released 

that month. These sessions are a way for SC Works to make connections and offer support to these 

individuals who may not know how to start over. Service information, center locations and 

contacts are the main focus of these meetings. SC Works services are also provided in various 

corrections facilities across the state on an as needed basis. 

JOB FAIRS: 

As part of the Second Chance initiative, DEW and SCDC provide behind-the-fence job fairs. 

Businesses that are "ex-offender friendly" come to correctional facilities to discuss employment 

opportunities for soon-to-be-released offenders. These job fairs have resulted in several 

employment opportunities for participants. The last job fair held at the Manning Reentry/Work 

Release Center in Columbia included employers such as Verizon, who was looking for sales reps; 

Echerer Painting, wanting painters; Lineberger Construction company, looking for laborers and 

other skilled workers; RUIZ Foods looking for production staff; and O'Reilly Auto Parts seeking 

sales reps. 

OUTCOMES FROM PARTICIPATING INSTITUTIONS MANNING AND CAMILLE 

GRAHAM (November 1, 2014 through May 31, 2017) 

• 963 individuals have completed the Second Chance program 

• 516 returning citizens have been released from prison 

• 389, or 75%, are earning wages 

NOTES FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES: 

Tools available to returning citizens include: 

• Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC)- Included as part of the WOTC, hiring returning 

citizens helps businesses receive a tax credit. This federally funded program, administered 

by DEW, provides employers with a 40 percent tax credit on eligible employees' first year 

of wages after they have worked 400 hours. 

• The Federal Bonding Program - This free-of-charge insurance policy provides Fidelity 

Bonding insurance coverage for high-risk workers. While many individuals just need a 

second chance to prove themselves, this policy protects businesses in case ofloss of money 

or property due to work dishonesty. 

Sentencing Reform 

The sentencing reform initiatives implemented pursuant to the "Omnibus Crime Reduction and 

Sentencing Reform Act of2010" have resulted in significant successes. This legislation has 

averted all projected growth and decreased the prison population 14% since 2010. The 

conservative estimate of the total cost avoidance since 20 I 0 is at least $491 million. The averted 

costs include $141 million in operating costs and $317 million in capital costs. The savings also 

include $33 in additional operating costs. In September of2015, the PEW Charitable Trusts 

(PEW) issued a report titled "Imprisonment and Crime Rates Fell in 30 States over 5 Years." 

PEW estimated that South Carolina is one of the top five states that has experienced the largest 

4 
29 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 13 here 26561.013

decrease in imprisonment rates, while at the same time South Carolina has experienced a 

significant decrease in crime rates. 

This legislation increased diversion options for less serious drug offenses and reduced sentencing 

ranges for some low-level offenses. The annual admissions of offenders to SCDC in fiscal year 

2016 totaled 8,798. This number represents a 30% decrease in admissions compared to fiscal 

year 2010. Annual admissions of non-violent offenders to SCDC in fiscal year 2016 totaled 

6,813. This number represents a 35% decrease in admissions compared to fiscal year 2010. 

Annual admissions of violent offenders to DOC in fiscal year 2016 totaled 1,985. This number 

represents a 7.5% decrease in admissions compared to fiscal year 2010. 

Servsafe, National Restaurant Association Certification, curriculum was implemented in January 

2016 at several institutions within SCDC. This has been very successful at certifying inmates for 

work in the restaurant business upon release. To date, we have certified approximately 300 

inmates in Servsafe, making them highly marketable upon release from prison. 

WorkKeys/GED/ Apprenticeship/On the Job Training 

• Offenders who receive their GED, WorkKeys, and/or Vocational certificates are 

equipped \vith the skills and credentials to secure employment, and are therefore less 

likely to re-offend. 

• A 2013 recidivism report compiled by the RAND Corporation (supported by the U.S. 

Department of Education and Justice Department), found that: 

1. Offenders who participate in correctional education experienced a 43 percent 

reduction in recidivism. 

2. Offenders exposed to computer-assisted instruction; 

a) learned slightly more in reading 

b) substantially more in math 

3. Every $1 spent of correctional education reduces incarceration costs by $4 to $5 

• WorkKeys is a system of assessments and curriculum that build and measure essential 

workplace skills that can affect your performance and increase opportunities for career 

changes and advancement. Business and industry utilize this system to determine what 

essential skills are needed to be successful in a particular job. A large majority of 

businesses require a WorkKeys certificate to be submitted with their application for 

employment. 

• Students take WorkKeys in the following areas: Applied Mathematics, Locating 

Information, and Reading for Information. The levels of certificates that they can earn are 

(least to greatest): Bronze, Silver, Gold, and Platinum. 

• Apprenticeships are recognized by the Department of Labor as someone that has spent at 

a minimum 2000 hours training and can demonstrate competencies in specific job tasks. 

This certificate allows employers to know the applicant has been u:ained to perform the 

functions for which they are applying. It provides an employer the opportunity to hire 

trained employees who are DOL certified. 

• The On the Job Training program participants are given a certificate indicating 

proficiency in core job skills associated with a specific job. Individuals spend at a 

minimum of200 hours learning job proficiencies and then must demonstrate their ability 

to complete a specific task to their instructor prior to being awarded a certificate. The 

5 
30 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 14 here 26561.014

certificate can then be used upon release when applying for employment. This will assist 

the offender in securing employment at the point of re-entry. 

• SCDC Division of Facilities Management began our first paving project in 2015. To 

date, the division has completed four paving projects to include: perimeter roads and 

parking lots. The Division of Facilities Management conducts on the job training for 

many trades to include: asbestos competencies, construction carpentry competencies, 

custodial services competencies, fork lift competencies, heavy equipment competencies, 

HV AC/commercial refrigeration competencies, masonry competencies, metals 

fabrication competencies, plumbing competencies and roofing competencies. The 

Division of Facilities Management met with a representative from the South Carolina 

Asphalt Pavement Association, and SCDC is developing a certificate program for the 

proficient inmates. For each project completed, we train a new crew. There are four ( 4) 

supervisors with over fifty (50) years combined experience in asphalt paving. The intent 

of this program is to train inmates in all aspects of asphalt paving, to include operating all 

the necessary equipment and tools. 

YOPRS 

GENERAL INFORMATION 

• Historically, the three-year recidivism rate tor Youthful Offenders released from SCDC 

has exceeded 50%. 

• SCDC implemented a new community supervision (parole) service called Intensive 

Supervision Services (ISS) during FY 2011-12. 

• ISS is based on the nationally recognized Intensive Aftercare Program (IAP) Model 

that utilizes evidence-based practices proven to: 

o Ensure the successful reentry of Youthful Offenders back into the community 

o Assist in the reduction of recidivism 

o Improve family and individual functioning 

o Ensure community safety 

o Reduce victimization 

• Through ISS, an Intensive Supervision Officer (ISO) works in the community and is 

assigned to each Youthful Offender upon admission to SCDC. 

• ISOs act in a proactive manner in the life of each offender under his/her supervision 

and manages a caseload of20- 25 individuals. 

• Since implementation of ISS, the daily population of Youthful Offenders has dropped 

from 1,333 in FY2010 to 661 in FY2016 (50%). 

ISO GUIDELINES 

• ISO Supervision While an Offender is Incarcerated 

o Face-to-face visits, minimum of one per month 

o Completes three onsite residential assessments to ensure suitable residence upon 

release 

o Completes a GRAD-90 Assessment, which addresses both the risks (mental health 

issues, substance abuse, sociability concerns, career development) and assets 

(individual strengths, positive leisure time, family/mentor support, workforce 

readiness) that have proven prominent to the lives of the Youthful Offender 

population 

6 
31 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 15 here 26561.015

o Completes an individualized Case Management Plan (CMP) that develops 

objectives for offenders that are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, timely, 

and incorporate restorative practices 

o Develops a Community Reentry Team (CRT) that meets regularly to develop 

resources to assist the offender when reentering society such as educational 

opportunities, employment opportunities, and mental health/substance use services 

• ISO Supervision While an Offender on Parole Supervision in the Community 

o Face-to-face visits in the home/community 

First week: three (3) 

Second week, onward: one (1) per week, four ( 4) per month 

o Ensures, when applicable, restitution is paid to victim(s) of crime 

o Monitors Release Guidelines to insure compliance 

o Utilizes a series of graduate responses, i.e., electronic monitoring, curfew, drug 

testing, service referrals, etc. to address Technical Violations of Release 

Guidelines, i.e., absconding, exceeding curfew, failure of random drug test, etc. 

o Assists offender in pursuing employment, further education, social services, mental 

health, medical and substance use services 

o Utilizes a series of incentives to encourage positive behavior, i.e., academic 

recognition, certificate of achievement, extended curfew, gift cards, reduction in 

level of supervision, etc. 

o Reviews individualized Case Management Plan (CMP) as needed with CRT, 

updating as offender progresses and needs change 

DATA (Current as of 6-01-17) 

• Total of 1,160 youthful offenders currently assigned to 61 ISOs, for an average of 19 

per ISO 

o 828 (71 %) of assigned offenders are in the community and on ISS parole 

o 332 (29%) of assigned offenders remain in SCDC institutions preparing for reentry 

• Total of 5,535 random drug tests have been performed with offenders on ISS parole 

o 3,795 (69%) of offenders have passed these random drug tests 

o 1,740 (31 %) of offenders have failed these random drug tests 

• Total of359 (43.4%) offenders are gainfully employed 

• Total of 69 (8.3%) offenders are enrolled in or have completed GED classes 

• Total of 17 (2.1 %) ofienders are enrolled in Higher Education 

• Total of 16 (1.9%) offenders are enrolled in Alternative Education 

• Total of 52 (6.3%) offenders are involved in Competency Development Programs (not 

education) 

• Total of 1,669 Incentives have been used 

• Total of 5,253 Technical Violations have occurred 

• Total of5,861 Graduated Responses have been issued/used 

• Total of 4,567 Community Service hours have been completed by offenders 

• Total of 244 (10.1 %) of paroled offenders have been returned to SCDC custody for 

technical violations (over life of the program) 

• Total of 196 (8.1 %) of paroled offenders have been returned to SCDC custody for new 

convictions (over life of the program) 

7 
32 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 16 here 26561.016

• Three-year ISS recidivism rate of 22.9% is less than half of the 52.9% recidivism rate 

for Youthful Offenders not receiving ISS 

8 
33 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 17 here 26561.017

Overall Recidivism 
34 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 18 here 26561.018
35 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 19 here 26561.019

i 

Federal, state, and local governments work to improve outcomes 

Efforts to reduce recidivism are grounded in the ability to accurately and consistently collect and analyze 

various forms of data. To that end, states have developed increasingly sophisticated and comprehensive 

recidivism tracking methods. By improving the accuracy and consistency of data collection, using more timely 

measures, and expanding the types of recidivism metrics that are tracked as well as the populations to which 

these metrics are applied, states are now better positioned to understand and respond to recidivism trends. 

The recidivism data included in this brief is not meant to be compared state by state; it is meant to show 

individual examples of state successes across various recidivism measures. 

This brief uses publicly available data from state agencies 

to identify achievements in recidivism reduction. Two 

types of recldlvism are presented in this documentcohort-based and revocation-based. 

Cohort-based recidivism is measured by tracking a set 

group of people over a specified time period. This type of 

recidivism is always presented as a rate representing the 

proportion of people who recidivate as compared to the 

whole cohort. For example, a cohort-based analysis of 

prison releases may track all people released in 2010 and 

measure the rate of returns to prison within three years. lf 

there were 100 people in the 2010 release cohort and 32 of 

them returned to prison within three years, the recidivism 

rate for this cohort would be 32 percent. Cohort-based 

recidivism tends to be a less timely indicator than 

revocatfon~based recidivism due to the time period 

necessary for tracking. In the example above that uses a 

cohort of people released from prison in 2010, it would not 

be possible to calculate a three-year recidivism rate until 

after the end of 2013. Compounded by the time needed to 

conduct the analysis and publish results, this three- to fouryear lag is commonly present for recidivism rates of any 

given cohort. Despite this lag, cohort-based recidivism is an 

important measure because it indicates how well a system 

is doing at limiting people's continued criminal justice 

involvement. 

Revocation·based recidivism is measured by identifying 

people who are on either probation or parole who have had 

thelr supervision status terminated either due to a technical 

COlORADO 

-9 percent 

COLORADO 

-24 percent 

MICHIGAN 

-20 percent 

GEORGIA 

-46 percent -35 percent 
36 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 20 here 26561.020

violation of the conditions of their supervision (e.g., failing a drug test or missing an appointment with a 

supervision officer) or because they were arrested or convicted of a new crime. V\lhile some states publish 

only the rate of revocations from supervision, most states publish the exact number of revocations that occur 

within each calendar year. Revocation-based recidivism is an important measure because it shows how a 

system responds to noncompliant behavior, which may or may not include criminal behavior. 

Because the type of information that is tracked and published in each state varies, different definitions of 

recidivism and means of measuring that recidivism vary across the state examples presented in this brief. 

The volume and rate of revocation-based recidivism are presented when possible, and rates are consistently 

presented for cohort-based recidivism data. Each state example also includes a summa!)! of the types of 

recidivism data collected by the state. 

Key Measures of Recidivism 

REARREST ts the broadest measure of rec:kilvlsm, Because not all rearrests result 

In a gu!!tyfindlng or convit:tlon, th!s metric may suggest that there !s more criminal 

activity than there actual!y ls. Ho~\1\?ver, !tis sttll an important measure of the volume 

of peopie retumlng to courts and county ja!ls as wei! as the most comprehensive 

fndlcator of a person's Interaction with the crlmfnal justice system, 

ilECON\/!CT!0!\1 

comm!tt~d by someone with prJ or !nvo!vernent In the cr!m!nal just!ce system and !s 

considered th~ most accurate Indicator of reddMsm and pub!lc safety outtomes, 

RElNCARCEAATION can be the result of both crlmlna! and non-crlmfna! heha:vlor 

{e.g,, inc.:~rc,eratlon for c:e:rta!n su~Ms!on Violations:}, and generally refers to prison 

intarce:ratlon. Incarceration 1s the most cost!yoimlnaljustke response avaHableto 

REVOCATION occurs when people who have been senlsm:sd to probation supervision 

or who have beel'! p!aced ort probation or parole fo!!owlng a term of incarceration have their 

supenrislon status r-evoked, and In some Instances incarcerated, as a respome to their 

behavlor.llevocatlonc:an be the result of both crlrnlnal and non..crlmino! behavior{e.g_,, 

arrest or conViction for a new crime or the vlo!at!on of su~rv!s:ton conditions), and has 

s.!gn!flcant cost Implications for focal and state governments, 
37 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 21 here 26561.021

STATES DELIVER RESULTS: 

I 

Between 201 0 and 2015, the number of revocations for technical violations of conditions of 

supervision that resulted in admission to prison decreased 46 percent, from 3,293 to 1, 788. 

Revocations not resulting in admission to prison also declined 46 percent, from 1,490 to 810.1 
38 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 22 here 26561.022

In 2010, the South C.aroHna legislature passed an 

omnibus bill that codlfi.ed criminal justlce system 

changes by 

Mandating post·reiease supervision, authorizing 

earned discharge, enhancing the available 

administrative responses to supervision violations, 

and using risk assessments to gu!de supervision 

declsions; and 

Restructuring penatttes for certain violent, 

and drug offenses to reserve prlson space for people 

convicted of more serious offenses. 

South Caronna has received $800,000 ln 

investments th-at include 

One grant for a nonprofit organization to provide 

pre~ and post-release mentor!ng and transitional 

se:n.tices to peopie; and 

One grant for the Department of Probation, Parole 

and Pardon Services to test innovative approaches 

to improve outcomes for people under probation 

supervisfon and Implement evidence~b.ased 

strategie-s:. 

long-held views about what makes a criminal justice system successful have 

changed over the years, and South Carolina is one of the states leading the way 

in developing better approaches toward reducing recidivism. We now train staff 

been proven to keep people out of the criminal 

safer community. 

DIRECTOR OF CORRECTIONS 
39 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 23 here 26561.023

11/27/2016 

1 
40 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 24 here 26561.024

South Carolina: Justice Reinvestment 2009-201 0 

South Carolina's correctional population had nearly 

tripled during the past 25 years and was projected to 

grow 13% by 2014. 

Sentencing Reform Commission 

1. state uses best practices in sentencing and corrections. 

2. Prison Drivers >- Examine what's driving the size of the state's priso-n population; how the 

prison and supen;iston populations have changed over time. 

3. Policy Development 

Y Evaluate potential policies; reach out to interested stakeholders. 

4. Final Findings and Recommendations Y Finalize recommendations and task legislature with codifying them into law. 

11/27/2016 

2 
41 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 25 here 26561.025

11/27/2016 

Corr&ctionai Population {prison, ja!!, prOOat!on and parole}. iSSti ~ 2008 

3 
42 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 26 here 26561.026

2008: 

1 in 13 State Dollars on Corrections 

State Correctional Spending, 1987·2008 {m!Hk<nsY 

60,000 

50,000 

40,000 

30,000 

20,000 

$19.3 

10.000 billion 

Justice Reinvestment States 2007~2010 

$52.3 

billion 

11/27/2016 

4 
43 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 27 here 26561.027

11/27/2016 

J1.1stice Reinvestment States 2007-2016 

s 
44 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 28 here 26561.028

11/27/2016 

2014: 

1 in 36 Under Correctional Control 

Co.rrectional Population !f:Hison, jail, probation and parole}, 1!l00~2014 

8,000:,000 ' .2008:' 

7.427,675 

7,000,000 

6,000,000 

5,000,000 

4,000,000 

3,000,000 

2,000,000 

1,836,762 

1,000,0\)0 

0 

1980 19821984 1986 iSSS 1990 1992 1994 i996 1995 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 20~4 

30 States Achieved Reductions in 

lrnnri""'""'"""''"i" Rates 

6 
45 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 29 here 26561.029

11/27/2016 

does not matter whether a nonviolent offender is in 

for 21 or 24 or 27 months. What matters is 

of sure when an 

less likely to commit another 

crime." 

STRONGlY AGREE 73% 

TOTAl AGREE 90% 

Demonstrate that 

7 
46 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 30 here 26561.030

Reforms 

Finding: Admissions lo prison increased 26% since 2000, with the 

increase largely made up of low-level offenders 

Reforms: Increased diversion for less serious drug offenses; 

increased the felony property threshold to $2,000 

Finding: 49% of offenders In 

offenses; share of drug 

year period to 20% of population 

Reforms: Reduced sentencing 

made some drug offenses parole 

opportunities for earned time 

for some low-level offenses; 

provided more 

11/27/2016 

8 
47 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 31 here 26561.031

Finding: 24% of admissions were offenders revoked from 

supervision, with technical violations !he large majority 

Reforms: Established graduated sanctions and incentives for 

supervised offenders; established 20 for 30 earned time on 

supervision 

Finding: The parole grant rate had substantially decreased to a rate 

of 10% in 2006 

Reforms: Made 

non-violent inma!es who have at 

released to mandatory supervision 180 days before release 

Number and Share of Nonviolent Offenders in 

Decreased Since 2010 

11/27/2016 

9 
48 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 32 here 26561.032

11/27/2016 

nri,o:nrlm,:;nt Rate Fell From 11th In Nation to 

100,000 Residents .-~~~~~~~~~ 

Rate Continued to Decline After Reforms 

10 
49 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 33 here 26561.033

Decreased Prison 

Growth and 

14% Since 2010 

South Caronna's Prtsol'!l Popu!aUon 

11/27/2016 

11 
50 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 34 here 26561.034

11/27/2016 

Contact Info 

12 
51 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 35 here 26561.035

Second Chance Program 

DEW 
52 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 36 here 26561.036

Second Chance Program 

Each year, approximately 10,000 people are released from South Carolina prisons. Far too often, exoffenders are released into the same environment from which they came, lacking the education or skills 

needed to succeed outside of prison. 

Through WIOA Title Ill funds, the S.C. Department of Corrections (SCDC) and the S.C. Department of 

Employment and Workforce (DEW) in 2014 developed a pilot program where a case manager from DEW 

was placed on site with laptops and materials to assist eligible returning citizens in work-skills training. 

Ninety days prior to release, ex-offenders are taught employment skills in a one-hour class each day, 

including: 

• workshops 

mock interviews 

resume assistance 

• letters of explanation 

basic computer skills 

introduction to the SC Works system 

job search tactics 

soft skills 

The last 30-days prior to release are especially important as the case manager prepares individuals for 

life outside the facility. This includes one-on-one sessions to talk through any fears or concerns they may 

have about being released, making suggestions and providing guidance and information about other 

agencies or resources they may need post release. 

This is also the time when returning citizens get registered in the SC Works system and begin to apply 

for jobs online. 

As part of the Second Chance initiative, DEW and SCDC provide behind-the-fence job fairs. Inviting exoffender friendly businesses to come on-site to discuss employment opportunities, these job fairs have 

resulted in several employment opportunities for participants. 

At the time of release each participant receives a folder that includes a Federal Bonding letter, several 

copies of their resume, a letter of explanation that explains their personal situation, information on the 

SC Works centers across the state and any other information that staff feel they need relating to other 

available resources. 

Each month after release day, the names of these returning citizens are sent out to the SC Works staff in 

the field so they may reach out to the individuals in their area to offer continued support. 

ln addition to the Second Chance program, SC Works also provides monthly assistance by conducting 

informational sessions in each correctional facility for those who are set to be released that month. 
53 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 37 here 26561.037

These sessions are a way for SC Works to make connections and offer support to these individuals that 

may not know how to start over. Service information, center locations and contacts are the main focus 

of these meetings 

Services are also provided in various corrections facilities across the state on an as needed basis. SCDC 

will contact the center closest to them and request specific workshops in an effort to prepare their exoffenders for release. The staff within each SC Works region also regularly reaches out to the facilities 

within their areas to offer support and assistance. 

SC Works continues to work closely with all individuals after their release. 

With proven results stemming from the pilot, the State Workforce Development Board invested state· 

level Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act funds into expanding the program to other correctional 

facilities. 

Employment Tools- All Returning citizens are given an overview of the SC Works online system, as well 

as contact information for the SC Works center closest to their return destination. Participants in the 

Second Chance Initiative receive a folder at the time of release that includes a Federal Bonding letter, 

several copies of their resume, a letter of explanation that outlines their personal situation, information 

on the SC Works centers across the state and a case manager from their local SC Works center, and any 

other information or available resources relevant to that individual. Other tools available to returning 

citizens include: 

Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC)- Included as part of the WOTC, hiring returning citizens 

helps businesses receive a tax credit. This federally funded program, administered by DEW, 

provides employers with a 40 percent tax credit on eligible employees' first year of wages after 

they have worked 400 hours. 

The Federal Bonding Program- This free-of-charge insurance policy provides Fidelity Bonding 

insurance coverage for high-risk workers. While many individuals just need a second chance to 

prove themselves, this policy protects businesses in case of loss of money or property due to 

work dishonesty. 

Outcomes 

963 individuals have completed the program 

• 516 returning citizens have been released from prison 

389, or 75%, are earning wages 

Additional information 

• The average class size is 20 with 3 classes per 90-day session. 

• The last job fair held at the Manning pre-release center in Columbia included employers such as 

Verizon, who was looking for sales reps; Echerer Painting, wanting painters; Lineberger 
54 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 38 here 26561.038

Construction company, needed laborers and other skilled workers; RUIZ Foods looking for 

production staff; and O'Reilly Auto Parts needing sales reps. 

Federal bonds are paid for out of the state's Wagner Peysner federal funds. The typical coverage 

is $5,000 but can go up to $25,000 if requested by the employer. There is no cost to the 

jobseeker or the employer, each $5,000 bond costs $98 (again out of the federal funding}. The 

coverage expires after six months. The agency spends less than $2,500 of its federal dollars on 

bonds per year. It is a very successful program in that less than 1% nationally have had claims 

filed. 

• The Work Opportunity Tax Credit was enacted in 1996. It is a federal tax credit available to 

employers for hiring individuals from certain targeted groups who face barriers to employment 

(i.e. ex-offenders, veterans, low income, long term unemployed, disabled} 

This program is open only to non-violent offenders. There are only three reasons to keep a nonviolent offender out of the program: 1) if he didn't have HS diploma or GED; 2) if he had 

behavioral issues within the last 90 days; or 3) if he was self-employed in a legitimate business 

before he went to prison and is going back to it after he is released. Everyone who enrolls does 

not complete the program. The great majority of those who don't finish self-drop out but the 

agency doesn't know the reasons why they leave. Only a "handful" have been removed from the 

class. 
55 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 39 here 26561.039

SC Thrive 
56 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 40 here 26561.040

' l' scThDve 

Manning Correctional Institution 

(May 1, 2016· June 18, 2017) 

Application Intake by Type 

SNAP 811 

Medicaid Full-462 

Aged, Blind and/or Oisabled-31 

Medicare Savings- 0 

Optional State Supplemental-0 

Breast and Cervical Cancer Program-1 

General Hospital Services-0 

Emergency Medicaid- 2 

Nursing Home Services-0 

Home and Community Based Services-0 

TEFRA-0 

Welvista 2 

Voter Registration 0 

Military & Veterans Benefits 0 

JUUMP (Jobs Upfront Mean More Pay) 0 

Medically Indigent Assistance Program 1 

Taxes: Federal 0 

Taxes: State 0 

Total Applications Completed 1,311 

SNAP Allotment by Client 

(All Data is an estimate based an information provided by client and final qualification is 

determined by the Department of Social Services) 

Estimated Annual Allotment $1,410,192 

Average Estimated Annual Allotment Per $2,316 

Individual 

Average Estimated Individual Monthly $193 

Allotment 
57 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 41 here 26561.041

Clients Served 

Clients with App Return 

Applications Completed 

Counselor 

Danielle Atkinson 

Brandon Byrd 

Charles Daniel 

Tam ala Jackson 

Janie Jefferson 

Stephanie laSane 

Johnny Morrow 

Rodney Robinson 

Households 

Households with children 

Household members 

Children (under 18) 

Adults (18·59) 

Seniors (60+) 

919 

824 

1,311 

Counselor Activity 

Last Login 

06-12·2017 

06-06·2017 

06·16-2017 

05·22-2017 

11-30·2017 

02·28·2017 

06-16-2017 

06-16·2017 

Household Dynamics 

Current member of the military or a veteran 

Surviving spouse or a dependent child of a 

veteran 

Applications Completed 

185 

40 

218 

26 

134 

6 

257 

470 

919 

5 

927 

6 

899 

22 

39 

8 
58 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 42 here 26561.042

', J' scThrJve 

Ridgeland Correctional Institution 

(May 1, 2016-June 18, 2017) 

Application Intake by Type 

SNAP 4 

Medicaid FuiJ-1 

Aged, Blind and/or Disabled-a 

Medicare Savings· a 

Optional State Supptemental-1 

Breast and Cervical Cancer Program-a 

General Hospital Services-a 

Emergency Medicaid- a 

Nursing Home Servlces-0 

Home and Community Based Services-a 

TEFRA·O 

Welvista a 

Voter Registration 0 

Military & Veterans Benefits 0 

JUUMP (Jobs Upfront Mean More Pay) 0 

Medically Indigent Assistance Program 0 

Taxes: Federal 0 

Taxes: State 0 

Total Applications Completed 6 

SNAP Allotment by Client 

{All Data is an estimate based an information provided by client and final qualification is 

determined by the Department of Social Services) 

Estimated Annual Allotment $6,984 

Average Estimated Annual Allotment Per $2,32B 

Individual 

Average Estimated Individual Monthly $194 

Allotment 
59 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 43 here 26561.043

Clients Served 

Clients with App Return 

Applications Completed 

Counselor 

Ashlelgh Aycock 

Stacey Evans Hamilton 

Shirley Singleton 

Christal Thomas 

Households 

Households with children 

Household members 

Children (under 18) 

Adults (18-59) 

Seniors {60+) 

5 

4 

6 

Counselor Activity 

last Login 

06-15-2017 

02-07·2017 

No Login 

08-3-2017 

Household Dynamics 

4 

0 

5 

0 

5 

0 

Current member of the military or a veteran 0 

Surviving spouse or a dependent child of a 0 

veteran 

Applications Completed 

2 

4 

0 

0 
60 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 44 here 26561.044

Kershaw Correctional Institution 

{May 1, 2016-June 18, 2017) 

Application Intake by Type 

SNAP 38 

Medicaid Full-33 

Aged, Blind and/or Olsabled·S 

Medicare Savings- 1 

Optional State Supplemental-0 

Breast and Cervical Cancer Program-0 

General Hospital Services-0 

Emergency Medicaid· 0 

Nursing Home Services..() 

Home and Community Based Services-0 

TEFRA·O 

Wefvlsta 0 

Voter Registration 0 

Mifitary & Veterans Benefits 0 

JUUMP (Jobs Upfront Mean More Pay) 2 

Medically Indigent Assistance Program 0 

Taxes: Federal 0 

Taxes: State 0 

Total Applications Completed 79 

SNAP Allotment by Client 

(All Data is an estimate based on information provided by client and final qualification is 

determined by the Department of Social Services} 

Estimated Annual Allotment $88,092 

Average Estimated Annual Allotment Per $2,447 

Individual 

Average Estimated Individual Monthly $204 

Allotment 
61 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 45 here 26561.045

Clients Served 

Clients with App Return 

Applications Completed 

Counselor 

JoAnn Cook 

Steven Miller 

Naomi Otano 

linda Tammen 

Households 

Households with children 

Household members 

Children {under 18} 

Adults (18·59) 

Seniors ( 60+) 

46 

42 

79 

Counselor Actlvltv 

last Login 

02-06·2017 

06·08·2017 

No login 

12-29·2016 

Household Dvnamics 

Current member of the military or a veteran 

Surviving spouse or a dependent child of a 

veteran 

Applications Completed 

0 

75 

0 

4 

46 

0 

48 

0 

44 

4 

5 

0 
62 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 46 here 26561.046

Allendale Correctional Institution 

(May 1, 2016-June 18, 2017) 

Application Intake by Type 

SNAP 1 

Medicaid Fufi·O 

Aged, Blind and/or Disabled-0 

Medicare Savings- 0 

Optional State Supplementaf-0 

Breast and Cervical Cancer Program-0 

General Hospital Services-0 

Emergency Medicaid- 0 

Nursing Home Service s-O 

Home and Community Based Services-0 

TEFRA·O 

Welvista 0 

Voter Registration 0 

Military & Veterans Benefits 0 

JUUMP (Jobs Upfront Mean More Pay) 0 

Medically Indigent Assistance Program 0 

Taxes: Federal 0 

Taxes: State 0 

Total Applications Completed 1 

SNAP Allotment by Client 

{All Data is an estimate based an information provided by client and final qualification is 

determined by the Department of Social Services) 

Estimated Annual Allotment $0 

Average Estimated Annual Allotment Per $0 

Individual 

Average Estimated Individual Monthly $0 

Allotment 
63 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 47 here 26561.047

Clients Served 

Clients with App Return 

Applications Completed 

Counselor 

Maurice CorujO 

Chelsea Hilliard 

Ellen Inabinet 

Anita James 

Teresa Ramsey 

Households 

Households with children 

Household members 

Children (under 18) 

Adults (18-59) 

Seniors (60+) 

1 

1 

1 

Counselor Activity 

last login 

11-10-2016 

11-21-2016 

10-27-16 

l-31-2016 

No Login 

Household Dynamics 

Current member of the military or a veteran 

Surviving spouse or a dependent child of a 

veteran 

Applications Completed 

0 

1 

0 

0 

0 

1 

0 

1 

0 

0 

l 

0 

1 
64 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 48 here 26561.048

scThrJve ' 

Camille Griffin Graham 

Correctional Institution 

{May 1, 2016-June 18, 2017) 

Application Intake by Type 

SNAP 63 

Medicaid Fulf.47 

Aged, Blind and/or Disabled-5 

Medicare Savings- 1 

Optional State Supplemental-0 

Breast and Cervical Cancer Program-7 

General Hospital Services-a 

Emergency Medicaid- 0 

Nursing Home Services-a 

Home and Community Based Services-a 

TEFRA-a 

Welvista 4a 

Medicare RX Help 2 

Voter Registration 0 

Military & Veterans Benefits 0 

JUUMP (Jobs Upfront Mean More Pay) 15 

Medically Indigent Assistance Program 3 

Taxes: Federal 0 

Taxes: State 0 

Total Applications Completed 181 
65 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 49 here 26561.049

SNAP Allotment by Client 

(All Data is an estimate based an information provided by client and final qualification is 

determined by the Department of Social Services) 

Estimated Annual Allotment $161,856 

Average Estimated Annual Allotment Per $3,303 

Individual 

Average Estimated Individual Monthly $275 

Allotment 

Clients Served 

Clients with App Return 

Applications Completed 

-r Counselor 

Kami Drakes 

Jennifer McDuffie 

Stephanie McMillan 

5C THRIVE STAFF 

Households 

Households with children 

Household members 

Children (under 18) 

Adults (18·59) 

Seniors (60+) 

70 

67 

181 

Counselor Activity 

last login 

No login 

02·04-2016 

05·08-2017 

06-14-2017 

RESOURCE FAIR 

Household Dynamics 

67 

11 

130 

13 

92 

25 

Current member of the military or a veteran 5 

Surviving spouse or a dependent child of a 5 

veteran 

Applications Completed 

0 

0 

39 

138 

4 
66 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 50 here 26561.050

Sentencing Reform 

Insert offset folio 51 here 26561.051KING-6430 with DISTILLER

South Carolina's Prison System 

Report to the 

Sentencing Reform Oversight Committee 

Bryan P. Stirling, Director 

November 28,2016 

Insert offset folio 52 here 26561.052KING-6430 with DISTILLER

SCDC Institution Levels and Population Cou

Institutional Count Total (as of November 2, 2016) = 20,529 

Level I (Minimum Security): 

Level II (Medium Security): 

5 Institutions 

9 Institutions 

Level III (Maximum Security): 6 Institutions 

Female: 2 Institutions 

Agency Total: 22 Institutions* 

*During FY 2016, Lower Savannah Pre-Release closed (on June 2016) 

During FY 2016, Goodman Correctionallnst. no longer housed women as of June 2016 

During FY 2017, Walden Cl closed as a Men's Levell, and relocated to Goodman CI as of November 2016 

Insert offset folio 53 here 26561.053KING-6430 with DISTILLER

120.0% 100.0% 

80.0% 

60.0% 

40.0% 

20.0% 

0.0% 

• ' ' Utilized Capacity on November 15, 2016 

Levell (Minimum) Level 2 (Medium) Level 3 (Maximum) 

'IIIGcncral Housing 

II!Special Managem

Female Institutions 

Insert offset folio 54 here 26561.054KING-6430 with DISTILLER

Average Daily Population Statistics 

Fiscal Years 2001 - 2016 

.2006 2007 2012 2013 2014 

);> SCDC's Average Daily Population* 

-Between June 2001 and June 2010 increased by 3,079 (14.6%) 

-Between June 2010 and June 2016 decreased by 3,373 (14.0%) 

);> By law, SCDC must provide security, housing, clothing, food, and healthcare. 

);> To prepare inmates for reentry into community, SCDC provides education, work, and addiction 

treatment programs. 

*Facilities and Authorized Absences. 

Insert offset folio 55 here 26561.055KING-6430 with DISTILLER

li " ' The Prison Population is Moving in the Opposite Direction fro

what was Projected by Applied Research Services, Inc. 

High Average Jurisdictional Count CY 1998- CY 2016 (To Da

19,000 -~·~-~~~--~-~-~·~·~·~~~~-~----~~·-·-~"'''~~~~~·--·~·~-~·-··~· 

28,000 

27,000 

i5 26,000 

< --' 

= 0.. 

= 0... 

= = ~ = 0... 

25,000 

24,000 

23,000 

22,000 

21,000 -~----·-------~--~~------·--L....·-----~--· 

'98 '99 ·oo 'o1 ·o2 '03 '04 ·os '06 '07 ·os '09 '10 '11 '12 '13 '14 '15 

YEAR 

*The high average monthly jurisdictional count for CYTD 2016 occurred in August 2016. 

Insert offset folio 56 here 26561.056KING-6430 with DISTILLER

Annual Admissions to SCDC 

Fiscal Years 1997 - 2016 

15>000 ~~-~~-~--·--·~--~~·~·--~---~~--~----------------------------~----~~----~--

14,ooo 13.71111 .,._., * . ,. ""'" 

13,000 I ,.L ~ 13 397 ...... -l_3.199 

1~,000+---------~-----------------~------------

ll:,OOO I ..... ,......... =:---. .,., \J 0.888 

lO,(JUO n "'""" 

"9;0;00 

FY .FY FY 

2003 2004* 2005 

Fl: .. FY cF\'C. )l"X >FY FY n FY 

2.oos. 2009 2010 201~ .2012 2o13. 21).14 :z01s 

Insert offset folio 57 here 26561.057KING-6430 with DISTILLER

ti!JI Annual Violent and Non-Violent Admission

- Fiscal Years 2009-2016 

(36%DecreaseJn Non"'Violent Admissions · Between.FY 200~ and FY201S) 

12:,000· 

10;000 

8,000 

!l 6,725 .sa, J,· 6,000. +~~··~-·-·~-· 

< 

'It: 

4,000 

2,043 2,146 2,052 2,046 2,042 1,955 1,931 1,9

2,000 

2010 2011 2012.. 2013 

FJScaiYear 

2014 
74 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 58 here 26561.058

= 0 •• ...... 

....-! = 

c. = 

0 

~ 

...... 

= ~ ""' = "" ....-! 

0 '¢ 

•• > I > = 0 I z 

II 

= 0 

z 

• r:l'.i 

> 

...... 

= ~ ....-! 

0 

•• > 

Insert offset folio 59 here 26561.059KING-6430 with DISTILLER

E 

i£! 

.. 

f.!: 

.... 

Q 

"' 

40% 

35% 

30% 

25% 

20% 

Recidivism Rates of Inmates Released 

During Fiscal Years 2004- 2013* 

v .. r ..... .t .. oe of Releases who Returned to SCDC 

within Three Years or Less 

FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 l''Y 2007 FY 2008 FY 21109 FY 2010 FY 2011 J<Y 2012 FY 201

Year of Release 

*Inmates released in FY 2013 and followed for three years, i.e., through FY 2016. 
76 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 60 here 26561.060

YOPRS 
77 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 61 here 26561.061
78 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 62 here 26561.062

WorkKeys I GED I 

Apprenticeship I on the Job 

Training 
79 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 63 here 26561.063

Attainment: 

I. Inmates who receive their GFD. Work Keys. and/or Vocational ccrtilkates arc equipped 

with the skills und credentials to secure cmploj ment. und ure therefore less likely to rcoffend. 

2. A 2013 recidivism report compiled by the R/\1\D Corporation (supported by the U.S. 

Department of Education and Justice Department). !(lUnd that: 

• Inmates who participate in correctional education experienced u 43 percent 

reduction in recidivism 

• Inmates exposed to computer-assisted instruction: 

a) learned slightly more in reading 

b) substantially more in math 

3. Every S I spent of Correctionul I:ducation reduces incarceration costs by S4 to S5 
80 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 64 here 26561.064

OJT Certificates 

PRGM 

CODE DESCRIPTION 

100 OJT ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK I 

101 OJT ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK II 

102 OJT ADMINISTRATIVE ClERK Ill 

103 OJT ADMINISTRATIVE ClERK IV 

348 OJT ANIMAl HUSBANDRY I 

349 OJT ANIMAl HUSBANDRY II 

350 OJT ANIMAL HUSBANDRY Ill 

351 OJT ANIMAl HUSBANDRY IV 

116 OJT ASBESTOS REMOVAL I 

117 OJT ASBESTOS REMOVAl II 

118 OJT ASBESTOS REMOVAL Ill 

119 OJT ASBESTOS REMOVAL IV 

124 OJT BAR BERING I 

125 OJT BARBERING II 

126 OJT BARBERING Ill 

127 OJT BARBERING IV 

132 orr BEE KEEPING I 

133 OJT BEE KEEPING II 

134 OJT BEE KEEPING Ill 

135 OJT BEE KEEPING IV 

698 Orr BOILER ROOM I 

699 OJT BOILER ROOM II 

700 OJT BOILER ROOM Ill 

701 OJT BOILER ROOM IV 

140 OJT BRAillE TRANSCRIPTION I 

141 orr BRAILLE TRANSCRIPTION II 

142 orr BRAillE TRANSCRIPTION Ill 

143 OJT BRAILLE TRANSCRIPTION IV 

148 OJT BUILDING MAINTENANCE I 

149 OJT BUILDING MAINTENANCE II 

150 OJT BUILDING MAINTENANCE Ill 

151 OJT BUILDING MAINTENANCE IV 

164 OJT CAKE DECORATING I 

165 orr CAKE DECORATING II 

166 OJT CAKE DECORATING Ill 

167 OJTCAKE DECORATING IV 

172 OJTCANTEEN I 

173 OJT CANTEEN II 

174 Orr CANTEEN Ill 

175 OJT CANTEEN IV 

180 OJT CAREER DEVELOPMENT I 

181 OJT CAREER DEVELOPMENT II 

182 OJT CAREER DEVELOPMENT Ill 

183 OJT CAREER DEVELOPMENT IV 

Certificate Level 

I 

II 

Ill 

IV 

Apprenticeships 

Working Hours 

Require to Achieve 

200 

400 

800 

1600 

2000 
81 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 65 here 26561.065

188 OJT CARPENTRY I 

189 OJT CARPENTRY II 

190 OJT CARPENTRY Ill 

191 OJT CARPENTRY IV 

535 OJT CHAPLAIN CLERK I 

536 OJT CHAPLAIN CLERK II 

537 OJT CHAPLAIN CLERK Ill 

538 OJT CHAPLAIN CLERK IV 

212 OJT COMMISSARY I 

213 OJT COMMISSARY II 

214 OJT COMMISSARY Ill 

215 OJT COMMISSARY IV 

228 OJT CUliNARY ARTS I 

229 OJT CUliNARY ARTS II 

230 OJT CUliNARY ARTS Ill 

231 OJT CULINARY ARTS IV 

236 OJT CUSTODIAl SERVICES I 

237 OJT CUSTODIAl SERVICES II 

238 OJT CUSTODIAL SERVICES Ill 

239 OJT CUSTODIAl SERVICES IV 

244 OJT DAIRY SCIENCES I 

245 OJT DAIRY SCIENCES II 

246 OJT DAIRY SCIENCES Ill 

247 OJT DAIRY SCIENCES IV 

252 OJT DOG GROOMING I 

253 OJT DOG GROOMING II 

254 OJT DOG GROOMING Ill 

255 OJT DOG GROOMING IV 

260 OJT DOG REHABILITATION I 

261 OJT DOG REHABILITATION II 

262 OJT DOG REHABILITATION Ill 

263 OJT DOG REHABILITATION IV 

380 OJT EGG LAYING HOUSE I 

381 OJT EGG LAYING HOUSE II 

382 OJT EGG LAYING HOUSE Ill 

383 OJT EGG LAYING HOUSE IV 

268 OJT EGG PROCESSING I 

269 OJT EGG PROCESSING If 

270 OJT EGG PROCESSING Ill 

271 OJT EGG PROCESSING IV 

276 OJT ELECTRICAl I 

277 OJT ELECTRICAl II 

278 OJT ELECTRICAL Ill 

279 OJT ELECTRICAL IV 
82 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 66 here 26561.066

284 OJT EQUESTRIAN CARE I 

285 OJT EQUESTRIAN CARE II 

286 OJT EQUESTRIAN CARE Ill 

287 OJT EQUESTRIAN CARE IV 

550 OJT FARM MAINTENANCE I 

551 OJT FARM MAINTENANCE II 

552 OJT FARM MAINTENANCE Ill 

553 OJT FARM MAINTENANCE IV 

632 OJT FINISHING SPECIALIST I 

633 OJT FINISHING SPECIALIST II 

634 OJT FINISHING SPECIALIST Ill 

635 OJT FINISHING SPEOALIST IV 

300 OJT FOOD SERVICE I 

301 OJT FOOD SERVICE II 

302 OJT FOOD SERVICE Ill 

303 OJT FOOD SERVICE IV 

308 OJT FORK LIFT OPERATOR I 

309 OJT FORK LIFT OPERATOR II 

310 OJT FORK LIFT OPERATOR Ill 

311 OJTFORK LIFT OPERATOR IV 

316 OJT FRAME SHOP I 

317 OJT FRAME SHOP II 

318 OJT FRAME SHOP Ill 

319 OJT FRAME SHOP IV 

628 OJT FURNITURE ASSEMBLY I 

629 OJT FURNITURE ASSEMBLY II 

630 OJT FURNITURE ASSEMBLY Ill 

631 OJT FURNITURE ASSEMBLY IV 

526 OJT GENERAL MAINTENANCE I 

527 OJT GENERAL MAINTENANCE II 

528 OJT GENERAL MAINTENANCE Ill 

529 OJT GENERAL MAINTENANCE IV 

548 OJT GREENHOUSE/NURSERY I 

549 OJT GREENHOUSE/NURSERY II 

567 OJT GREENHOUSE/NURSERY Ill 

554 OJT GREENHOUSE/NURSERY IV 

324 OJT GREYHOUND REHABILITATION I 

325 OJT GREYHOUND REHABILITATION II 

326 OJTGREYHOUND REHABILITATION Ill 

327 OJT GREYHOUND REHABILITATION IV 

539 OJT GROUNDS MAINTENANCE I 

540 OJT GROUNDS MAINTENANCE II 

541 OJT GROUNDS MAINTENANCE Ill 

542 OJT GROUNDS MAINTENANCE IV 
83 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 67 here 26561.067

332 OJT HEAVY EQUIPMENT I 

333 OJT HEAVY EQUIPMENT II 

334 OJT HEAVY EQUIPMENT! II 

335 OJT HEAVY EQUIPMENT IV 

556 OJT HIGHWAY SANIATION II 

555 OJT HIGHWAY SANITATION I 

557 OJTHIGHWAYSANITATION Ill 

558 OJT HIGHWAY SANITATION IV 

340 OJT HORTICULTURE I 

341 OJT HORTICULTURE II 

342 OJTHORTJCULTURE Ill 

343 OJT HORTICULTURE IV 

356 OJT HVAC I 

357 OJT HVAC I! 

358 OJT HVAC Ill 

359 OJT HVAC IV 

364 OJT INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURING I 

365 OJT INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURING II 

366 OJT INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURING Ill 

367 OJT INDUSTRIAL MANUFACTURING IV 

547 OJT INST. SM. ENGINE REPAIR I 

543 OJT INST. SMAU ENGINE REPAIR I 

545 OJT INST. SMALL ENGINE REPAIR Ill 

546 OJT INST. SMALL ENGINE REPAIR IV 

544 OJT INST. SMALL ENGINE REPAIR II 

624 OJT LAMINATION SPECIALIST I 

625 OJT LAMINATION SPECIAliST II 

626 OJT LAMINATION SPECIAliST Ill 

627 OJT LAMINATION SPECIALIST IV 

559 OJT LANDSCAPING I 

560 OJT LANDSCAPING II 

561 OJT LANDSCAPING Ill 

562 OJT LANDSCAPING IV 

702 OJT LAUNDRY I 

703 OJT LAUNDRY II 

704 OJT LAUNDRY Ill 

705 OJT LAUNDRY IV 

372 OJT LAW LIBRARY CLERK I 

373 OJT LAW liBRARY CLERK II 

374 OJT LAW liBRARY CLERK Ill 

375 OJT LAW LIBRARY CLERK IV 

396 OJT MASONRY I 

397 OJT MASONRY II 

398 OJT MASONRY Ill 
84 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 68 here 26561.068

399 OJT MASONRY IV 

404 OJT MEDIA CENTER CLERK I 

405 OJT MEDIA CENTER CLERK II 

406 OJT MEDIA CENTER CLERK Ill 

407 OJT MEDIA CENTER CLERK IV 

412 OJT METAL FABRICATION I 

413 OJT METAL FABRICATION II 

414 OJT METAL FABRICATION Ill 

415 OJT METAL FABRICATION IV 

420 OJT MILK PROCESSING I 

421 OJT MILK PROCESSING II 

422 OJT MILK PROCESSING Ill 

423 OJT MILK PROCESSING IV 

428 OJT PAALS I 

429 OJT PAALS II 

430 OJT PAALS Ill 

431 OJT PAALS IV 

694 OJT PAINT I 

695 OJT PAINT II 

696 OJT PAINT Ill 

697 OJT PAINT IV 

436 OJT PAlliATIVE CARE I 

437 OJT PAlliATIVE CARE II 

438 OJT PALLIATIVE CARE Ill 

439 OJT PALLIATIVE CARE IV 

525 OJT PERSONAL CARE ASSISTANT I 

710 OJT PERSONAL CARE ASSISTANT II 

711 OJT PERSONAL CARE ASSISTANT Ill 

712 OJT PERSONAL CARE ASSISTANT IV 

444 OJT PLUMBING I 

445 OJT PlUMBING II 

446 OJT PLUMBING Ill 

447 OJT PLUMBING IV 

452 OJT PRINT SHOP I 

453 OJT PRINT SHOP II 

454 OJT PRINT SHOP Ill 

455 OJT PRINT SHOP IV 

612 OJT QUALITY CONTROL SPECIALIST I 

613 OJT QUALITY CONTROL SPECIALIST II 

614 OJT QUALITY CONTROL SPECIAliST Ill 

615 OJT QUALITY CONTROL SPECIALIST IV 

530 OJT RECREATION I 

531 OJTRECREATION II 

533 OJT RECREATION Ill 

534 OJT RECREATION IV 
85 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 69 here 26561.069

460 OJT RECYCLING I 

461 OJT RECYCLING II 

462 OJT RECYCLING Ill 

463 OJT RECYCLING IV 

468 OJT REFRIGERATION I 

469 OJT REFRIGERATION II 

470 OJTREFRIGERATION Ill 

471 OJT REFRIGERATION IV 

476 OJT ROAD REPAIR I 

477 OJT ROAD REPAIR II 

478 OJT ROAD REPAIR Ill 

479 OJT ROAD REPAIR IV 

484 OJT ROOFING J 

485 OJT ROOFING II 

486 OJT ROOFING Ill 

487 OJT ROOFING IV 

608 OJTSAWOPERATORI 

609 OJT SAW OPERATOR II 

610 OJT SAW OPERATOR Ill 

611 OJTSAW OPERATOR IV 

999 OJT SERVSAFE FOOD HANDLER 

563 OJT SEWER LIFT I 

564 OJT SEWER LIFT II 

565 OJT SEWER LIFT Ill 

566 OJT SEWER LIFT IV 

492 OJT SEWING I 

493 OJT SEWING II 

494 OJT SEWING Ill 

495 OJT SEWING IV 

SOO OJT SHORT ORDER COOK I 

501 OJT SHORT ORDER COOK II 

502 OJT SHORT ORDER COOK Ill 

503 OJT SHORT ORDER COOK IV 

690 OJT SMALL ENGINE REPAIR I 

691 OJT SMALL ENGINE REPAIR II 

692 OJT SMALL ENGINE REPAIR Ill 

693 OJT SMAll ENGINE REPAIR IV 

604 OJT SPRAY SPEOALIST I 

605 OJT SPRAY SPECIALIST II 

606 OJT SPRAY SPECIALIST Ill 

607 OJT SPRAY SPEOAUST N 
86 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 70 here 26561.070

50S OJTTEACHERASSISTANTI 

509 OJTTEACHER ASSISTANT II 

510 OJTTEACHERASSISTANTUI 

Sll OJT TEACHER ASSISTANT IV 

516 OJTWELDING FABRICATION I 

517 OJT WELDING FABRICATION II 

518 OJT WELDING FABRICATION Ill 

519 OJTWELDING FABRICATION IV 

620 OJT WOOD PRODUCTION MAINTENANCE I 

621 OJT WOOD PRODUCTION MAINTENANCE II 

622 OJT WOOD PRODUCTION MAINTENANCE Ill 

623 OJTWOOD PRODUCTION MAINTENANCE IV 

616 OJT WOOD SHOP FOREMAN I 

617 OJTWOOOSHOP FOREMAN II 

618 OJT WOOD SHOP FOREMAN Ill 

619 OJT WOOD SHOP FOREMAN IV 

681 OJTWOOO SHOP SPECIALTY FABRICATOR 

680 OJT WOOD SHOP STOCK ROOM CLERK 

600 OJT WRAPPING/SHIPPING I 

601 OJT WRAPPING/SHIPPING II 

602 OJT WRAPPING/SHIPPING Ill 

603 OJT WRAPPING/SHIPPING IV 
87 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 71 here 26561.071
88 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 72 here 26561.072
89 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 73 here 26561.073
90 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 74 here 26561.074
91 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 75 here 26561.075
92 

Chairman GOWDY. Thank you, Director. 

Pastor Jahwar? 

STATEMENT OF OMAR JAHWAR 

Pastor JAHWAR. First let me say thank you to Chairman Gowdy 

and to these representatives we have on this great committee, and 

for allowing us to testify to give voice to the work that we do. I do 

want to say to start that my son, Omar Jahwar, II, is here, and 

one of our great workers, Urban Specialists, Edward Loredo. I am 

saying this to my son so when he brags on me that he can be accurate that I did acknowledge him when I was in Congress. 

Twenty years ago I stood before a similar committee that was 

headed by then Chairman Henry Hyde and John Connors about 

the effective ways in deterring a child from becoming involved in 

criminal activity, and what we said then is that it is necessary to 

pursue the core of the problem. There were a number of variables 

that we said were the root of youth crime. Back then it was economic disparity, cultural insensitivity, and the lack of moral identity. 

But concerning intervention and reformation, I warned against 

using a blanket solution that isolates each category of dysfunction. 

An effective solution to youth crime requires an holistic approach, 

one that treats the entire individual and, in turn, the larger family, 

and then the community. Today, we are attempting to cure the poisonous fruit that grew from that untreated root. 

Twenty years later, these high-risk youth have become ex-offenders trying to raise families and re-integrate into a damaged society. 

The solution to their lack of production as citizens cannot be merely punitive, as we have been talking about, and I am so glad that 

you understand it. Again, it must be holistic. We must walk people 

getting out of prison through the process of redemption and lead 

them into productive citizenship. 

We attempt to train and we use what we call Urban Specialists 

to intentionally dive deep into the lives of these to transform the 

fundamental values that are guiding destructive behavior and degrading urban culture and greatly limiting their potential. We 

train and empower our organizations and businesses and individuals to collaboratively operate in the community, stimulating the 

economy and uplifting their personal spirits. 

Collectively, we can help each other economically, socially, and 

spiritually. In turn, we create change together to build a greater 

and stronger community. We use what we call a 3–I Model, and I 

will explain it if there are any questions about your model. And 

that model we use to empower organizations, businesses, politicians, and citizens so we can transform the urban culture. In 

Urban Specialists, we use this common approach to invade the culture, we are intrusive in our action, and build up strong community institutions. 

I am personally committed to advancing the cause of the voiceless who suffer silently in an attempt to become productive citizens 

of this great country. If there are ways that we can collectively ensure a better process and a better outcome, the Urban Specialists 

group is ready to serve. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
93 

I want to say personally that I was the first gang specialist hired 

by the State of Texas. So for many years, I was working inside the 

prisons, and my job was to negotiate peace in prisons with men 

who were violent. And what I realized is that most of these men 

were not violent perpetually. They were violent as a response to 

what they felt was a violation, and my job was to create civility in 

their mind so that their behavior could follow where their heart 

was going. But unfortunately, many of these men, who I knew had 

transformed inside the prison, once they walked out, they had to 

go into a community that was not prepared for their transformation. 

So in order for them to be released from prison, they had to tell 

the guards that they had changed. But in order for them to go back 

to their neighborhoods, they had to tell the neighborhood citizens 

that they were the same. So it was a dichotomy of a lifestyle. 

So what we decided to do was go into those neighborhoods and 

say who is it that can lead these young people back to their civility, 

and normally it was those who you did not know. It was some people who were former OGs and former gang leaders and former prisoners and grandmothers and other teachers and pastors who were 

informal coalition to help transform urban culture. 

So what we want to do is provide as much pressure as we can 

and as much opportunity as we can so that those who really want 

to be citizens do not feel like they are perpetually left out because 

of a mistake or because of an environmental choice. Some people 

do what they do because they know no other choice, but we want 

to give them those choices through the efforts that we do. 

So, thank you for allowing us to be a part of the solution, and 

if we can offer any help, we are absolutely poised to do so. Thank 

you. 

[Prepared statement of Pastor Jahwar follows:] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
94 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 76 here 26561.076

r.: = ~~. 

June 26, 2017 

The Honorable Trey Gowdy 

Chairman 

Committee on Oversight and Government 

Reform 

United States House of Representatives 

2157 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515-6143 

Dear Chairman Gowdy and Chairman Cummings, 

The Honorable Elijah Cummings 

Ranking Member 

Committee on Oversight and Government 

Reform 

United States House of Representatives 

2157 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515-6143 

First, let me say, thank you to the committee for allowing me to testify and give voice to the 

work we do in urban communities. 

Twenty years ago, I stood before you offering grassroots solutions to youth crime. In order to 

be effective in deterring a child from becoming involved in criminal activity, it's necessary to 

pursue the core of the problem. There were a number of variables I cited as the roots of youth 

crime: economic disparity, cultural insensitivity, lack of moral identity- But intervention or 

reformation, I warned against using a blanket solution that isolates each category of 

dysfunction. An effective solution to youth crime would require a holistic approach; one that 

treats the entire individual, and in turn, the larger family, then community. Today, we are 

eating the poison fruit that grew from that untreated root. 

Twenty years later, these high risk youth have become ex-offenders trying to raise families and 

re-integrate into a damaged society. The solution to their lack of production as citizens can not 

be merely punitive. Again, it must be holistic. We must walk people getting out of prison 

through the process of redemption and lead them into productive citizenship. We train and use 

Urban Specialists to intentionally dive deep into the lives of these to transform the fundamental 

values that are guiding destructive behavior, degrading Urban Culture, and greatly limiting their 

potential. Accordingly, we train and empower organizations, businesses, and individuals to 

collaboratively operate in the community stimulating the economy and promoting 

sustain ability. 
95 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 77 here 26561.077

Collectively, we can help and heal each other- economically, socially, and spiritually. In turn, 

we create change together to build a greater and stronger community. Through our 3-1 Model, 

organizations, businesses, politicians, and citizens can transform Urban Culture with Urban 

Specialists using a common approach to Invade the culture, take Intrusive action, and build up 

strong community Institutions. 

I am, personally, committed to advancing the cause of the voiceless who suffer silently in an 

attempt to become productive citizens of this great country. If there are ways that we can 

work collectively to ensure a better process and a better outcome, the Urban Specialists group 

is ready to serve. 

Sincerely, 

Pastor Omar Jahwar 

CEO 

Urban Specialists 

1401 S. Lamar 

Dallas, TX 75201 

469.458.3006 

........ .,... 
96 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 78 here 26561.078

Written Testimony of William C. McGahan 

Chairman and Founder 

Georgia Works! 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

2157 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Criminal Justice Reform and Efforts to Reduce Recidivism 

Hearing: Wednesday June 28, 2017 at 1pm. 

Chairman Gowdy, Ranking Member Cummings, 

My name is Bill McGahan and I am the Founder and Chairman of a non-profit called 

"Georgia Works!". 

Georgia Works helps formerly incarcerated and homeless men become productive 

citizens. Since our founding in 2013 we have helped 311 men get jobs, remain clean, 

and get an apartment, and virtually all have not returned to prison. We have an 

additional170 men in the program today who are all working toward full time 

employment. 

When a man comes to our voluntary program we ask him to do three things: 1) be clean 

of alcohol and drugs (we drug test everybody weekly), 2) not take handouts from the 

government or anyone else, and 3) to work. 

Over the course of 6 to 12 months we work with each of clients on their "obstacles" to 

employment: the lack of a driver's license, wage garnishments, criminal history, a lack 

of a high school diploma, past due fines, lack of a bank account, just to name a few. 

But more importantly, we work with each client on the underlying cause of their 

problems, which is typically an addiction, past abuse, or a psychological problem. Each 

person is assigned to a case manager who they meet with daily. We have in-house 

AAJNA meetings, GED classes, one on one counseling, anger management classes, 

healthcare, and financial planning courses, among others. 

The key thing that makes us different is that we run a staffing business within Georgia 

Works! Georgia Works! contracts directly with 30 to 40 businesses around Atlanta for 

their labor needs, and over 100 our men go to work for these employers every day while 

they are living at our facility. The staffing business is a way for employers to "try out" an 

employee in a low-risk way. 
97 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 79 here 26561.079

Most of the people in our program end up getting full time job offers from the private 

employers that are customers of our staffing business, and the rest get jobs in the 

market place. 

So, while a man is at Georgia Works he is learning how to be a valuable employee at a 

private business, he eliminating the obstacles that might prevent him from being 

employed, and he is working on his addiction or other problem that is the root cause of 

his problems. He is also making money through his own work, not though a handout. 

We have a mandatory savings program, and most participants save between $2000 to 

$3000 by the time they leave. 

We are funded completely by private sources (including me), we take no government 

funding of any kind, I take no salary or reimbursement for any expenses, and our 

staffing business funds almost the entire cost of running the entire operation. 

There are several things that I have learned since I founded Georgia Works! that I want 

to specifically address: 

1. There is no shortage of jobs. (According to snagajob.com, there are 30,000 jobs in 

available in Georgia). In fact, there is a labor crisis in some sectors, including 

construction, food and beverage, commercial truck driving, auto repair, etc .. etc .. 

These sectors simply can't find the labor to fill their open positions. 

2. The people in our program range from poorly educated to very smart. We have 

people who stopped school in the 8th grade, and others with PhD's. So, we don't 

need just low skill jobs or high tech jobs - we need a menu of all types of jobs that fit 

each particular type of person. 

3. Individuals don't need to be highly trained to get a job with career prospects. Many 

men leave our program and begin full time work in the $13 to $15 range without any 

training at all. Employers will train the people so long as they perceive them to be 

worth the investment. 

4. The biggest problem is bad habits, not a lack of intelligence, or poor schooling. The 

scarce commodity is the individual, regardless of their past, who works hard, takes 

direction well, has good habits, and who will stay on the job past the first few 

paychecks. 

5. Many formerly incarcerated returning citizens and former homeless people are 

terrific employees. They are eager to get their lives moving in the right direction and 

they know that they don't have a lot more chances. Many former drug dealers are 

entrepreneurial, creative and personable, and our employer customers tell us that 

they are some of their most valuable employees. 

Georgia Tech did a study on our program that found that we saved our community $6 to 

$11 for every dollar invested in our program mostly due to the fact that our graduates 

don't go back to prison, and recidivism drops like a stone. Georgia Works! can 

graduate an individual to self-sufficiency and being a tax payer for under $2500 an 
98 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 80 here 26561.080

individual, compared to a cost of about $20,000 a year to incarcerate a person in the 

State of Georgia. 

Where state and federal governments can help the most are in three areas: 

1. Stop taking away driver's licenses for anything other than poor driving. Driver's 

licenses are suspended in some states for drug offenses, failure to pay child support, 

and for other reasons. Most jobs require an individual to have a driver's license. 

2. Wage garnishments, particularly for past due child support, are crippling poor men 

and ex-offenders. A man with a low hourly wage simply cannot support himself with 

significant wage garnishments, almost forcing him to work in "under the table" jobs or 

illegal activity. 

3. Promote programs for returning citizens and homeless people (like Georgia Works!) 

that ready people for work, change bad habits, eliminate barriers, and provide 

employment opportunities. 

Today, I am in a working group with Georgia Justice Project, The Georgia Department 

of Community Supervision, The Georgia Department Corrections and other 

organizations to come up with specific policy recommendations in Georgia to eliminate 

barriers to employment for ex-offenders. 

I want to thank the committee for focusing on this important issue on the Federal level. 
99 

Chairman GOWDY. Thank you, Pastor. 

Mr. McGahan? 

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM C. MCGAHAN 

Mr. MCGAHAN. Thank you, Chairman Gowdy and Ranking Member Connolly. My name is Bill McGahan, and I am the Founder 

and Chairman of a non-profit called ‘‘Georgia Works!’’. I am a graduate of the University of Virginia, and I am married to a woman 

for 26 years who is a graduate of Socastee High School, South 

Carolina. 

Georgia Works! helps formerly incarcerated and homeless men 

become productive citizens. Since our founding in 2013, we have 

helped 316 men get jobs, remain clean, and get an apartment, and 

virtually all have not returned to prison. We have an additional 

170 men in the program today, and they are all working toward 

full-time employment. About 70 percent of our participants are felons. 

When a man comes into our program, our voluntary program, we 

ask him to do three things: to be clean of alcohol and drugs, and 

we test when they come in and throughout the program; not to 

take handouts from the government or anyone else; and to work. 

Over 6 to 12 months we work with each of our clients on their 

obstacles to employment: the lack of a driver’s license, wage garnishments, criminal history, a lack of a high school diploma, pastdue fines, the lack of a bank account, just to name a few. 

But more importantly, we work with each client on the underlying cause of their problems, which is typically an addiction or a 

psychological problem. Each person is assigned to a case manager 

who they meet with daily. We have in-house meetings on NA, GED 

classes, one-on-one counseling, anger management classes, 

healthcare, and financial planning courses, among others. 

The key thing that makes us different from other organizations 

is that we run a staffing business within Georgia Works! We contract directly with 30 to 40 businesses around Atlanta for their 

labor, and over 100 of our men every day go to work for these employers while they are living at our facility. The staffing business 

is a way for employers to try out our employee in a low-risk way. 

Now, most of the people in our program end up getting full-time 

offers from the private employers that are customers of our staffing 

businesses. So, while a man is in our program, at Georgia Works!, 

he is learning how to be a valuable employee at a private business, 

he is eliminating the obstacles that might prevent him from being 

employed, and he is working on his addiction or other problem that 

is the root cause of his issues. He is also making money through 

his own work. It is not a handout. We have a mandatory savings 

program, so when they leave they usually have between $2000 to 

$3000, which is enough to put a security deposit down on an apartment. 

We are funded completely by private sources, including me. We 

take no government funding of any kind. I take no salary or any 

expenses, and our staffing business basically funds the cost of running the entire program. 

There are several things that I have learned since I founded 

Georgia Works! that I want to talk about specifically. First, there 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
100 

is no shortage of jobs. According to websites, today in Georgia there 

are about 30,000 full-time jobs available. And there is a labor crisis 

in some sectors, including construction, food and beverage, commercial truck driving, auto repair, et cetera. These sectors simply cannot find the labor to fill their needs. 

Secondly, the people in our program range from poorly educated 

to very smart. We have people who stopped school in the junior 

high, and we have other people in our program with PhD’s. So, we 

do not need just low-skill jobs or high-tech jobs, but we need the 

whole menu of jobs that fit each person. 

Number three, individuals do not really need to be highly trained 

to get a job with pretty good career prospects. Most of the men 

leave our program and begin full-time work around $13 to $15 

without any training at all. 

Number four, the biggest problem—and this is what we work on 

the most—is bad habits, not a lack of intelligence or poor schooling. 

The scarce commodity is the individual, regardless of their past, 

who works hard, takes direction well, has good habits, and will 

stay on the job past the first few paychecks. 

Many formerly incarcerated returning citizens and former homeless people are terrific employees. We have had many employers 

tell us that past drug dealers are their most entrepreneurial and 

creative and personable employees, and they move up pretty quickly. So that is my commercial for people to hire people who are exoffenders. 

Now, Georgia Tech did a study on our program and found that 

our program saved $6 to $11 for every dollar invested in our program, and we can get a person from walking in the door to selfsufficiency and a taxpayer for about $2,500, and it costs the State 

of Georgia about $20,000 to incarcerate him. 

Where state and Federal Government can help the most, at the 

specific level down at helping men, are in a couple of ways. The 

first is to stop taking driver’s licenses away for anything other than 

poor driving. We still have a whole lot of states that take people’s 

driver’s licenses or suspend them for drug offenses, failure to pay 

child support, and for other reasons. It is really a prerequisite to 

get a job now to have a driver’s license. 

Secondly, wage garnishments, particularly in the area of pastdue child support, are really crippling poor men and ex-offenders. 

A man with a low hourly wage simply cannot afford to support 

himself with significant wage garnishments. 

And then lastly, promote programs like ours that will help people 

ready for work, change their habits, and eliminate barriers. 

Now, on the state level I am working with the Georgia Justice 

Project, the Department of Community Supervision, the Georgia 

Department of Corrections and other organizations to come up with 

some specific policy recommendations, and it is my honor to be 

here today, and I thank you for focusing on this on the Federal 

level. Thank you. 

Chairman GOWDY. Yes, sir. Thank you. 

Your Honor? 

[Prepared statement of Mr. McGahan follows:] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
101 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 103 here 26561.103

Written Testimony of William C. McGahan 

Chairman and Founder 

Georgia Works! 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

2157 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Criminal Justice Reform and Efforts to Reduce Recidivism 

Hearing: Wednesday June 28, 2017 at 1 pm. 

Chairman Gowdy, Ranking Member Cummings, 

My name is Bill McGahan and I am the Founder and Chairman of a non-profit called 

"Georgia Works!". 

Georgia Works helps formerly incarcerated and homeless men become productive 

citizens. Since our founding in 2013 we have helped 311 men get jobs, remain clean, 

and get an apartment, and virtually all have not returned to prison. We have an 

additional170 men in the program today who are all working toward full time 

employment. 

When a man comes to our voluntary program we ask him to do three things: 1) be clean 

of alcohol and drugs (we drug test everybody weekly), 2) not take handouts from the 

government or anyone else, and 3) to work. 

Over the course of 6 to 12 months we work with each of clients on their "obstacles" to 

employment: the lack of a driver's license, wage garnishments, criminal history, a lack 

of a high school diploma, past due fines, lack of a bank account, just to name a few. 

But more importantly, we work with each client on the underlying cause of their 

problems, which is typically an addiction, past abuse, or a psychological problem. Each 

person is assigned to a case manager who they meet with daily. We have in-house 

AA/NA meetings, GED classes, one on one counseling, anger management classes, 

healthcare, and financial planning courses, among others. 

The key thing that makes us different is that we run a staffing business within Georgia 

Works! Georgia Works! contracts directly with 30 to 40 businesses around Atlanta for 

their labor needs, and over 100 our men go to work for these employers every day while 

they are living at our facility. The staffing business is a way for employers to "try out" an 

employee in a low-risk way. 
102 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 104 here 26561.104

Most of the people in our program end up getting full time job offers from the private 

employers that are customers of our staffing business, and the rest get jobs in the 

market place. 

So, while a man is at Georgia Works he is learning how to be a valuable employee at a 

private business, he eliminating the obstacles that might prevent him from being 

employed, and he is working on his addiction or other problem that is the root cause of 

his problems. He is also making money through his own work, not though a handout. 

We have a mandatory savings program, and most participants save between $2000 to 

$3000 by the time they leave. 

We are funded completely by private sources (including me), we take no government 

funding of any kind, I take no salary or reimbursement for any expenses, and our 

staffing business funds almost the entire cost of running the entire operation. 

There are several things that I have learned since I founded Georgia Works! that I want 

to specifically address: 

1. There is no shortage of jobs. (According to snagajob.com, there are 30,000 jobs in 

available in Georgia). In fact, there is a labor crisis in some sectors, including 

construction, food and beverage, commercial truck driving, auto repair, etc .. etc .. 

These sectors simply can't find the labor to fill their open positions. 

2. The people in our program range from poorly educated to very smart. We have 

people who stopped school in the 8th grade, and others with PhD's. So, we don't 

need just low skill jobs or high tech jobs - we need a menu of all types of jobs that fit 

each particular type of person. 

3. Individuals don't need to be highly trained to get a job with career prospects. Many 

men leave our program and begin full time work in the $13 to $15 range without any 

training at all. Employers will train the people so long as they perceive them to be 

worth the investment. 

4. The biggest problem is bad habits, not a lack of intelligence, or poor schooling. The 

scarce commodity is the individual, regardless of their past, who works hard, takes 

direction well, has good habits, and who will stay on the job past the first few 

paychecks. 

5. Many formerly incarcerated returning citizens and former homeless people are 

terrific employees. They are eager to get their lives moving in the right direction and 

they know that they don't have a lot more chances. Many former drug dealers are 

entrepreneurial, creative and personable, and our employer customers tell us that 

they are some of their most valuable employees. 

Georgia Tech did a study on our program that found that we saved our community $6 to 

$11 for every dollar invested in our program mostly due to the fact that our graduates 

don't go back to prison, and recidivism drops like a stone. Georgia Works! can 

graduate an individual to self-sufficiency and being a tax payer for under $2500 an 
103 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 105 here 26561.105

individual, compared to a cost of about $20,000 a year to incarcerate a person in the 

State of Georgia. 

Where state and federal governments can help the most are in three areas: 

1. Stop taking away driver's licenses for anything other than poor driving. Driver's 

licenses are suspended in some states for drug offenses, failure to pay child support, 

and for other reasons. Most jobs require an individual to have a driver's license. 

2. Wage garnishments, particularly for past due child support, are crippling poor men 

and ex-offenders. A man with a low hourly wage simply cannot support himself with 

significant wage garnishments, almost forcing him to work in "under the table" jobs or 

illegal activity. 

3. Promote programs for returning citizens and homeless people (like Georgia Works!) 

that ready people for work, change bad habits, eliminate barriers, and provide 

employment opportunities. 

Today, I am in a working group with Georgia Justice Project, The Georgia Department 

of Community Supervision, The Georgia Department Corrections and other 

organizations to come up with specific policy recommendations in Georgia to eliminate 

barriers to employment for ex-offenders. 

I want to thank the committee for focusing on this important issue on the Federal level. 
104 

STATEMENT OF ALEXANDER WILLIAMS, JR. 

Judge WILLIAMS. Chairman Gowdy and Congressman Connolly, 

as well as my friend, Congressman Cummings, I wish you the best 

as you recover from your illness. 

Let me preface my remarks by thanking everyone on this committee for allowing me this opportunity to present just a few comments. I served for 20 years on the Federal bench as a trial judge, 

and prior to that I was the twice-elected prosecutor for a fairly 

large jurisdiction in Maryland called Prince George’s County. I now 

am a share of the Judge Alexander Williams, Jr. Center for Education, Justice and Ethics, and my passion, of course, is criminal 

justice. 

I have three simple points that I wish to focus on. One that I 

think will help reduce recidivism and also address criminal justice 

reform is the need to review and for a better use of discretion. This 

is an area that really has not been addressed that much. All of us 

who are lawyers know, and prosecutors in particular understand 

that discretion is the hallmark of criminal justice. Discretion is administered and exercised by police officers, judicial officers, prosecutors, even grand juries and petty jurors, medical examiners, correctional officials, probation and parole officers, and executives 

through granting pardons, clemency, and commuting sentences, 

just to name a few. 

Discretion commences and continues with decisions such as who 

to investigate, whether to arrest, what charges to file, who gets 

bond, who is to be released, whether a minor is to be charged as 

an adult, whether the family car should be forfeited for drugs found 

in a car driven by a minor, what plea bargaining is offered, and 

other decisions by judges and others exercising discretion. 

Justice often varies depending on the nature of discretion employed and exercised. For me, the issue comes down to whether or 

should we and how can we attain reasonable uniformity, consistency, fairness, and how we can curb or employ better standards for 

the exercise of discretion. Every point of the criminal justice system 

where discretion is used should be carefully reviewed, data collected, and policies implemented to make sure there is consistency 

and that a meaningful effort is being made to address racial 

profiling, selective enforcement, and the disproportionate impact of 

the criminal justice system on minorities. We hope that the Justice 

Department and Congress can take the lead in this area to establish a model for the states to follow. 

The second point is the need to review mandatory minimum penalties. I know there has been a lot said there. The debate surrounding mandatory minimum sentences remains. While there are 

plausible arguments that repeated drug traffickers and those running criminal organizations and enterprises, and certainly some 

violent offenders and white collar and identity fraud crimes, certainly they warrant stiff and substantial sentences in order to 

deter, protect the community, and limit recidivism. However, studies have revealed the Comprehensive Crime Control Act, the Career Offender Statutes and enhancement penalty statutes unfortunately too often single out low-level drug offenders and disproportionately affect racial minorities. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
105 

The final issue that needs to be addressed, in my view, is to review and address the collateral consequences and discriminatory 

practices and barriers imposed upon returning citizens and those 

with records. The bottom line for me is, again, we need to cut back 

on recidivism; that is, to make sure that persons with records and 

those returning have a successful reentry and are not reincarcerated. Clearly, there are circumstances where collateral consequences are appropriate. For example, it cannot be reasonably 

disputed that those convicted of child abuse or elderly offenses 

must be carefully screened and limited. Moreover, financial institutions must be alerted of potential employees having convictions of 

embezzlement. But I do believe that there are a number of situations where collateral consequences can be eased. 

My general view is that reducing recidivism can be best achieved 

by removing some of the discriminatory and unreasonable practices 

which prevent or limit access to health care, housing, education, 

and employment. Of course, there are a number of questions that 

can be raised, and some of those questions would be this: Do those 

returning to the community require more extensive or shorter periods of supervised release, or is it necessary in every instance for 

a convicted person who is applying for some type of vocational license, to get a Pell Grant, or for admission to an institution of 

higher learning, or must they be required to disclose a 20-year-old 

conviction that has very little relevance and relationship to the specific request? 

So those are my three points, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. 

[Prepared statement of Mr. Williams follows:] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
106 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 81 here 26561.081

1 

CONGRESSIONAL HEARING ON "CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM AND EFFORTS TO REDUCE 

RECIDIVISM." 

BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM 

Testimony of the Honorable Alexander Williams, Jr. 

Chairman Trey Gowdy and 

Retired United States District Judge 

For the District of Maryland 

Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings: June 28, 2017 

Members of the Committee 

Let me preface my remarks by expressing how grateful! am for this privilege of providing brief 

comments and testimony regarding the very important issues of criminal justice reform and 

efforts to reduce recidivism. I am Alexander Williams, Jr, a retired United States District Judge 

for the District of Maryland. Just prior to my nearly 20 years on the federal bench as a trial 

judge, I served as the two-time elected States Attorney for Prince George's County, Maryland. I 

teach criminal procedure and have had a long time passion for criminal justice. Presently, I am 

the founder and the CEO of the Judge Alexander Williams, Jr. Center for Education, Justice and 

Ethics, a policy center at the University of Maryland, College Park. I am confident when I say 

that a significant number of elected and public officials understand the importance of criminal 

justice reform, the need to reduce recidivism, and the challenges we face as a nation to address 

massive incarceration and racial disparities. 

My comments for criminal justice reform fall into three general areas: (1) reviewing the 

exercise of discretion; (2) reviewing mandatory-minimum sentencing penalties; and (3) 

removing the unnecessary barriers imposed on returning citizens and those with records. 

Before addressing the three points, let me make a couple of observations which if addressed 

would undergird much of the proposals for criminal justice reform. 

First, we must repair police community relationships. More police officers are being indicted for 

unjustified and inappropriate shootings and for use of excessive force, and there is a deep 

division around the country and a wide distrust ofthe police and oflaw enforcement in general. 

What is needed is to assemble a broad spectrum and gathering of the appropriate stakeholders 

(community leaders, law enforcement, legislators, business community, social scientist and 

others to develop a uniform paradigm or strategy (i.e. body cameras, more training, more 

community policing, etc.)) to bridge the gap between the community and the police or at least 

reduce the real and perceived distrust. 

Second, Pre-trial detention of minor offenders is a real problem. When these persons charged 

with minor offenses are not released or provided reasonable bail which they can meet, there is 

a real threat of loss of their job, loss of their house, and break-up of their family. What often 

happens is that in order to avoid spending time in jail, these defendants plead guilty. Periodic 

reviews of bail and pre-trial release policies would help. I would like to see magistrates and 
107 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 82 here 26561.082

judges provided with the full panoply of release options, including the use of monetary 

requirements or bail, pretrial release, and other creative monitoring which reduces the 

detention of minor defendants. 

2 

Closely related to this observation is my belief that there are too many individuals serving time 

for low level and non-violent offenses. There has to be alternatives to incarceration for some 

minor defendants. Alternative sentences or referrals away from the criminal justice system 

must be developed and proposed for minor offenses, for those using and abusing drugs, and for 

women convicted of minor offenses and who are heads of households. These individuals should 

also be candidates for pardons. 

Those observations aside, here are my three points: 

(1} Need for a review and for a better use of Discretion. 

Discretion, of course, is the hallmark of criminal justice. Discretion is administered and 

exercised by police officers, judicial officials, prosecutors, grand and petit jurors, medical 

examiners, correctional officials, probation and parole officials, and executive officials (through 

granting pardons, clemency and commuting sentences), just to name a few. Discretion 

commences and continues with decisions such as who to Investigate, whether to arrest, what 

charges to file, who gets bond or who is to be released, whether a minor is to be charged as an 

adult, whether the family car should be forfeited for drugs found in a car driven by a minor, 

what plea bargaining is offered, and other decisions by judges and others exercising their 

discretion. Justice often varies depending on the nature of discretion employed and exercised. 

For me, the issue comes down to whether or should we and how can we attain reasonable 

uniformity, consistency, fairness, and how we can curb or employ better standards for the 

exercise of discretion. Every point of the criminal justice system where discretion is used 

should be carefully reviewed, data collected and policies implemented to make sure there is 

consistency and that a meaningful effort is being made to address racial profiling, selective 

enforcement, and the disproportionate impact of the criminal justice system on minorities. The 

Justice Department and Congress must take the lead in this area and establish the model for 

the states to follow. 

(2) Need for a review of mandatory-minimum penalties. 

Mandatory-minimum penalties have contributed to the problem of massive incarceration. 

Legislation imposing harsh drug penalties, long sentencing guidelines, mandatory minimum 

sentences, and life sentences--even applying and imposing these sentences for those under 18 

and without balancing other concerns and considerations should be reviewed. In a landmark 

case entitled Miller vs Alabama 567 U.S.460 (2012) the Supreme Court recognized that youth 

were different from adults when it comes to sentencing and held that mandatory life without 

parole sentences for juveniles convicted of murder violated the gth amendment's ban on cruel 

and unusual punishments. 

The debate surrounding mandatory minimum sentences remain. While there are plausible 

arguments that repeated drug traffickers and those running criminal organizations and 
108 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 83 here 26561.083

3 

enterprises, and certain white collar and identity fraud crimes, warrant stiff and substantial 

sentences in order to deter, protect the community and limit recidivism, studies have revealed 

the Comprehensive Crime Control Act, the Career Offender Statutes (where previous 

convictions of various offenses trigger mandatory career offender status and penalties under 18 

USC Section 924 ©)),and enhanced penalty statutes too often single out low level drug 

offenders and disproportionately affect racial minorities. 

A significant offshoot of the issue of mandatory minimum sentences has been the legislative 

enactments and sentencing policies which have shifted judicial discretion over to prosecutors 

who are invested with the decision to charge outside of the statutory minimum, and reward 

those defendants who cooperate and/or provide substantial assistance. Prosecutors have the 

unfettered charging authority and are able to extract pleas from defendants-- some of whom 

wanted trials but simply are not able to risk the chances of being convicted and getting a long 

prison sentence under mandatory minimum sentences. Mandatory-minimum penalties have 

also watered down and prevented judges from taking into consideration the uniqueness or 

special circumstances of the individual being sentenced before him/her. 

Recommendation: (1) Review legislative enactments as to mandatory minimum sentences and 

pare them back where appropriate; (2) Give judges more discretion to take into consideration 

[where appropriate] the unique circumstances and background ofthe individual being 

sentenced; (3) refer non violent drug offenders and users to drug treatment and drug 

counseling in lieu of incarceration; (4) encourage the President and Governors to utilize their 

pardon and clemency authority to reduce the prison population. 

(3) Review and address the collateral consequences and discriminatory practices and barriers 

imposed upon returning citizens and those with records. 

The bottom line with respect to the returning citizens is to cut back on recidivism: that is to 

make sure that they have a successful reentry and are not re-incarcerated. Clearly there are 

circumstances where collateral consequences are appropriate. For example, it cannot be 

reasonably disputed that those convicted of child abuse or elderly offenses must be carefully 

screened and limited [where necessary] from employment opportunities interacting with 

children or elderly. Moreover, financial institutions must be alerted of potential employees 

having convictions for embezzlement; yet there are other unnecessary barriers preventing the 

successful reintegration and transition of returning citizens. My general view is that reducing 

recidivism can be best achieved by removing some of the discriminatory and unreasonable 

practices which prevent or limit access to health care, housing, education, and employment. 

There are other questions which may be considered with a review of collateral consequences. 

Do those returning to the community require more extensive or shorter periods to be on 

supervised release? Is it necessary in every instance for a convicted person who is applying for 

some kind of vocational license or to get a Pell grant, or for admission to an institution of higher 

learning, to disclose a twenty-year-old or any conviction for that matter which has very little, if 

any, relevance or relationship to the specific license or position sought? Do safety 

considerations require permanent mandatory disqualifications? In other words, at what point 
109 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 84 here 26561.084

will the need to disclose a criminal record be outweighed by the collateral consequences 

imposed on someone for something which happened years ago? 

4 

The Federal Government should set the national standard for employing returning citizens, and 

providing them with access to services and resources to assist them with in making a successful 

transition with the end product being reduction of recidivism and the increase in public safety. 

Recommendation: (a) Revisit the collateral consequences and other systemic barriers which 

unnecessarily prevent the successful reentry of returning citizens; (b) Appropriate more money 

for transitional homes and for transitional programs for returning citizens who need places to 

stay and programs available in order to obtain the support necessary for a successful reentry. 

There are an insufficient number of (not warming spots for sleeping and eating for the night) 

but transitional homes which provide a meaningful and non-punitive structure and passionate 

and caring staff to address issues such as: the trauma which many inmates have carried for 

years, life skills, mental counseling, mental wellness, behavior modification, job interviewing, 

resume writing, GED, computer skills, etc. 

Again, I thank the committee for inviting me to testify as a witness and present my reflections. 
110 

Chairman GOWDY. Thank you, Your Honor. 

I will now recognize the gentleman from Georgia for his questioning, Mr. Hice. 

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

Let me just also take the opportunity—I think it is appropriate 

to say congratulations on your role in leading this committee. We 

sincerely look forward to working with you as this committee 

moves forward. 

And to each of our witnesses, let me say thank you, and also to 

the previous panel as well, for the work that each of you are doing. 

We are very much appreciative. 

Mr. Stirling, you mentioned briefly in your testimony some of the 

things that South Carolina is doing and the diversion options for 

less serious drug offenses, and I am very proud in Georgia, Mr. 

McGahan, what is happening there with the accountability courts 

where really, instead of going to jail, people have the opportunity 

to prevent even starting the cycle of recidivism as they get involved 

in a two-year-long, court-supervised program that is evidencebased, a treatment program, involved in community service. They 

get jobs, all these types of things. 

Mr. Chairman, I do not know if any of my colleagues have had 

the opportunity to be a part of one of the graduation ceremonies 

of these courts, the accountability courts, but I have gone and, I 

will tell you, it took everything I had just to fight back the tears 

watching how these individuals had, over the previous two years, 

experienced life change as they saw, many of them for the very 

first time, community support where they themselves had their 

dignity raised as they got jobs and they broke the cycle of what 

many of their families had perhaps for generations. 

So, Mr. Stirling, I want to come back to you and, if we can, go 

fairly briefly. Do you have any idea how many people who are currently, percentage-wise, how many prisoners will be released at 

some point? 

Mr. STIRLING. Well, most of them will be released. I know in 

under five years or roughly five years, it is 85 percent, and then 

it kind of goes down from there. But over 30 years, it is .27 percent. Five to 10 years is about 10 percent. Five and under, it is 85 

percent. 

Mr. HICE. So say 10 years, probably 90 percent are going to be 

out. Is that fair to say estimate-wise? 

Mr. STIRLING. Ninety-five percent. 

Mr. HICE. Okay, 95 percent. All right. So, here is the issue we 

are dealing with: these folks are going to be out. 

Mr. STIRLING. Yes, sir. 

Mr. HICE. So the question then becomes what happens with them 

when they are out? And from what I have been able to find, well 

over 60 percent of prisoners who are released are re-arrested within two years. In states where there are the accountability courts, 

that number drops from 60 percent down to 25 percent. I know in 

Georgia we are well below even that rate for those that are a part 

of the accountability courts. 

So, Mr. Stirling, can you just briefly discuss some of the diversion options that are taking place in South Carolina? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
111 

Mr. STIRLING. Sure. We have drug courts, which are amazing to 

watch. We have veterans courts. We have—Judge McCullough in 

Richmond County has started mental health courts. As I said 17 

percent of those incarcerated in South Carolina are diagnosed with 

a mental health issue, and sometimes for these folks getting treatment, getting hooked up with the proper medication and medical 

professionals really can change their lives and we will never see 

them again. Incarcerating someone costs around $20,000 a year in 

South Carolina, which is one of the lowest in the nation, and by 

getting these treatments and having them become taxpaying citizens, we will never see them again. 

Mr. HICE. That is amazing. 

Mr. McGahan, what you all are doing with finding jobs and so 

forth, has it been difficult to find companies that will take these 

individuals? 

Mr. MCGAHAN. Well, there are obstacles, certainly. Some are just 

not good fits, but then there are others who have a crisis and just 

need work. As you know, in Georgia there are a lot of distribution 

centers, and our men go work there, property management companies. We have people who work in recycling, nighttime work. So because there is such a big need now for labor, not to mention the 

construction, the food and beverage, the hospitality industries, we 

are able to use salesmen to help them overcome their objections, 

their initial objections, to get opportunities for our guys. 

Mr. HICE. Well, I just again want to say thank you for all. I wish 

we had time just to hit on a lot of questions. I am sure many more 

will come. But, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this hearing, and I 

yield back. 

Chairman GOWDY. The gentleman yields back. 

The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. 

Connolly. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I thank the Chair. 

Last month Senator Rand Paul wrote an op-ed entitled, ‘‘Sessions’ Sentencing Plan Would Ruin Lives’’ in response to the Attorney General’s instruction directing prosecutors to pursue ‘‘the most 

substantial guideline sentencing, including mandatory minimum 

sentences, for non-violent drug crimes.’’ 

Pastor Jahwar, does that policy make sense from your experience, to go back to what had characterized sentencing prior to the 

2013, 2012 period? 

Pastor JAHWAR. Mr. Connolly, no. I think that is a bad policy, 

personally, because I have seen so many young people who I know 

who were victims of their own environment, and then they did 

some victimization. But to go back would say to us that rehabilitation is not possible, that this is a warehousing institution. As Mr. 

Stirling said, what do you want? Would you rather have young people, older people, whomever, to come out of a prison somewhat rehabilitated, or would you rather have them just locked down until 

they have done enough time where it becomes punitive? 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Stirling, listening to your testimony on the 

data, which was pretty impressive what you are describing in 

terms of the recidivism rate going down in South Carolina, I do not 

want to put words in your mouth, but I assume from your testiVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:36 Sep 14, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\26561.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
112 

mony that you would kind of agree with Pastor Jahwar and what 

he just said. 

Mr. STIRLING. I do think we are seeing success in the programs 

with, as I said, some of the things that we have done on the state 

level, which may or may not translate to the Federal level. We 

have seen success in the diversion programs, but we have also seen 

a lot of success in the other programs that we have at the Department of Corrections. 

One of the things I did not mention is the Youthful Offender Program, where they are assigned a mentor. The numbers are one 

mentor, one social worker or youthful offender officer to about 25 

people, and they are testing them for drugs, they are making sure 

they are working, they are making sure they are getting their education, and they are holding them accountable. We have had people 

that said I do not want to do that, I would rather just go to prison, 

and they do go to prison, but we do use graduated responses. That 

program, at 50 percent to 22 percent, is amazingly successful and 

is saving a lot of tax dollars. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. You know, I remember doing a tour of our county 

jail in my county when I was chairman of the county, and I asked 

our sheriff, you know, how many people here are just sort of hardcore, no hope, versus something bad happened to them or they 

made a bad judgment or they hung around with the wrong crowd? 

And he said overwhelmingly the latter. There’s the hard core, but 

most people can be rehabilitated with the right measures. 

And the other irony, I think, is jails often serve as a massive substitute for mental health treatment and substance abuse treatment 

because we do not have the services in the community, and it puts 

a huge burden on people like yourself and your colleagues to provide services that one wishes were provided through a different 

kind of safety net. 

Judge Williams, from 2013 to 2016, the number of Federal prisoners dropped by more than 10 percent, and mandatory minimum 

sentences were used at the Federal level 30 percent less than they 

had heretofore. What is your view about mandatory minimum sentences in terms of the discretion given to people like yourself and 

your former colleagues on the bench? 

Judge WILLIAMS. Certainly, and I think I speak for a significant 

number of Federal judges who did not like the idea of having been 

stripped of their authority to consider a number of factors when 

sentencing people. What mandatory minimum sentences have done 

effectively—and, of course, I am a former prosecutor, so I certainly 

enjoyed that power, but the authority and the power really vests 

in prosecutors under mandatory minimum sentences, and they 

have the right to charge within the mandatory statute or not 

charge if someone would cooperate or give substantial assistance or 

what have you. 

So I was very happy when some cases and also the sentencing 

commission began to restore some of the discretion that Federal 

judges had for certain types of offenses, and I think that resulted 

in less sentences being imposed on a number of defendants. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. One can understand why mandatory minimum 

sentences came up, but is it not true that the problem is it is, on 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
113 

its face, discriminatory? That is how it works, the results are discriminatory even if the intent is not. 

Judge WILLIAMS. Well, certainly the impact does have a disparate impact on minorities, but also mandatory minimum sentences have an unreasonable result sometimes. You may have seen 

an article that appeared in the Washington Post a couple of weeks 

ago involving myself and an inmate who I had given life in prison. 

I had to do it because of his young brushes with the law years ago. 

I looked at all of the cases. There were eight or nine defendants. 

This guy had less involvement. I did not want to give him the maximum sentence, but I had to because, again, his record made him 

a career offender. 

So sometimes you have just an unreasonable result that takes 

place when you have these things. Fortunately in his case, President Obama did commute his sentence, and after serving 12 or 13 

years, he is now out. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Yes, although that is sort of a last resort. We 

wish the law could be more flexible. 

My time is up, although, Mr. Chairman, I do not want to deny 

Mr. McGahan an opportunity to comment if he was getting ready 

to comment. 

Mr. MCGAHAN. I deal with people coming out of prison who want 

to get their lives back, who want to work, and many have been involved in drug crimes, non-violent crimes, or in some other non-violent felony, and they are terrific people, almost without exception, 

or they would not walk through our door. These are people who 

made mistakes, were caught up with the wrong crowd. 

It is too expensive for us to put these people in a prison when 

there are other, better alternatives to handle these folks. 

Chairman GOWDY. The gentleman yields back. 

The gentleman from Arizona, Dr. Gosar. 

Mr. GOSAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

As you talk about recidivism and issues facing the criminal justice system, I wanted to take a few moments today to discuss the 

impact of programs like the veteran treatment courts on recidivism 

rates. Veteran treatment courts promote sobriety and recovery 

through coordinated local partnerships among community correction agencies, drug treatment providers, the judiciary, and other 

important community support groups. Veteran treatment courts 

have been extremely successful in my district. 

The veteran treatment court in Lake Havasu City and Kingman, 

Arizona have strong records of effective service to the veterans they 

serve. In Mojave County these programs have been leaders in best 

practices, innovative approaches to engaging stakeholders, building 

support coalitions, and expanding access to effective treatments. 

Our veterans need focused treatment and a helping hand, and 

these courts provide such an avenue. 

The alternative is often jail, and I am very proud that one of my 

own staff has been instrumental in Arizona, Sean Johnson, for getting these up and running. 

So, Mr. Stirling, I have a question for you. Does South Carolina 

implement any type of veteran treatment courts? 

Mr. STIRLING. We do. We have veteran treatment courts. Ten 

percent of our inmates, our prisoners, are self-identified as vetVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:36 Sep 14, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\26561.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
114 

erans. One of the things we have done recently is down by Charleston and McDougall Correction, we have a veterans dorm, where I 

figure they have given a lot for this country and maybe because of 

their service or something that happened or something they saw 

they ended up being incarcerated. 

So we have designed a program, a wrap-around program that 

just started I think back in January where the dorm is run by veterans and we have veteran volunteers, and we try to get these people—it is a pre-release dorm—to services and connected with other 

veterans when they leave so they will not come back. 

Mr. GOSAR. So it is still pretty early in that program. 

Mr. STIRLING. It is. Yes, sir. 

Mr. GOSAR. Well, I have to tell you, the application that we have 

seen in Arizona is incredible. You see a broken person start that 

process, and you see their eyes light up, getting back to peers that 

they want to respect and be respected for. 

Mr. McGahan, your program helps getting homeless and incarcerated men back on their feet. What percentage would you say are 

veterans? 

Mr. MCGAHAN. About 10 percent, sir. 

Mr. GOSAR. Do you find that they have more specific needs than 

others in your program? 

Mr. MCGAHAN. They do. They have unique challenges and sometimes require more mental health and counseling than other people 

in our program. 

Mr. GOSAR. So one of the things we found in Arizona is that a 

comprehensive approach is needed to getting veterans back on 

their feet. They need access to housing, access to jobs, and the ability to stay away from those bad habits. Do you see similar issues 

that those who work with you in your program? 

Mr. MCGAHAN. We do, and it does take a holistic, comprehensive 

approach. Many veterans have been through some very difficult situations, and they have not addressed them adequately, and that is 

what leads them to our program. 

Mr. GOSAR. It seems like these treatment courts really work because of working with your peers. They identify and respond so 

much differently than you see anybody else. It is like they are letting their buddy down from the military, and there is something 

there. Can you explain a little bit more, too? 

Mr. MCGAHAN. I completely agree. I think putting veterans with 

other veterans helps them. So if you have one in need and we have 

two or three that are more senior and who have been in the military, to help a person talk about their problems, to address them. 

One of the things that I have found is that many men are programmed to not talk about their feelings or the things that they 

have been experiencing, and to get them over that hurdle. And 

then once they do that and articulate their problems, then things 

tend to get better from there. 

Mr. GOSAR. In your opinion, what is the primary factor that 

keeps individuals from going back to criminal activity? 

Mr. MCGAHAN. I think bad habits, and that includes drug habits 

and work habits. So if we can address—if there is an underlying 

psychological issue that we have just been speaking about, and 

then we have a drug addiction on top of that, we have to address 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
115 

both those issues. And then if we address those issues and we then 

get them in a job and get them working, they tend not to go back 

to their old ways. 

Mr. GOSAR. And I think that is the benefit of these treatment 

courts. They give that positive influence and support on a timely 

basis, repetitively, in the military fashion. 

Thank you very much for all that you do. We certainly appreciate 

it. It is a great hearing. Thank you. 

Chairman GOWDY. Dr. Gosar yields back. 

The gentle lady from the District of Columbia is recognized. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank all of 

the witnesses. I have learned from them all. 

I also want to offer my congratulations to Chairman Gowdy, and 

I want to thank him for his first hearing which focuses on an issue 

where there have been earnest efforts on both sides. I think, Mr. 

Chairman, beginning with criminal justice reform in a hearing indicates the tone you are setting for this committee, recognizing 

that, as Mr. Connolly’s remarks indicate, there will be circumstances where we must disagree, but it seems to me that this 

was an important precedent about how to start a new chairmanship on a committee such as this, and I thank you. 

Mr. Chairman, I would also ask that a letter written by the 

ranking member, Mr. Cummings, and Mr. Issa requesting that you 

place H.R. 1905, the Fair Chance Act, on the agenda for the committee’s next markup. That, of course, is the bill that says that 

only at an appropriate point in the hiring process may an applicant 

be asked about his criminal history record. 

Perhaps the most important issue for someone coming out of 

prison is the challenges he faced in finding employment, and the 

discouragement he faces in that regard. Of course, he will find 

many barriers. Some of those are to be expected. But I was interested to note that 18 states and more than 150 cities, including my 

own, have adopted the so-called Ban the Box idea I just spoke of 

a minute ago so that employers can consider the record of any applicant, but it simply delays asking about that record. 

Many of us have heard really poignant stories about someone 

who has been out of jail for 10 or 20 or even more years but must 

put, if he is truthful, that he has once been incarcerated. Ten, 20, 

30 years of exemplary behavior may not matter if the first thing 

the employer reads is of a record. 

Now, I recognize that some of you are from states that have not 

adopted Ban the Box, but I am very impressed at the number of 

so-called Red States that have. I asked my staff to find them for 

me. Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee. Now, of 

course, Judge Williams has adopted Ban the Box. 

I am not asking the others of you to take a position on what your 

state should do, but I am asking you whether or not you think Ban 

the Box legislation has been useful, or otherwise to explain to me 

why apparently, regardless of where the state has stood on other 

matters, it seems to be in line with other states that are far more 

liberal than it is on Ban the Box. I would be very interested in Mr. 

Stirling, Pastor Jahwar, and Mr. McGahan on that question. Would 

it be useful to consider Ban the Box in your state? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
116 

Mr. STIRLING. Governor Haley and Cheryl Stanton actually had 

a summit with a bunch of businesses, and we asked them to look 

at and hire people who were incarcerated. I do understand why 

some companies—and it is a frustration of mine when I go to companies and say will you hire these folks, and they say we do not, 

and I say just give them a chance because they are going to work 

hard. But I do understand why some companies cannot, for various 

reasons, if they work with financial services. 

So a blanket policy of banning the box, I think you would get 

people down a path and then they would find out that there was 

a record or there was a reason not to hire that person. So I think 

this is something that we encourage in South Carolina companies, 

just to look at hiring second-chance employees, and that is my role 

as a Department of Corrections director, to go out and find those. 

Those ladies sitting behind me, that is their role and their staff’s 

role, to find that. 

Ms. NORTON. I am glad you mentioned that there are some instances where you would not want to have such a person hired. But 

after you find out, Mr. Stirling, about the record, you can still 

refuse to hire. So there is no such thing as once you find it out and 

you do not hire, even though it has been 30 or 40 years ago I am 

still requiring you to hire, and the notion that you raise is very important about what your conviction was in. 

Mr. Chairman, if I may just hear the answers of the other two 

gentlemen, because I recognize I am over time. 

Pastor Jahwar? 

Pastor JAHWAR. Yes. In Texas, we have been dealing with that, 

and what we have found is that that legislation would help us even 

if we had to modify it somewhat, because I do recognize what Mr. 

Stirling was saying. But what we see more than that is that there 

are not enough tools to protect those who have reformed, that there 

is a reformation process, but the punitive process goes beyond them 

reforming. 

So a friend of mine would say that a full heart needs a full stomach and busy hands or they will return to the other behavior. So 

what I have always pushed from my local and state government is 

to figure out ways to eliminate the barriers, and that would be another tool. As many tools as we can have in our toolbox for me is 

important because that is where we are. We are at a state of emergency where those who are truly trying to do right are prevented 

by things that they have done in the past. 

Ms. NORTON. Mr. McGahan? 

Mr. MCGAHAN. In Georgia, Georgia has banned the box for state 

jobs, which is an executive order, and for occupational licenses. But 

Georgia Works! is based upon banning the entire application. We 

say to employers just let us show up with five or six guys, regardless of their past, see if you like them, let them get to work there, 

and they inevitably like them after a few months. 

So we put all the paperwork aside, say try out our men, and this 

is a pitch for our employment agency, you will like our guys, and 

then these guys will get hired full-time jobs, and then the application comes after they have started working there on a temporary 

basis. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
117 

So I am for banning the box, I am for banning the application 

and eliminating the barriers to employment. 

Ms. NORTON. That sounds very innovative. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman GOWDY. The gentle lady yields back. 

The gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. Massie. 

Mr. MASSIE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I am not an attorney or a lawyer or a judge, but I was in county 

government. It was county judge executive, sort of the county executive. My impressions of criminal justice reform were informed by 

my experience there as county executive where the jail was the biggest expense in the county and it does not create any revenue, and 

you see situations there that just do not make any sense, like a 

Gulf War veteran who is serving one year. We house state inmates 

as well in the county, in jail. The state pays to keep them there. 

A Gulf War veteran, decorated, serving a year for non-child support. Now, that is despicable, not to support your children, right? 

But how does that improve the situation? Now this man is a felon 

with a one-year sentence, virtually unemployable. 

Mr. McGahan, can you speak to that? 

Mr. MCGAHAN. Well, that is crazy, right? I mean, we have a guy 

who has not paid his child support, so he is put in jail, which he 

then further cannot pay his child support, which goes back to one 

of the points I wanted to make, which is, first of all, a Gulf War 

veteran has been through a lot, probably has an underlying issue 

which needs dealing with, probably has a substance abuse issue as 

he tries to self-medicate on top of that. So we need to get to the 

core problem to help that person so he can then get employment 

and then pay his past-due child support. So, that is the first point. 

The second one is past-due child support is onerous on low-earning humans, people, returning citizens. It is preventing them from 

getting payroll jobs. It is incenting them to do under-the-table 

work. It is incenting them to do criminal activity, because for a 

small portion of folks, they just cannot afford to pay for themselves 

because of these issues, these wage garnishments. 

Of course, we want people to pay—absent fathers, we want them 

to pay for their children, there is no question about it. But there 

is a portion which get behind, and then it becomes too big of a 

mountain for them to climb on their own, and we just have to— 

and we are incenting behavior that we do not want. The general 

problem is we have all these employers who have open jobs, and 

we have all these people who want to work at them, and we have 

these barriers in-between. We have to knock those barriers down. 

Mr. MASSIE. Ms. Norton sort of covered this, but what role does 

expungement play? 

Mr. MCGAHAN. Well, we have had some success with some folks 

to go back and get past-due child support eliminated, and we have 

thought a lot about this. For people who have younger children, we 

have had some success in getting it reduced, or the payments reduced, not the total amounts reduced, because we want those fathers to pay. But for some people who are 60 and their kids are 

long gone, they are grandparents, we are talking about mountains 

of past-due child support —— 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
118 

Mr. MASSIE. Well, let me just be clear, and I want to move on 

to another topic. I am not advocating non-support here. I am just 

saying sometimes we do things that compound the problem and 

cause the children never to receive any support if we cause the father to be unemployable. 

I want to move on very quickly. I am the lead Republican sponsor on a bill with Congressman Bobby Scott called the Justice Safety Valve Act, which would give judges more discretion in applying 

the sentencing. In other words, discretion to override the mandatory minimums across the board. 

It occurs to me listening to you, Judge Williams, that there is already sort of a safety valve in there that my colleagues here do not 

understand. It seems like every two or three months we pass another bill with a mandatory minimum in it, but they do not understand that the prosecutor has discretion as well and may choose 

not to prosecute that particular crime because that mandatory minimum is in there. 

So by putting a mandatory minimum in there, is it possible that 

sometimes we cause certain crimes not to get prosecuted? They 

might choose another one if they did not think the mandatory minimum was appropriate. Can you speak to that, Judge Williams? 

Judge WILLIAMS. Yes. That is why I mentioned that all points of 

the system where discretion is utilized, these should be reviewed. 

Certainly, the safety valve is one mechanism to undercut some of 

the harshness associated with mandatory minimum sentences. But 

in addition to that, I would just like to see an equalization of the 

discretion and the authority, both for prosecutors as well as for 

judges. 

You are right, Congressman, prosecutors have a way to get 

around even the safety valve by charging or making some other decisions on prosecution that, again, would lessen that impact. So I 

would just like to see, again, a review of all of that legislation, all 

of those policies, so there can be more of an equal distribution so 

that judges can take into consideration a few more factors to make 

sure that the appropriate sentences are handed down. 

Mr. MASSIE. Just in closing here, I just want to say one other 

crazy thing I saw at the county jail, state jail level. It is public perception. They feel good when they see inmates picking up trash on 

the side of the road. What they do not realize is they are not learning a vocation that is going to be transferrable back into society. 

So even though that may score points with the public officials to 

have the inmates out there picking up trash, we might be doing society a better favor to teach them or to have them do tasks where 

there are employable skills that are being picked up. 

Pastor, did you want to say something to that? 

Pastor JAHWAR. Yes, sir. I think you are hitting on a vital point, 

that the skill set that a person needs is not just what they can do 

with busy work but what they can do to further their societal advantage. What I tell some of these young men is that your characteristic has a marked advantage in the neighborhood that you 

are living in, but we need to help you transform your character. 

But they have skill sets that are beyond being at the bottom rung. 

One of the things I say to investors is do not ask these young 

men and young ladies how to be workers. Ask them do they want 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
119 

to grow up to be an employer, what is the best way not to have 

the minimum qualification, because they do not have a lack of understanding, a lack of brilliance. A lot of times it is the lack of environmental support to get them where they are going. So, I totally 

agree with you. 

Mr. MASSIE. Thank you. I see my time has expired. 

Chairman GOWDY. The gentleman from Kentucky yields back. 

The gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Clay, is recognized. 

Mr. CLAY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before I get into the questioning, let me compliment you for holding this hearing, for inviting 

this great witness panel, as well as the two previous witnesses. All 

of them have given voice to the circumstances, and they have also 

stressed access to opportunity. So I appreciate this hearing, and 

also to the ranking member. 

According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration, more than half of all state prison inmates are reincarcerated within three years of release. About two-thirds of the 

estimated 600,000 new incarcerations annually are people who 

have failed on probation or parole. A 2012 report from the Council 

of State Governments Justice Center also found 53 percent of state 

prisoners and 46 percent of Federal prisoners in the year prior to 

their arrest met the DSM–IV criteria for substance dependence or 

abuse. 

Judge Williams, in your experience, can untreated substance 

abuse disorders contribute to individuals failing to meet the requirements of their probation or parole? 

Judge WILLIAMS. Yes. In the Federal system we call it supervised 

release. But let me say this, Congressman. I absolutely agree with 

you, the failure to provide adequate mental treatment and counseling while incarcerated, and even when they are released, contributes in a mighty way to recidivism. 

I headed the task force in Maryland studying that issue, and 

there was a lot of testimony from stakeholders and people who had 

been out saying that there is a lot of stress and buildup of mental 

anxiety associated with people incarcerated, and they did not think 

that enough was being done in the prison to address that issue so 

that they could handle their release once they came out. So I agree 

with you. 

Mr. CLAY. Thank you. And let me ask Mr. Stirling, do prisons 

and jails face challenges in effectively treating inmates suffering 

from substance abuse disorders? 

Mr. STIRLING. Yes, sir. When I took over, I took over on October 

1st, 2013, in January of that year Circuit Court Judge Baxley in 

South Carolina issued a 46-page order of how the mentally ill were 

being treated at the Department of Corrections. It was a decadeold lawsuit by P&A, and one of the first things I did was I wrote 

a letter to P&A and I said please sit down with me as a practicing 

attorney. I knew the benefit of mediation. So we sat down. We had 

a retired judge mediate it, and we settled that matter in January. 

But treating folks with mental health issues while incarcerated 

is extremely difficult. It is extremely difficult to find a vacancy rate 

for mental health professionals. We have one psychiatrist, and 

when St. Peter meets her, she is going straight into heaven because she has been on call for almost a decade. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
120 

We are doing what we can with what we have, but hiring people—South Carolina does not have a lot of mental health professionals, and on another committee we are working on that. But 

treating people that are incarcerated with mental health issues and 

getting the proper staffing is very difficult. On top of that, a lot of 

corrections facilities across the country, mainly in the southeastern 

states, have high rates of vacancies for their officers. So if you have 

officer vacancy rates, you have lockdowns, which exacerbates the 

problem. They cannot get treatment, they cannot get into group. 

We are in the early stages of trying to fix that, but it makes it 

very, very difficult to treat these folks. 

One last thing, and I know your time is quick. One thing we are 

doing is we partner with our drug agency. A lot of people who are 

addicted to opioids are starting to come into our prisons. So we are 

starting a program in August where we are going to give them a 

pill, and then we are going to give them shots on the way out that 

will be an opioid blocker, and we are doing this with about 10, and 

we are going to follow them for a time to see how they do. If it is 

successful, we will expand that program. 

Mr. CLAY. So the opioid epidemic is affecting recidivism rates. 

Mr. STIRLING. Well, it is so new to South Carolina. I would say 

drug addiction does affect, but opioids are starting to come into the 

state. It is not as much as some other states, but we are starting 

to see it, and I am trying to get ahead of it. It is not like some of 

the other states, like West Virginia and like that. 

Mr. CLAY. Mr. McGahan, are you seeing this? 

Mr. MCGAHAN. Not in inner-city Atlanta, no. We are still dealing 

with alcohol, marijuana, and crack. 

Mr. CLAY. I see. 

Mr. Chairman, my time is up. I yield back. 

Chairman GOWDY. The gentleman from Missouri yields back. 

The gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Walker, is recognized. 

Mr. WALKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate being here 

on your very first day as chairman. I appreciate also your work in 

partnering with us and Senator Tim Scott and working with 

chancellors throughout the historically black colleges and universities, and even talking about some of these issues with those wonderful people. 

Let me first commend Pastor Jahwar for honoring your son. As 

a former pastor and pastor’s son, I respect that. I am sure it is reciprocal in many cases, or at least eventually got there if you are 

like most pastor’s kids. But I do appreciate that. I appreciate your 

calling. I appreciate what you are trying to do here. I think it is 

incredibly important. 

There is a lot of talk in this area these days, and I have often 

thought how much of that actually comes or is able to formulate 

into some kind of substance where we are seeing results. We are 

always talking about awareness, and it is good in some ways, but 

how do we translate that to the action steps? I have often thought 

that in many cases this has to start with relationships, and I am 

not talking about pandering stuff or knowing the talking points. I 

am talking about getting involved in these communities and showing up, sitting in the back row sometimes even when you are not 

the featured speaker, to be able to engage. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
121 

We have done some work over the years in the inner cities in 

places like Cleveland and New York and Baltimore, and I will 

never forget, certainly not anytime soon, the gentleman we were 

working with and his family there in Cleveland when we said what 

is it that we can bring, and he said if you will bring hope, he said 

bring hope. 

And I see many times that we have lost the hope, and these 

young men and women, sometimes they have never seen hope before. And I wonder, with all the great policies and programs, we 

cannot just force a template in different communities and societies 

without adding hope in the relationship component to that. And I 

challenge myself, and I am grateful for the different people that are 

here today because I heard a little bit of that element in all of that. 

My question today for you, Pastor, and maybe some others, is 

when it comes to education, how crucial of a role does education 

play in this process when it comes to the reentry component? 

Pastor JAHWAR. Well, thank you. I believe that education’s role 

is important in this sense. I believe it goes back to what you said 

initially. It is relational education. It is not just what they learn, 

it is what they retain, and they retain it from mentors and coaches. 

I had a man who had 1,000 years. He had a 1,000-year sentence 

for a crime he did not commit, Harold Hill. He got released. He 

said to me, he said, man, the strong rule the weak, but the wise 

rule them all. He was a very thin man, and he said when I came 

into prison I had to figure out what it is I could learn, not who it 

is I could intimidate. And when he came out of prison, his whole 

platform was how do I become educated enough to show these 

other young men that they do not have to do what I did, they do 

not have to go through what I went through. 

So I believe education in its purest form, a high school diploma, 

is absolutely necessary. But there is a relevant education that 

comes through relationship that teaches one and reaches one, and 

as a pastor I have said it is a discipleship. It is how do you disciple 

that person through an environment that is known to destroy you. 

Mr. WALKER. Yes. It has to be a genuine investment instead of 

just something out of a book, in my opinion here. 

I may have the other guys weigh in, but I want to get to something else, something that is not in the notes that I want to talk 

about just for a second. 

We are always talking about educating these men and women 

who are reentering society. What I do not hear talked about sometimes is educating those who are working with these individuals, 

and let me give you an example. 

Recently I had a pastors breakfast there in North Carolina, representing 50 or 60 pastors there, and I just boldly asked them, I 

said how many times in the last six months have you used the terminology ‘‘second chance’’ or just criminal justice in general? I had 

two raise their hands. 

So when we talk about education, it is important that we find 

that skill set to reenter society, but how important is it for those 

who are community and society leaders when we are talking about 

these policies when it comes to the education of those providing it? 

I want to start with Mr. McGahan, and also the pastor can weigh 

back in as well. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
122 

Mr. MCGAHAN. Sir, I think it is very important. I think just having this hearing is incredible because it makes people realize, first 

of all, that we have a big problem of many people that are coming, 

reentering society from prison; and secondly that we should welcome those folks with open arms back to our communities once 

they have paid their price. People make mistakes and they can 

change and they can move on from there, and I think that is an 

important thing for all of us to talk about. 

Pastor JAHWAR. And you made a statement about those who 

serve. The most profound thing that I found is those who are serving normally are the most tired, the most frustrated and agitated 

with the population, and it is normally because they are behind the 

curve. So they are learning, and their learning is from bad experience. So, absolutely, we need to do as much training, opening people’s minds up to a different way because there is one idea, and if 

that one idea is not producing—normally we would just double 

down on that idea regardless of whether it is producing results or 

not. 

Mr. WALKER. Thank you, Pastor. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman GOWDY. The gentleman from North Carolina yields 

back. 

I will tell my colleagues they are expecting votes around 4 

o’clock. So if we assiduously adhere to the 5 minutes, we maybe 

can get everybody in before we go vote. 

With that, my friend from Massachusetts, Mr. Lynch. 

Mr. LYNCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and your congratulations 

to you on your new appointment. It will be good to be working with 

you. 

I do have a matter of some interest on just procedural aspects 

of the work of this committee before I ask our panelists some questions. It has been a matter of longstanding constitutional precedent 

that Congress, and specifically this committee, is empowered to investigate matters within its jurisdiction to see that the laws are 

faithfully executed, and I think it is beyond argument that foreign 

interference with a democratic election is an appropriate, if not 

compelling, area of inquiry for this committee. 

Also, given the history of congressional inquiry, from the struggle 

for civil rights to the Vietnam War and to the Nixon impeachment, 

the current refusal of this committee to take up the reports of our 

intelligence agencies, including the NSA, CIA, and FBI, who all report with high confidence that our elections were hacked, I think 

our refusal to investigate is not only disappointing but perhaps 

shameful. 

I, however, remain hopeful that with your leadership, Mr. Chairman, and with Ranking Member Cummings’ leadership as well, 

that we can look back and at some point take up this issue of foreign interference with democratic elections within this committee. 

If there is any issue out there that is beyond Democrat, beyond Republican, beyond Independent, it is whether or not we enjoy full integrity in our electoral process here in the United States. I think 

that is important to all Americans, and I hope at some point we 

can do it in a non-political way. Forget about the last election. Mr. 

Trump won. But we are going to have another election, and we 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
123 

want to make sure that we are able to protect the integrity and the 

results of that upcoming election. Democrats, Republicans, Independents, we all have an intense interest in the legitimacy of that 

outcome. 

Turning now to our panelists, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank 

you for your wisdom in selecting this group. They have been absolutely fantastic today. I have had a chance to meet with a lot of 

my prison officials. And, Mr. Stirling, my warm regards to your 

family in my district. 

In my district and across the State of Massachusetts, I would say 

on average 80 to 90 percent of my inmates are dually addicted, so 

alcohol and drug addiction, and that is high. I realize that is high. 

I know what the national numbers are, but it is high. 

We are struggling. We are struggling in Massachusetts with how 

to deal with OxyContin and all these opioids. I hear some great 

things in Georgia and in South Carolina. I am just wondering—so, 

suboxone, buprenorphine, vivitrol—what are you using to try to 

help your folks so that when they come out, they at least have— 

and this is a big thing, not ‘‘at least’’—they have that drug addiction under control, because that really, I think, dictates their resistance to recidivism. That really gets them squared away so that 

the drug courts, which I was a big supporter of when I was in the 

state legislature, and I still am—we have veterans courts as well, 

that you are doing as well. But we really have to get the drug 

issue, we have to get them clean and in a good place so we can 

work on the other problems, and I just want to hear about your 

own experience in South Carolina and in Georgia, if I could. 

Mr. STIRLING. For some folks who have drug addictions, that is 

why drug courts are so good. Chairman Gowdy knows this, but the 

prisons have drugs in them. You can get what you want in prison 

because of contraband. Everybody probably at this table knows 

this. Everybody who has ever been in a prison knows that. So not 

sending some of these folks to prison is a better way, and sending 

them to treatment. 

In South Carolina, because of costs, we give them five days of 

medicine and a 30-day prescription. What we are doing in South 

Carolina is we are hooking them up with services as they go out 

the door. 

The best thing we can do, to answer your question, is have a job 

with benefits, mental health benefits, health care, things of that 

nature. Short of that, though, what we do with SC Thrive is, if they 

are a veteran, we hook them up with the Veterans Administration. 

If they have other things that we can hook them up with, we do. 

This new program—and I am not a pharmacist or a doctor, but 

naproxen I think is the name of it, the shot that we are doing. The 

pill that you take every day, you can forget. So we are going to give 

them a pill, see their reaction, and then we are going to give them 

a shot out the door, and then our drug agency is going to work with 

them and follow them and give them a shot every six months. And 

from what I am told—and we did have some resistance internally— 

we made the decision that we were going to do it because a lot of 

people did not like long-acting injectables. So we are going to follow 

these people and if it works, we are going to keep on doing it. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
124 

Again, hooking them up with free clinics, things of that nature, 

trying to find the medication that they need. But the biggest thing 

is a job with benefits and a future and, as the Congressman from 

North Carolina said, hope and a connection with family, and positive reinforcement while they are out. Maybe it is not good to go 

back into your neighborhood of maybe Charlestown or maybe 

South—maybe you should move to a different area, because where 

you are, the influences are not good and you are going to slide back 

into that. Maybe move across the country, things of that nature. So 

we try to set them up for success and not set them up for failure. 

And if I might, just real quick, one of the things I did when I 

first took over is I went to see how we release people from our prison near the University of South Carolina. We dropped them off in 

a van, and I saw what happened there. Some of the folks were 

dropped off in their prison tans without the prison stripe, so now 

we have clothes closets. No one leaves with prison tans anymore. 

We had to hire a law enforcement officer because the drug dealers and some of the women of the night were there to get these 

people and put their hooks back into them. So we had to hire the 

Sheriff’s Department to be there to run those folks off. They did not 

have a chance when they got off that bus. 

We also, lastly, if you are picked up by a family member, you get 

to leave on the first day possible. If you are not, you are going to 

take the bus, you are going to put yourself back in that environment, we have you wait a couple of days. Well, everybody is getting 

picked up by a family member. 

Some things we were doing were not making sense, and we are 

trying to look at it, use evidence-based practices to get them to the 

right treatment. Again, a job with benefits is the best thing that 

they can have. 

Mr. LYNCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank you for your 

courtesy. I appreciate it. 

Chairman GOWDY. The gentleman from Massachusetts yields 

back. 

The gentleman from Tennessee, Judge Duncan, is recognized. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and 

thank you for picking this topic to hold your first hearing because 

I think it is very important. I am sorry I had a big group of constituents and also had an opportunity to speak on the floor on a 

bill that I was interested in. 

I was a judge for seven-and-a-half years before I came to Congress trying criminal cases in Tennessee, and I have never forgotten the first day I was judge Gary Telic, who was the main probation counselor for 16 counties in East Tennessee, he told me, he 

said 98 percent of the defendants and felony cases came from broken homes. Well, it was not exactly accurate. What was more accurate was—and I do not believe it was 98 percent, but I went 

through over 10,000 cases in the seven-and-a-half years I was there 

because, as most of you know, 98 or 99 percent of the people plead 

guilty and apply for probation. 

So every single day for seven-and-a-half years, I read over and 

over and over and over again, defendant’s father left home when 

defendant was 2 and never returned, defendant’s father left home 

to get a pack of cigarettes and never came back. Well, it makes an 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
125 

impression on you. And I can tell you I remember several years ago 

when I was still in Congress, one Friday afternoon I missed the direct flight out of National Airport and I had to drive to Dulles Airport one Friday afternoon, and the 3:00 national news came on. 

There had been a school shooting by some 14-year-old boy or something, and they had the national head of the YMCA on the radio, 

and he said children are being neglected in this country like never 

before. 

And I thought, boy, how sad it was to say something like that. 

But somehow or another, we have got to get out that, especially 

young boys cannot raise themselves. I read that 80 or 85 percent 

of the babies that are being born in some of our biggest cities are 

born out of wedlock. I know that drugs and alcohol are involved in 

most of these cases, but they all seem to be secondary to that father-absent household. I think I could go to any 4th grade class or 

6th grade class in an elementary school in this country, and if I 

found out the family situation of these kids, I could tell you which 

ones were most likely to get into trouble. And every time I read 

about one of these boys pursuing one of these mass shootings in 

someplace, like in Connecticut or this one I mentioned, which I 

think was in Oregon, or all over, you read about those kids and 

they come from dysfunctional families. 

So I think we need to do all kinds of things. I think we need to 

get more males teaching in the elementary schools, because so 

many boys are growing up without a good male role model. I would 

like to see more boys get into Boy Scouts. 

This is a national crisis, and it is the root of our crime problem, 

in my opinion. It seems to me there are just a lot of things that 

we need to do. 

I started when I was judge a program called—I called it Court 

Counselors, and I got the churches involved, and I got them to do 

it on a volunteer basis. I said most of these young men, they have 

almost never sat down with a family to have supper. I said if you 

just have once a month, or more often if you can do it, but at least 

once a month, have them to your house to have supper with the 

family. It is really sad what I am seeing. 

And then we need to separate these non-violent people away 

from the violent people in these prisons. 

But I am supporting some of these efforts on some of these criminal justice reform bills, and I sure hope we can move on that. I just 

wanted to say a few things like that, Mr. Chairman. I will work 

with you any way that I can on this because it is a subject of great 

interest to me. 

Chairman GOWDY. I thank the gentleman from Tennessee. Not 

only is it a great subject of interest, you are also an expert in the 

field and we appreciate your perspective. 

The gentle lady from Michigan, Ms. Lawrence, is recognized. 

Ms. LAWRENCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, too, join my colleagues in congratulating you in your position of leadership and 

look forward to working with you. 

I have consistently said that in America, I still believe in the 

American Dream, that ladder to success. That first wrung is education. If you do not educate a child, how can you expect them to 

climb the ladder of success or opportunities in America? If you do 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
126 

that, you are limiting that child’s success, and prison, unfortunately, is one of the limited choices they have. 

A 2013 RAM report stated that inmates who participate in correctional educational programs, correctional programs, have a 43 

percent lower odds of reentering prison than those who do not. 

So, Judge Williams, have you seen efforts to educate prisoners 

increase proportionately to the massive growth in the prison population? Have you seen an impact? 

Judge WILLIAMS. Let me say I certainly agree with you that education is the key, and also dysfunctional families that the Congressman talked about. Certainly all of that contributes to criminal 

activity and behavior. 

But I want to go back to something that you said. The failure to 

have access to appropriate education is the key. 

Ms. LAWRENCE. Yes. 

Judge WILLIAMS. There are a number of youngsters in schools 

who are not being taught properly. They have lost interest, and 

sometimes the school system is responsible for what results in 

them getting involved in criminal behavior later. 

Now, in terms of the prison, in my state, of course, not enough 

across the years has been given by way of funding for enough programs to educate and prepare inmates for the new types of jobs 

that are out here in the world. So that is something that has to 

be a focus, and I certainly agree with you that education is the key, 

and training. 

Ms. LAWRENCE. Well, I just want to take a few minutes to compliment the governor that, sitting right here in this chair, I have 

not had very good things to say, but my governor in Michigan has 

taken skill trades, which he and I partner on, and he has started 

a virtual welding program in prison. If you are eligible for a nonviolent probation from prison—and there are job offers being offered to the prisoner before they even leave. Can you think of the 

opportunity of a person who has been incarcerated that is guaranteed a job, that has a skill, that you know for a lifetime will be able 

to work? Those type of programs are game changers, and we need 

to step up. 

Mr. Chairman, I am telling you, we can make a difference in 

America with stopping this industry of private prisons, because the 

only way that they are profitable, they have to fill the cells. But 

if we get into the proactive mode of finding ways to stop it, we can 

make a difference. 

I have one question for Mr. Stirling. In your written testimony 

you indicated that under the Second Chance initiative Northwestern College was selected as a pilot site where Pell Grants 

would be available to offenders. Can you explain how it works, and 

is it working, and what are the benefits of that, and have we expanded beyond the pilot? 

Mr. STIRLING. Sure. So, we have not expanded beyond the pilot 

because it is fairly new. What we did is we picked a character dorm 

where the offenders live amongst themselves. They are held accountable by themselves. Just recently I received an email from 

Sandy sitting behind me that 10 of the folks that are in that program were either on the Dean’s List or the President’s List. 

Ms. LAWRENCE. Wow. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
127 

Mr. STIRLING. So, that is great. If I can briefly go back, in South 

Carolina we are teaching welding. Somebody just donated forklifts 

because warehousing is big in South Carolina. So they are going 

to learn and get their certification in forklifts, brick mason, things 

of that nature, plumbing. We teach and do all that stuff for people 

that are leaving and people that are there so we know when they 

leave they will be prepared. As a plumber, they will make twice as 

much as a lawyer would make by the hour. 

Ms. LAWRENCE. Exactly. This is where we need to move as a 

country. If we say you are going to do your time and pay for the 

crime that you commit, we should be committed to ensuring that 

this person does not return. If they commit the crime, yes, they 

should return. But how can you expect someone who knows how to 

be a criminal—they have proven it because they have been arrested and tried. They know how to commit crime. But if you really 

say the correctional system is to reform and to release a person 

back into society that will not be a prisoner anymore, then we have 

some responsibility. 

I yield back my time, and thank you, thank you for having this 

hearing. 

Chairman GOWDY. Yes, ma’am. The gentle lady yields back. 

I will now recognize the gentle lady from New York. I would tell 

my friend from New York, I think they are going to call votes in 

a couple of minutes. I am going to try to get my friend from Florida 

and my friend from the Virgin Islands in before I go so they can 

all go and I will be late for votes and not you all. 

So, with that, you are recognized. 

Ms. MALONEY. First of all, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and congratulations on your appointment. 

And to the panelists, I have been listening in the back room and 

listening here too, and many of you bring a lot of experience on an 

incredibly important issue. 

Judge Williams, you recently chaired a working group convened 

by the Republican governor of Maryland, Larry Hogan, to examine 

the collateral consequences of imprisonment and criminal convictions. The working group issued its final report in December, and 

according to the report, and I quote, ‘‘The American Bar Association’s National Inventory of the Collateral Consequences of Convictions has cataloged more than 38,000 collateral consequences of 

criminal convictions, which include denial from public housing and 

public assistance, deportation, disenfranchisement, licensing or employment restrictions in a variety of occupations.’’ 

Judge Williams, can you discuss how collateral consequences affect returning citizens’ ability to provide for themselves and their 

families? 

Judge WILLIAMS. Certainly there have been a lot of studies 

around the country on the collateral consequences affecting persons 

returning back to the community. But there are a number of barriers imposed on individuals who are returning such as, again, trying to get licenses and other vocations to get involved in. In my 

state, my report focused on people who were embalmers and people 

who were pest controllers who needed to disclose their record in 

order to get a license, so that has been a problem. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
128 

Of course, there has been discrimination against persons trying 

to get adequate housing. They have not been able to get Pell 

Grants, and there are a number of employers around who are simply afraid of hiring a person for fear of litigation and other kinds 

of things against them. 

We can certainly talk about voting rights. They have also been 

denied civil rights associated with that. 

So there are a host of collateral consequences imposed on people 

with records, and my position has always been that we can promote less recidivism if we come up with programs that are going 

to assist persons to make an adequate transition back to the community. 

Ms. MALONEY. You have done this work on these current blanket 

bans. Would waiting 10, 20, even 30 years from the time of conviction, or even of release, to apply for a professional license or permit 

be long enough to make an ex-offender eligible for employment in 

these categories? 

Judge WILLIAMS. What is the question? 

Ms. MALONEY. They have these blanket bans where they ban 

them —— 

Judge WILLIAMS. Yes. Those are permanent. 

Ms. MALONEY. They are absolutely permanent. 

Judge WILLIAMS. Absolutely —— 

Ms. MALONEY. So you could be out 30 years and be a good person 

and have a record of good work, and you still are blanket banned. 

Judge WILLIAMS. Absolutely, and the good news is that our state, 

of course, we think we are progressive, but this task force has dealt 

with that and encouraged the General Assembly, the state General 

Assembly to look at those blanket bans and permanent disallowance to see if they can do something about that. But that is one 

of our recommendations that came out of that task force report. 

Ms. MALONEY. Yes, that is an important one. 

Now, could you also talk about the rights restoration certificates? 

Explain how these work and how can they help ex-offenders stay 

out of prison. 

Judge WILLIAMS. Yes. One of our recommendations was to have 

a group and an entity assess the progress that returning citizens 

are making. Once our organization or our entity or this department 

issues a certification that they are making progress, that the likelihood of them perpetrating another crime is excellent, then they get 

the issuance of a certificate which will be in the hands of employers 

and that would probably likely cause them to hire them. 

Ms. MALONEY. Well, I think all of your testimony, your ideas are 

good ones. I think we should look at them. I know that this was 

a top concern of Ranking Member Cummings. I just talked to him 

on the phone and he was so interested to hear what is happening 

in the committee, but also President Obama did a lot of work and 

studies on prison reform, and I want to thank you for what you are 

doing. I think it is tremendously important. We have to help people, once they get out, stay out, and you certainly cannot help them 

if you are banning them from all types of employment. 

What was your recommendation on voting? I mean, they take 

away the voting rights, too. Were you recommending that people be 

able to vote? 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
129 

Judge WILLIAMS. Well, we had not addressed that yet. That is in, 

hopefully, a Phase II. 

Ms. MALONEY. That is Phase II. Okay. 

My time has expired. 

Judge WILLIAMS. This was mostly vocational and occupational licensing. 

Ms. MALONEY. Okay. Well, my time has expired. Thank you. 

Chairman GOWDY. The gentle lady from New York yields back. 

WE have a prosecutor and a former police chief left. You all are 

used to working together. I will let you continue to work together, 

and you can apportion time however you want. I am going to go 

last. I think they are about to call votes. 

Ms. Plaskett, I think you are technically up first, but you all can 

do what you want with the time. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Thank you. I will be very mindful of the time. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, witnesses, for being here. 

In 2013, former Attorney General Holder issued a memo to Federal prosecutors urging them to ensure that our most severe mandatory minimum penalties are reserved for serious high-level of 

violent drug traffickers. The Holder Memo, as it was called, was 

guidance that in cases involving applicable Title 21 gave prosecutors discretion to make a, quote, ‘‘individualized assessment and 

fairly represent the defendant’s criminal conduct.’’ 

Judge Williams, I am so glad to have you here. What improvements did Attorney General Holder’s charging policy make in the 

criminal justice system? 

Judge WILLIAMS. Certainly once that edict came down, the Federal prosecutors in my jurisdiction had a little more authority to 

offer pleas that did not involve mandatory minimum sentences. So 

everyone essentially was pleased with that. I do not have any statistics before me, but I know that the severity of penalties and the 

long sentences were decreased with that edict. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Thank you. On May 10th of this year, Attorney 

General Sessions rescinded that policy and issued a memorandum 

that directed all Federal prosecutors to charge and pursue, quote, 

‘‘the most serious offenses that carry the most substantial guideline 

sentence, including mandatory minimum sentences.’’ 

Judge Williams, in your experience, why is charging the most serious offense not always the most effective way to deter crime? 

Judge WILLIAMS. Yes. Again, I think that is misguided and is 

just not appropriate in every case to direct prosecutors to charge 

the most serious offenses. Again, every case is different, and there 

ought to be an easing of that philosophy, and I just disagree with 

whatever that edict is. 

Ms. PLASKETT. Thank you. You know, I as well have been a prosecutor at a local level in the Bronx District Attorney’s Office in 

New York City, and then at main Justice, working at the Justice 

Department, and it is my belief that this memo sends a chilling effect on our justice system both at a prosecutor’s level, to make 

prosecutors go after the most serious charge, but also sends a message to policing as well in terms of criminals and how police are 

going to be handling the individuals that they encounter on the 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
130 

street and what the message is from the highest level of law enforcement. 

I talked with our chairman quite often about the fact that being 

a prosecutor was, to me, one of the most wonderful jobs that I had. 

It was a dream of mine. I come from a long line of law enforcement 

officers. My grandfather, my father were police officers, uncles, and 

I had to leave that job because I got tired of every day looking 

across the courtroom and seeing what looked like myself, seeing my 

sons, in essence, every day, and having to issue some of the most 

harsh charges on the people that I now represent, people that look 

like myself, people with names like John and Russ and Edmond, 

names that families have given their sons because they believe in 

them, names that I have given my own sons. 

I have four sons, and every day things like this from Jeff Sessions is really an indictment against my own sons, and I take that 

as a charge against them and those who look like them that says 

to scoop them up and put them away, and that is the way we are 

going to deal with individuals who look like that. 

I am really grateful that we are having this discussion. I am 

thankful that my colleagues across the aisle were willing to listen, 

to come up with solutions, not just for what happens in prison but 

before that. It is not just criminals that are scooped up. Many of 

us who have young black men as children, we give them—and I am 

going to use this term—they are going to get their Negro wake-up 

call, because as much education as they have, whatever they look 

like, as much middle-class as their families look like, they can be 

scooped up by the police just because of what they look like, and 

it has happened to all of us at one point or another. 

So I yield back the balance of my time, and I thank you, Mr. 

Chairman, for allowing us to have these discussions. 

Chairman GOWDY. The gentle lady from the Virgin Islands yields 

back. 

The gentle lady from Florida is recognized. 

Ms. DEMMINGS. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and congratulations to you. 

And thank you to all of our witnesses, and thank you for the outstanding work that you are doing. 

I spent 30 years in law enforcement, and I will be one of the first 

to say that the criminal justice system, like other systems, definitely needs to be improved. But I also know from my own personal 

experiences that many times we ask the criminal justice system to 

do too much. We ask prisons and jails and even law enforcement 

to deal with issues that they were never designed to deal with, 

even though there are an array of issues that fall in that category. 

Mental health is certainly one of them. 

The Urban Institute did a study and found that 45 percent of 

Federal prisoners, 64 percent of jail inmates, and 56 percent of 

state prisoners have mental health problems. There was a sheriff 

of Marion County, Indiana, who raised the issue during a meeting 

with President Trump recently, and he said this, and I quote: 

‘‘There are people with mental illness who, for lack of a better 

term, are warehoused in our jails across America because we do 

not have the facilities necessary to take care of them.’’ That is a 

sad statement. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
131 

We also know that studies show that ex-offenders who are homeless are seven times more likely to re-offend. 

The bipartisan 21st Century CURES Act enabled during the last 

Congress reauthorized the Adult and Juvenile Collaboration Program and authorized $50 million annually through Fiscal Year 

2021. The Act also expanded authorized activities under this program, including allowing grants to be used to provide a broad array 

of services to incarcerated individuals, including crisis response. 

However, this program has not been funded at authorized levels 

in recent years, and President Trump’s budget continues that trend 

by requesting only $10 million for this program. 

Judge Williams, I would like to start with you. I know we have 

talked about a lot of things and you may have already talked about 

it, but what are some of the ramifications that you see as it pertains to recidivism and other issues when programs like this or 

funding like this is cut that so help to uplift those who have been 

incarcerated? And anybody else that would like to respond as well. 

Thank you. 

Judge WILLIAMS. I will just start off by saying cutting these programs is certainly not helpful for the entire idea of reducing massive incarceration. There are just a number of different factors that 

you have to take into consideration, the poverty, the family dysfunction, lack of access to appropriate education, and even the environment. All of those things need to be addressed, and I think 

proper funding would certainly help. 

I want to say one other thing. We all are getting concerned about 

the increased indictment of law enforcement officers around the 

country right now, and that is a real problem for persons like myself who have been prosecutors because in arguing to juries, we 

want to make sure we have people with integrity, and that lack of 

credibility is becoming a problem. So it is going to invest itself in 

the criminal justice system. That is a problem also that we really 

have not addressed adequately. 

Ms. DEMMINGS. Thank you. 

Any others? 

Mr. STIRLING. One thing I would like to talk about that we use 

through the Department of Justice is training our officers CIT, crisis intervention, how to deescalate a situation. When the mental 

health case came out and we started training officers, I think we 

have, I am going to guess, around 200 to 300 officers who can then 

take over a situation, even if they are not the highest ranking officer, and they know how to interact. It is a 40-hour class. We put 

a placard on them, and they are the folks who come in and help 

deescalate a situation. In the first weekend we talked an offender 

out of swallowing a razor blade. The officer went home safe, and 

that offender went and got mental health treatment and is alive 

today. That would have been a great cost to the state, and that officer could have been imperiled. 

So the CIT training is great. I have not read the budget, so I do 

not know about that, but this was a program that was offered to 

us, and we took advantage of it. 

Ms. DEMMINGS. Thank you. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman GOWDY. The gentle lady from Florida yields back. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
132 

The Chair will now recognize himself. 

Bryan, I have told you on countless occasions you have the hardest job in all of law enforcement in South Carolina, and you do it 

so well. One thing I am so happy about today is you and your copanelists are getting credit for trying to solve very, very difficult 

challenges. 

You also were a prosecutor in a former life, and it strikes me— 

you tell me if I am wrong—it is tough to get a conviction, especially 

a jury trial, beyond a reasonable doubt. Twelve folks, hard to get 

them to agree. So what happens sometimes is you will take a plea 

to probation because it is so much easier to revoke probation in 

front of a judge later on. You get the same result. You go to the 

Department of Corrections. You just get to bypass the difficulty of 

a jury trial. 

How do you see most of the probation revocations coming in to 

the SEDOC, and what can we do at that stage to kind of limit the 

in-flow into your facilities? 

Mr. STIRLING. Sure. So, one of the things that came from the legislation, the sentencing reform oversight, was how people were revoked, and that is one of the reasons that, number one, we are not 

sending as many people to prison, but we are also not revoking for 

technical violations. 

I spoke with Jerry Adger, who used to be my Inspector General 

of the police force. He was a former SLED agent, South Carolina 

Law Enforcement Division, and during his testimony last year he 

said we would go tell someone they had to pay their fees or you 

are going to jail, and if they could not pay their fees, guess what? 

We were furthering criminal activity, because they would go find 

the money another way. 

So we work with them and find ways to work out the fees that 

they have to pay, and sometimes if we have to waive the fees so 

we do not send someone back to prison, that is what we do. But 

they try to do everything they can to avoid sending folks back to 

prison. 

With our youthful offender program, the one that used to be 50 

percent recidivism, now it is 22 percent, we have graduated responses. We can put an ankle bracelet on. We can do more checks. 

We can say you cannot go to this area. We can say you have to get 

a job, or we can bring them back for a time and then they leave, 

and we are seeing the success of that also. 

Chairman GOWDY. Something was touched upon, I think it was 

Mark Walker from North Carolina, which is the perception of the 

broader public of criminal justice reform in general. I do not think 

you and I are going to be accused of being soft on crime, and we 

talk about it, given what we did in previous lives. But there is a 

perception, and sometimes, because we live in a culture that is 

kind of dominated by episodes, you can have 90 percent of the people successfully part of a program, but that one episode where 

there is a recidivist or another crime committed tends to impact 

public perception. 

So what would you say to our fellow South Carolinians as a 

former prosecutor who is not soft on crime how not to be swayed 

by episodes of failure but to go ahead and pursue both the diversion programs on the front end—I am sure you had a tough time 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
133 

explaining to the victims of crime why someone was out on bond, 

particularly if they had a bunch of charges pending. 

So what would you say to the broader public about why it is still 

worth pursuing diversion programs, reentry programs, criminal 

justice reform, despite the fact that we are going to have episodic 

failures? 

Mr. STIRLING. Well, as a grandson and a great-grandson of a police officer, and as a victim of a crime by someone who was out on 

bond and had been convicted before who broke into my house, I too 

understand being a victim, but it is balancing. In South Carolina, 

a very fiscally conservative state, saving those tax dollars and seeing the recidivism rate go down, not spending the $20,000 a year, 

and also the public safety—our crime rate is down, and I think it 

is because of what we are doing. I think it is also because of employment, 4.1 percent employment. It is a magic bullet. When 

someone is working and participating in society, as they are doing 

in Georgia and other states, I think that works. 

Education. Tenth grade is the average education level of folks 

that come to the Department of Corrections. So getting an education, and maybe it is not college. Maybe it is a technical school, 

and you can start a job, and you can start a business, and you can 

grow it from there. I just had my air conditioner replaced. I know 

how much an AC repairman makes. I mean, it is a substantial living. 

Chairman GOWDY. This is my last question, and then we will go 

to the gentleman from Wisconsin. 

There has been some discussion with, I know, Senator Booker, 

Senator Johnson from the great State of Wisconsin. It is bipartisan, 

what some people refer to as Ban the Box. There is, Judge—I think 

you will appreciate this—there is a body of research that it actually, at least in one study, had a disparate effect on the very group 

that we are seeking to help. And even if that one study is an anomaly, I am a little bit concerned that some of the Ban the Box legislation does not have relief for negligent hiring. That is still a civil 

cause of action that you can pursue against someone for negligent 

hiring if they fail to ask. 

So it is not really a question as much as particularly, Your 

Honor, you are an academic now, in addition to being a jurist. If 

any of the four of you have ideas on how to both solve that negligent hiring aspect and also deal with that one study out there 

that says that it really has a disparate impact on communities of 

color despite the fact that that is the opposite intent from what the 

legislation is, well-intentioned but still hurting the cause is not 

good. 

Yes, sir? 

Mr. STIRLING. I can give you a quick question. We have a need 

for truck drivers in South Carolina, and I have had conversations 

with many truck drivers and many folks that were defense attorneys in the insurance industry, and one of the things that will 

come into court is if you are driving a truck and you hit someone, 

your record is going to be used against you. I have had conversations with legislators saying if it was not a driving charge and it 

did not affect, why should that come in as evidence in court? But 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
134 

I understand why insurance companies and businesses would have 

a concern. 

So that is not a Ban the Box, but it is an example of problems. 

We are still going forward and are going to train on that because 

there are companies that are willing to hire, but they will probably 

have to pay higher premiums because that will come into a court 

case, which is not really fair. 

Chairman GOWDY. You are right, it will. 

Judge WILLIAMS. Mr. Chairman, briefly, that is a real issue that 

you raise, the whole question of personal liability that the companies have, and I think the state legislatures are going to have to 

move to immunize those particular companies that reach out and 

employ returning citizens. They have to give them the leverage to 

do that. 

And also, we need to come up with some other incentives to give 

to employers to make sure that they will be receptive to hiring people with records. But that is a real issue that has to be addressed. 

Chairman GOWDY. Yes, sir. 

The gentleman from Wisconsin. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Thank you. 

Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, could I ask a question? Because I 

raised this issue initially. I wonder if this disparate effect is because, while you do not know about the record, but the person has 

applied, so you know the race. So the reason for the disparate effect or the failure to hire may really be race and not the record of 

the —— 

Chairman GOWDY. That is exactly what that study indicated, but 

it has a negative impact on one of the very groups that you would 

be seeking to help. So again, under the heading ‘‘well intentioned,’’ 

but this study may be an outlier. It may not be accurate. The judge 

is now an academic, it there may be five studies that debunk that 

one study. I do not want us to go down a road, if there is a way 

to fix that, without having unintended negative consequences. But 

the lady from the District of Columbia is right, it was race related, 

and that is what the study found. 

The gentleman from Wisconsin. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Before I ask a question, I would just like to 

make a statement. There was a comment made earlier today kind 

of pooh-poohing or saying it is no big deal on non-violent drug 

crimes. In my district I have a heroin problem. Part of that heroin 

problem is fueled, I believe, by prosecutors and judges in a county 

south of mine, Malaki County, who apparently think that if someone is caught selling heroin, it is not that big a deal. I think in this 

country every year thousands of people are dying of opioid abuse, 

and there are a variety of things that can be done to prevent it, 

but one of the things that I think is encouraging it is people who 

put this idea out that selling of drugs is a victimless or harmless 

crime. Thousands of people are dying of this harmless crime, and 

I strongly disagree with my colleague who kind of implied that if 

you put somebody in prison for trying to sell heroin, it is no big 

deal. It is a big deal. A lot of people are dying because of that. 

Now, Mr. McGahan—am I pronouncing that right? 

Mr. MCGAHAN. Yes, sir, pretty good. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
135 

Mr. GROTHMAN. You brought up something before that I sometimes think is interesting. You mentioned the degree to which people almost do not work because of the size of garnishes for child 

support. Is that true? 

Mr. MCGAHAN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. There is something in the past, about 20 years 

ago, around here called the Bradley Amendment, I think about 20 

years ago, that in essence said that even if child support is assessed wrongly, once it is assessed, you cannot undo it. Are you familiar with that? 

Mr. MCGAHAN. I am not familiar with that amendment. No, sir. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay. Well, in any event, you are conscious of 

the fact that sometimes child support gets so—the debt is so great 

that —— 

Mr. MCGAHAN. Insurmountable. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Yes, insurmountable. You get to the point where 

it puts a strong disincentive to work legally. I guess I will put it 

that way. 

Mr. MCGAHAN. No question about it. People come in and they 

cannot work in payroll jobs, so they have to work in under-thetable jobs or they have to engage in illegal activity. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Good. I wish you would follow up on that somewhere and maybe you can educate some people around here. 

Next question I have, you are always looking at the cause of 

crime, and I know a lot has been written about, or at least people 

keep track of race and imply that that might be a factor in incarceration or a factor in whatever. But I wondered, as far as family 

background is concerned, do we have any studies related to that 

that any of you folks are keeping track of? 

Mr. Stirling, do you keep track of that in the South Carolina Department of Corrections? 

Mr. STIRLING. We do not, but one thing that was mentioned 

when Mr. Duncan came in was the need for a parent. One of the 

reasons I think we are seeing such success with our youthful offender program is these youthful offender officers, it is a 1-to-20 

ratio. They get to know these folks that are under their supervision, and they are there to help them, but they are also there to 

keep them accountable. They do not want to disappoint—they become mentors, and I think they become mentors for life because a 

lot of folks who end up in prison just do not have a positive role 

model, and these folks that are giving their time and their life, because it is not just a 9-to-5 job. They are doing it on weekends, they 

are doing it at night, middle of the night. 

It is such a good program that some of the families now come to 

our officers and say my mother needs help with this, where can she 

go? 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay. I will look at it both ways for you, Mr. 

Stirling, and maybe suggest in the future you do keep track of 

these statistics because they might be illuminating, and for whatever reason, political correctness or otherwise, I know in Wisconsin 

we did not keep track of this stuff either. But you might want to 

maybe just for one prison keep track of it so we find things out. 

I am not only talking here about the parental background of the 

people but, say, people who are convicted of a crime, say at age 25, 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
136 

at age 30. Do you compare, say, for men, the percentage of men 

who are committing crimes who are, say, married with children 

and those that are single or are not connected with their children? 

Mr. STIRLING. We do. I do not have those in front of me, but I 

know we do a very comprehensive review and interview when people come in to try to find everything out about them when they do 

come in, education and things of that nature. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Why don’t you get back to us? Because I am 

under the impression that a benefit of families is not only for the 

children but sometimes for the parents, and I have a feeling that 

if you check—I have no idea, I have never seen this study—that 

you go through all the people in your prison system and for an age 

group 30 to 35 or whatever, compare men who are married with 

children compared to men that either have no children or are 

unconnected with their children and see what sort of statistics you 

can drum up there. Can you do that for us? 

Mr. STIRLING. Yes, sir. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. That is going to take a lot of work. 

Mr. STIRLING. That is fine, sir. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. It will be cutting edge. 

Thanks much. 

Chairman GOWDY. The gentleman yields back. 

The gentleman from Alabama has made a Herculean effort to 

come. I just heard the buzzer. I think we have time, given the fact 

that you are so interested in this issue and made such a great effort to get here. 

We will recognize the gentleman from Alabama, and then we will 

break. 

Mr. PALMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am sorry I had to 

leave. We have this whole issue of the budget going on. It is fairly 

important. 

A couple of things, Mr. McGahan. What are some of the major 

obstacles that the states impose on you to helping individuals who 

are exiting prison to find work? 

Mr. MCGAHAN. When a person gets out of prison, a couple of 

things. First of all, for some folks, they do not have their driver’s 

licenses, and they will get state-issued I.D.s. When a person goes 

in and tries to get a job, they have to give their I.D., and it says 

Jackson State Prison, and they immediately do not get the job. So 

having an identification or a driver’s license that has nothing to 

do—that shows their background, that is an impediment to work. 

I think the second thing that we can do is we can raise the level 

of garnishments that poor people who have past-due child support, 

that is a huge barrier for them to get a job. So if we can eliminate 

that barrier, they will get work. 

And then the last thing that was mentioned before, the biggest 

thing that makes families stay together is when a man has a job. 

If a man has a job, we find that almost immediately that family, 

he gets involved in his child’s life, he will get reconciled with the 

mother, and when he does not have a job and is living a destructive 

lifestyle, he is rightfully oftentimes pushed away from that child. 

So having employment while eliminating the barriers, changing 

his habits, and then getting a job will fix almost every problem. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
137 

Mr. PALMER. When you talk about eliminating the barrier of 

child support and the garnishments and issues like that, that is a 

delicate balance that you are trying to do there where the state, 

I think, could be helpful to make sure that an appropriate amount 

of support is being provided to his dependent family members, but 

also not disincentivizing the individual from getting a job or seeking employment where he is basically paid a cash wage that is not 

subject to garnishment. Do you see that pretty much across the 

board nationwide? Is that a bigger problem in certain places than 

others? 

Mr. MCGAHAN. I think it is a national problem. When I talk to 

my colleagues from other states, almost everyone will say one of 

the biggest problems that men face to get employment is eliminating wage garnishments. The problem is not that they do not 

owe the money, and we do not want to incent them to walk away 

from their responsibilities, but it is a question of balance of when 

they kick in. Having the ability to keep more dollars that they earn 

and to pay their own way, the ability to pay their own rent will 

go a long way to getting him into an employer, getting a career 

going, be valued in the workplace. We are putting work, we are 

valuing work over everything else, and that will reconcile the family. 

But right now I think the garnishments kick in too low, and that 

creates a barrier for him to seek employment. 

Mr. PALMER. Let me suggest that—and this might be of interest 

to all of you—that during the Bush Administration, Dr. Horn, Deputy Secretary of Health and Human Services, oversaw a program 

called the National Fatherhood Initiative where that was the very 

focus, to try to reconnect these men with their families, and it was 

very successful. I think that is something that might be useful to 

revisit at the state level as well as the Federal level, Mr. Chairman. 

One last point. One of the things that—I ran a think tank in Alabama, and one of the things that we were seeing is that about 60 

to 68 percent of the inmates were high school dropouts regardless 

of race or gender. As has been pointed out, about 90-something percent of them are eligible for parole. Alabama has a prison crowding 

problem. We do not want to just release those back into prison. 

Have you given much thought to utilizing the Internet to allow 

these inmates to earn a high school diploma? Or if they have graduated high school, to earn an Associate or technical degree so that 

when they get out of prison, they have employable skills? Network 

them with businesses where it does not matter that that box is 

checked, and with a support group that helps them be reintegrated 

into society. 

Mr. MCGAHAN. Yes, there are businesses that do that, and I 

think that is a tremendous idea. The one other piece is the habits 

of the person. So we have to eliminate the barriers, we have to get 

them skills, and then we have to change their habits, increase reliability for the employer, get them to show up at work on time, 

make sure they do not have an addiction, and if we can do those 

three things, then we will have a reliable person to continue on 

with their lives. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
138 

Mr. PALMER. Thank you for allowing me to ask questions, Mr. 

Chairman. I yield back. 

Chairman GOWDY. I thank the gentleman from Alabama for 

making the effort to come back despite a very hectic day. 

I want to end by thanking the four of you for your collegiality 

toward one another and toward the members of the committee, 

your comity, with a ‘‘T’’, toward one another, and the committee. 

I also want to thank Cory and Tim, the panel before you, for 

coming. I hope you can tell from the member interaction that it is 

an issue that, while we may not agree on every facet of it, people 

are interested in it. We value your perspective and, frankly, we 

have benefitted from it today. So, thank you. 

If there is no further business, without objection, the committee 

stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:33 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(139) 

APPENDIX 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
140 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 85 here 26561.085

612812017 Black senator describes facing unfair scrutiny by police- CNNPolitics.com 

Black senator describes facing unfair 

scrutiny by police 

By Ted Barrett, CNN 

Updated 9:56 PM ET, Wed July 13, 2016 

Black senator: I was stopped 7 times by police 00:46 

Story highlights 

Sen. Tim Scott says he has been pulled over 

by police repeatedly 

The South Carolina Republican also voiced 

support for law enforcement 

Washington (CNN)- Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina --who is 

the only African-American Republican in U.S. Senate--

delivered an emotional floor speech Wednesday about the 

unfair police scrutiny he has faced over his life because he is a 

black man. 

"In the course of one year, I've been stopped seven times by 

law enforcement," Scott said. "Not four, not five, not six, but 

seven times in one year as an elected official." 

The speech was the second of three the conservative firstterm senator is delivering this week related to the fatal 

shootings of two African-American men by white police officers and the sniper attack that ~lied five Dallas police 

officers by a black man angry over police mistreatment of African-Americans. 

Scott described this speech as "the most difficult because it is the most personal." 

http:/fw.Nw.cnn.coml2016/07/13/politics/tim.scott-police-racial-profi!inglindexhtrnl 1/3 
141 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 86 here 26561.086

6/2&'2017 Black senator describes facing unfair scrutiny by police- CNNPolitics.com 

"In many cities and towns across America, there is a deep divide between the black community and law 

enforcement. A trust gap, a tension that has been growing for decades. And as a family, one American family, we 

cannot ignore these issues." Scott said. 

"I can certainly remember the very first time that I was pulled over by a police officer as just a youngster. I was 

driving a car that had an improper headlight," Scott said. "The cop came over to my car, hand on his gun and 

said, 'Boy, don't you know your headlight is not working properly?' I felt embarrassed, ashamed, and scared, very 

scared." 

Holding up two fingers, Scott said there were times when he was pulled over that he was speeding. 

"But the vast majority of the time I was pulled over for nothing more than driving a new car in the wrong 

neighborhood or some other reason just as trivial," he said. 

Scott described drawing the attention of a police officer once as he drove out of a shopping mall. The cop pulled 

right behind Scott and followed him as he drove home. taking three left turns along the way. 

"Finally, I took a fourth left coming into my apartment complex and then the blue lights went on. The officer 

approached the car and said that I did not-- I did not use my turn signal on the fourth turn," Scott said. "Do you 

really think that somehow I forgot to use my turn signal on the fourth turn?" 

Another time Scott says he was pulled over by an officer who accused him of stealing the car he was driving. The 

senator recounted how his brother, who was a high-ranking enlisted man in the Army, was accused of the same 

thing when he was driving home one day in a Volvo. 

Scott also described the plight of a former staffer who sold his "nice car" because he was so "tired of being 

targeted" by suspicious police. 

"Imagine the frustration, the irritation, the sense of loss of dignity that accompanies each of those stops, even 

here on Capitol Hill," Scott said. 

Scott said he has even faced problems with U.S. Capitol Police as he has arrived at work. The officers are trained 

to recognize all lawmakers but Scott said he has faced "attitude" and forced to show his identification to get in. 

On three separate occasions. he has received calls of apology from a supervisor or the chief of the Capitol Police 

over the way he was treated, Scott said. 

In his speech, Scott also praised police and the dangerous work they do. 

"There is never, ever an acceptable reason to harm a member of our law enforcement community," he said. 

At the end of his speech, Scott pleaded with Americans who don't face racism not to ignore the plight of those 

who do. 

"Recognize that just because you do not feel the pain, the anguish of another, does not mean it does not exist. To 

ignore their struggles, our struggles. does not make them disappear. It simply leaves you blind and the American 

family very vulnerable," he said. 

"Some search so hard to explain away injustice that they are slowly wiping away who we are as a nation. But we 

must come together to fulfill what we all know is possible here in America: Peace, love, and understanding. 

Fairness," Scott said. 

http://wN.N.cnn.coml2016/07!13/politics/tlm..scott~polioo-racial~profilinglindex.html 
142 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 87 here 26561.087

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

C!Congre~~ of tbe Wntteb ~Mate~ 

j$ousr of l\rprrsrntatibrs 

COMMITIEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM 

2157 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6143 

1202Jnsoor4 

1202)22-S-50~1 

HIJAflE.CUMMINGS,MARYLAND 

RANKING N!INOlliTYM~MBER 

Opening Statement 

Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, Ranking Member 

Hearing on "Criminal Justice Reform and Efforts to Reduce Recidivism" 

June 28,2017 

I welcome our new Chairman, Congressman Trey Gowdy, and thank him for convening 

this hearing on an issue of critical importance to our nation- criminal justice reform. 

l also thank Senator Scott and Senator Booker for testifying before the Committee today 

and I thank all of the witnesses on the second panel, in particular Judge Alexander Williams, a 

distinguished jurist from my state of Maryland. 

The most important responsibility of our nation's criminal justice system is to keep 

Americans safe. Throughout my career as a lawyer and as a legislator, I have worked to advance 

policies that will protect our communities from crime. 

For example, more than a decade ago, in order to silence a Baltimore resident named 

Angela Dawson who had reported drug-related crime to law enforcement, drug dealers 

firebombed and killed Ms. Dawson and her family. In the wake of that senseless tragedy, I wrote 

and introduced the Witness Security and Protection Act. 

My legislation would create a Short-Term State Witness Protection Program in the U.S. 

Marshals Service to help protect witnesses with information about crimes involving homicide or 

other serious violent felonies. 

It hasn't passed yet, but I will continue to reintroduce this legislation until it is enacted 

into law. 

We need to be smart on crime, and focus our government resources on prosecuting and 

imprisoning individuals who pose the greatest risks to the safety of others and on protecting 

witnesses like Ms. Dawson who can help send violent offenders to jail. 

In Maryland alone, 58% of prison admissions in fiscal year 2014 were for non-violent 

offenses according to the Pew Charitable Trusts' Justice Reinvestment Coordinating Council 

report. 
143 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 88 here 26561.088

These sentences dispropotiionately affect Americans of color. In Maryland, 70% of the 

state's prison population is African American, although African Americans comprise only 30% 

of the state's population. 

These individuals will be followed by criminal records that will be barriers for them long 

after they have repaid their debts to society. Criminal records limit ex-offenders' opportunities 

to obtain the employment, education, healthcare, and housing they need to support themselves 

and their families after they serve their sentences- which makes it far more likely that they will 

re-offend. 

The decision to treat non-violent offenses that result from addiction, or mental illness, or 

desperation as crimes has an exorbitant financial cost and a staggering human toll. 

Perhaps nowhere are the consequences of that choice starker than in the comparisons of 

expenditures on higher education and prisons. 

In 2016, the Department of Education reported that "Since 1990, state and local spending 

on higher education has been largely flat while spending on corrections has increased 89 

percent." In some states, taxpayers are actually spending more to imprison their fellow citizens 

than to educate them in public colleges. 

Imagine what we could achieve if these numbers were reversed. 

Regrettably, every indication so far is that Attorney General Sessions is set on rolling 

back the progress we have already made, by reinstating ineffective, Draconian sentencing 

policies for non-violent dmg crimes and expanding the use of private prisons for the "future 

needs of the federal correctional system" when our nation is facing a crisis of mass incarceration. 

Fortunately, there is an emerging bipartisan consensus that this needs to change. And 

there are legislators on both sides of the aisle who are considering how we could transform lives 

- and save money- if we improve the way our justice system treats non-violent offenses and 

enable ex-offenders to truly put their pasts behind them. 

I have been honored to work with Senator Booker on bipartisan legislation to reform our 

criminal justice system and help reduce recidivism, including the Record Expungement Designed 

to Enhance Employment (REDEEM) Act and the Fair Chance Act, which is co-sponsored by our 

colleague and former Chairman, Congressman Darrell Issa. 

I urge Chairman Gowdy to take the next step toward true government reform of the 

criminal justice system by scheduling the Fair Chance Act for a markup as soon as possible. 
144 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 89 here 26561.089

June 28, 2017 

The Honorable Trey Gowdy 

Chairman 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Committee on Oversight 

& Government Reform 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Elijah E. Cummings 

Ranking Member 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Committee on Oversight 

& Government Reform 

Washington, DC 20515 

Re: Justice Roundtable Letter for the Hearing on Criminal Justice and Efforts to 

Reduce Recidivism 

Dear Chairman Gowdy and Ranking Member Cummings: 

On behalf of the 28 undersigned organizations, representing the Justice Roundtable, a 

national coalition of legal, civil rights, criminal justice, human rights and faith-based 

organizations dedicated to advancing a fairer federal criminal justice system, we urge you 

to support and advance criminal justice legislative reforms aimed at meaningfully 

addressing the primary drivers of unwarranted racial disparities, prison overcrowding, 

unnecessarily harsh sentences and unsustainable costs in the federal prison system. 

Until recently, the federal government had made strides towards a more proportional and 

cost-effective federal criminal justice system through enactment of the Fair Sentencing 

Act of 20 I 0, the Department of Justice's (Department) Smart on Crime Initiative, 

implemented by former Attorney General Eric Holder, and changes to the federal 

sentencing guidelines made by the U.S. Sentencing Commission. The reforms resulted in 

a Bureau of Prisons (BOP) population decline of 30,000 people from its peak population 

of219,000 in 2013. These policy changes resulted in some reductions in overcrowding 

which provided the Department cost savings and flexibility in its funding choices. 

While these changes have taken hold, crime rates remain near 40-year lows and studies 

indicate that sentencing reforms have not had an adverse impact on public safety. For 

example, the Sentencing Commission determined in 2014 that individuals who had 

served reduced federal drug sentences following a 2007 Commission action did not have 

higher recidivism rates than their counterparts who had served longer sentences for 
145 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 90 here 26561.090

similar crack cocaine offenses. 1 

Despite the recent progress, last month the Department announced its new Charging and 

Sentencing Policy memo. This memo directs prosecutors "to charge and pursue the most 

serious, readily provable offense." A revocation of the Smart on Crime guidance, this 

new directive from Attorney General Jeff Sessions embraces the draconian sentencing 

policies that contributed to mass incarceration at the federal level and resulted in 

unprecedented numbers of people incarcerated for low-level drug offenses. 

Mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses contributed to heightened incarceration 

levels in federal prisons. This failed policy has overwhelmingly impacted people of color, 

contributing to the appalling racial disparities we see in the federal prison system. 

Fundamentally, these harsh sentences do not make our communities safer, deny people a 

second chance to rectify their past mistakes and harm the record number of children 

growing up with a parent behind bars. 

During the 114'h Congress, bipartisan legislation was introduced in both the House and 

Senate that aims to achieve the goals of reducing excessive incarceration and racial 

disparities in the federal prison system. We urge you to build on this bipartisan 

momentum by supporting criminal justice reforms that embrace the following principles: 

• Restoring proportionality to drug sentencing; 

• Promoting and adequately funding recidivism reduction and reentry 

programming; 

• Applying sentencing reductions retroactively; 

• Expanding BOP's Compassionate Release Program; and 

• Extending time credits for good behavior. 

Restore proportionality to drug sentencing 

Currently, almost half of the federal prison population is composed of people convicted 

of drug offenses. The combination of large-scale drug prosecutions and mandatory 

sentencing results in excessive prison terms for far too many people, while providing 

little public safety benefit, at great expense to taxpayers. While we are concerned with the 

consequences of selling drugs, the lengthy mandatory minimum terms of five, 10, and 20 

years or life in prison for these offenses often do not fit the crimes or culpability of 

people who are often only low-level or occasional participants. Congress should act to 

1 United States Sentencing Commission (2014). Recidivism Among Offenders Receiving 

Retroactive Sentence Reductions: The 2007 Crack Cocaine Amendment, at 

http://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-projects-andsurveys/miscellaneous/20 140527 Recidivism 2007 Crack Cocaine Amendment. pdf (last 

visited June 28, 20 17). 

Page 2 ofS 
146 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 91 here 26561.091

limit, and ultimately eliminate, mandatory minimums and ensure punishments are 

proportional. 

Promote and adequately fund recidivism reduction and re-entry programming 

We support initiatives to reduce recidivism and expand re-entry programming, as well as 

provide opportunities for early release for individuals in federal prison. More than 90 

percent of incarcerated individuals will return to our communities, and in the interest of 

public safety we must ensure that they are on a path to successful reintegration. It is a 

smart investment to implement expanded re-entry programming, given that evidencebased programs, job-training, and education can reduce recidivism and lead to better 

outcomes for individuals returning to their families and neighborhoods. 

Current restrictions on people with criminal records that limit opportunities for 

employment, housing, education, financial assistance and food stamps only serve to 

complicate reintegration after incarceration. Such collateral consequences are 

counterproductive to building safe and healthy communities. In order to help people 

reentering our communities to be successful, there should be an opportunity to seal past 

criminal records and reinstate benefits for individuals excluded because of a criminal 

record. 

Make sentencing reductions retroactive 

Once Congress decides to reduce sentencing laws and a person is serving a sentence 

under an outdated law that no longer applies, people in prison should be eligible for a 

sentence reduction consistent with the law that now governs the offense. Specifically, 

Congress should pass legislation to extend the application of the Fair Sentencing Act of 

2010 to people who were sentenced prior to enactment of the law. 

Expand BOP's Compassionate Release Program 

Under the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, Congress authorized the BOP to request that a 

federal judge reduce a sentence for "extraordinary and compelling" circumstances - also 

known as compassionate release. The request can be based on either medical or nonmedical conditions that the judge could not reasonably have foreseen at the time of 

sentencing. 

In 2013, BOP expanded the medical criteria that can be considered for a person seeking 

compassionate release. In addition, the former Attorney General announced revised 

criteria for other categories of people seeking reduced sentences, including older 

prisoners and those who are the only possible caregiver for a dependent. Congress should 

codify these commonsense and merciful policy changes into federal law. 

Expand time credits for good behavior 

The BOP's method of calculating earned credit reduces a prisoner's sentence to a 

maximum credit of 47 days per year- below the 54 days intended. This decision results 

Page3 ofS 
147 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 92 here 26561.092

in unnecessary increases in prison sentences at significant cost. By clarifying the 

statutory language, Congress could save an estimated $41 million in the first year alone.2 

Congress should also implement a proposal creating a new time credit that can be earned 

for successful participation in recidivism-reduction programs, such as education or 

occupational programming. 

Conclusion 

We believe these criminal justice reforms will effectively address growing prison costs 

and populations while protecting public safety. Our continued progress toward meeting 

the economic and societal challenges posed by the current prison system and establishing 

a smarter, fairer criminal justice system depends on a broad-based approach to reform, 

grounded in these principles. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to 

contact Jesselyn McCurdy, Deputy Director, ACLU Washington Legislative Office at 

jmccurdy@aclu.org or (202) 675-2307 or Kara Gotsch, Director of Strategic Initiatives, 

The Sentencing Project at kgotsch@sentencingproject.org or (202) 628-0871. 

Sincerely, 

American Civil Liberties Union 

Anmesty International USA 

CAN-DO Foundation 

Church of Scientology National Affairs Office 

Citizens United for Rehabilitation of Errants 

D.C. Reentry Task Force 

Defending Rights & Dissent 

Drug Policy Alliance 

Human Rights Watch 

Justice Programs Office, School of Public Affairs at American University 

Justice Strategies 

Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights 

Legal Action Center 

Life for Pot 

NAACP 

NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. 

National African American Drug Policy Coalition 

National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers 

National Association of Social Workers 

National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence of Maryland 

National Employment Law Project 

National HIRE Network 

Project New Opportunity 

2 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, FY 2012 BUDGET REQUEST, {2012), 

http://www.justice.gov/sites/defaultlfiles/jmd/legacv/2014/0l/l2/fvl2-bud-summary-requestperformance.pdf 

Page 4 ofS 
148 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 93 here 26561.093

StoptheDrugWar.org 

Students for Sensible Drug Policy 

The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights 

The Sentencing Project 

WeGotUsNow 

cc: House Oversight and Government Reform Members 

Page 5 of5 
149 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 94 here 26561.094

The Honorable Trey Gowdy 

2418 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

June 27, 2017 

The Honorable Elijah Cummings 

2163 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

RE: Hearing before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform: Criminal Justice 

Reform and Efforts to Reduce Recidivism, June 28, 2017 

Dear Chairman Gowdy and Ranking Member Cummings: 

I write to thank you for holding a hearing on Criminal Justice Reform and Efforts to Reduce 

Recidivism, and to share the findings ofFAMM's new report on this important topic, Using 

Time to Reduce Crime: Federal Prisoner Survey Results Show Ways to Reduce Recidivism. 

FAMM is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that advocates for sentencing and prison reforms 

that are fair, individualized, cost-effective, and protect public safety and strengthen families. We 

oppose mandatory minimum sentences not just because they are too often arbitrary and unjust, 

but also because we believe the best reentry begins with a right-sized sentence. Unnecessarily 

lengthy sentences undermine rehabilitation. When people spend too much time in prison, it 

erodes their family ties and support, causes job skills and community connections to atrophy, and 

makes it harder to return to and reintegrate with a society that has usually changed dramatically 

while they were incarcerated. 

Because we correspond regularly with approximately 40,000 federal prisoners, we also know 

that Congress and the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) can do much more to reduce recidivism by 

improving prison programming. Our new report shares the findings ofF AMM' s recent survey of 

federal prisoners. More than 2,000 respondents confirmed what we had previously heard in 

anecdotes: rehabilitative progranuning in federal prisons is too often scarce, inconsistent, lacking 

in rigor, and not provided by qualified professionals. Federal prisoners lack meaningful jobs, 

vocational training, educational opportunities, access to computers, and sufficient mental health 

and drug abuse treatment. Half of the people in our survey were incarcerated more than 500 

miles away from their families, straining those vital relationships. 

Our report concludes with recommendations for making prisons more rehabilitative to reduce the 

risk of recidivism. Some recommendations require congressional action, like removing the ban 

on prisoners receiving Pell Grants and giving prisoners sentence reductions to incentivize 

completion of recidivism-reducing programs. Some recommendations require greater 

congressional funding or more oversight of the BOP, like expanding use of the effective 

Residential Drug Abuse Program, keeping prisoners closer to their homes, and investigating the 

efficacy of halfway houses. None of our recommendations should be viewed as giving prisoners 

a subsidy or a gift - it is in everyone's interest that all prisoners have the tools they need in 

prison so that they do not reoffend outside of prison. 

Families Against Mandatory Minimums 11100 H Street NW. Suite 1000, Washington, D.C. 20005 I p: (202) 822-6700 I www.famm.org 
150 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 95 here 26561.095

Thank you for holding this important hearing and for considering our report and its 

recommendations. We would be happy to discuss our findings with you, connect you with 

former prisoners who can share their experiences, and provide any assistance or expertise we can 

in your continued oversight of federal prisons. 

Thank you for considering our views. 

Sincerely, 

Kevin Ring 

President 
151 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 96 here 26561.096

THE 

SENTENCING 

PROJECT 

RESEARCH AND ADVOCACY FOR REFORM 

June 28, 2017 

The Honorable Trey Gowdy 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Committee on Oversight & Government Reform 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Elijah E. Cummings 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Committee on Oversight & Government Reform 

Washington, DC 20515 

Re: Hearing on Criminal Justice Reform and Efforts to Reduce Recidivism 

Dear Chairman Gowdy and Ranking Member Cummings: 

The Sentencing Project, a national criminal justice research organization, thanks you for holding this 

important and timely hearing exploring criminal justice reform. We wish to submit for the hearing 

record the attached briefing paper, "Federal Prisons at a Crossroads." 

Since reaching a peak in 20!3, the federal prison population declined 13% by the close of2016-twice 

the national rate of decarceration. But recent policy changes by Attorney General Jeff Sessions appear 

poised to reverse this progress. Indeed, the Department of Justice's budget proposal for 2018 forecasts a 

2% increase in the federal prison population. 

The Sentencing Project's analysis finds that federal courts are frequently obligated to impose stiff 

mandatory sentences on individuals even though many people who receive federal drug sentences are in 

the lower levels of the drug trade, were not caught with weapons, or have limited criminal histories. The 

average federal prison term being served for a drug offense is 11.3 years. 

As criminologists and many policymakers have cautioned, ratcheting up already punitive policies is 

ineffective in reducing drug use and crime rates, while carrying heavy fiscal, social, and human costs. In 

fact, the United States Sentencing Commission found that individuals who had served reduced federal 

drug sentences following a 2007 amendment did not have higher recidivism rates than their counterparts 

who had served longer sentences. 

The Sentencing Project looks forward to continued discussions with the Committee on Oversight and 

Government Reform about the federal criminal justice system. Please contact Kara Gotsch, Director of 

Strategic Initiatives for The Sentencing Project, at kgotsch@sentencingproject.org or 202-628-0871 with 

questions. 

Sincerely, 

Marc Mauer 

Executive Director 

1705 DeSales St. NW, 8'" Floor, Washington, DC 20036 • Tel. 202.628.0871• 

Fax 202.628.1091• www.sentencingproject.org 
152 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 97 here 26561.097

The number of incarcerated in federal prisons has declined substantially in 

recent years. In while most states enacted reforms to reduce their populations over the past decade, the federal prison system has downsized at twice the 

nationwide rate. But recently enacted changes at the Department of Justice 

(DOJ) and certain Congressional proposals appear poised to reverse this progress. 

Congress. the United States Sentencing Commission (USSC). and the DOJ reduced the federal prison 

population by reforming sentencing laws, revising 

sentencing guidelines, and modifying charging 

directives, respectively. But the DOJ's budget proposal for 2018 forecasts a 2% increase in the federal 

prison population. 1 The policy changes contributing 

to this reversal include: 

Attorney General Jeff Sessions' directive instructing federal prosecutors to increase their 

reliance on mandatory minimum sentences 

for low-level drug convictions.' 

The Attorney General's instruction to federal 

prosecutors to increasingly pursue criminal 

convictions for immigration law violations 

and his memorandum paving the way for 

greater use of private prisons. 3 

Congressional proposals to create new mandatory minimum sentences or increase existing ones for a range of drug, immigration, and 

violent crimes.' 

These policy shifts run counter to research and 

practice on effective crime policy. This brief explains 

why increasing the use and length of prison terms 

for people with drug convictions in particular-who 

account for half of the federal prison populationwill produce little public safety benefrt while carrying 

heavy frscal, social, and human costs.' Experience 

with criminal justice policy changes at the federal 

and state levels shows it is possible to substantially 

cut reliance on prisons without any adverse effects 

on public safety. 

I. OVERVIEW OFTHE FEDERAL PRISON 

POPULATION 

The federal prison system has grown to become the 

largest in the country. In 1980, federal prisons held 

24,000 people-' By 2016, 192,000 men and women 

were incarcerated in federal prisons, comprising 

about 13% of the total U.S. prison population-' 

The federal system is unique, in comparison to 

states, for imprisoning a large number of people for 

non-violent convictions' This is due in part to the 

jurisdictional focus of federal criminal courts, which 

has largely been on white-collar crime, bank robbery, 

large-scale drug and weapons distribution, and immigration law violations. 

Federal Prison Population by Offense, 2015 

Drug 1111111111111149·

5% 

Violent 

Property 

Other \0.8% 

Half of the federal prison population is serving time 

for a drug offense. In contrast, more than half of the 

population in state prisons is serving time for a 

violent crime. 9 
153 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 98 here 26561.098

THE 

SENTENCING 

PROJECT 

POLICY BRIEF: FEDERAL PRISONS AT A CROSSROADS 

To the extent that the federal criminal justice 

system historically prosecuted drug crimes, this 

was primarily focused on large-scale drug rings. But 

in recent decades it has shifted from this mission. 

Many people who receive federal drug sentences are 

in the lower levels of the drug trade, were not caught 

with weapons or have limited criminal histories. 

Specifically: 

Nearly half (48%) of individuals receiving a 

federal drug sentence in 2009 were at or 

below the level of "street-level dealers," which 

is defined as selling less than one ounce of 

drugS. 10 

No weapon was involved in 82% of the cases 

in which someone received a federal sentence 

for a drug offense in 2016." 

Half (50%) of those who received a federal 

sentence for a drug offense in 2016 had either 

no previous term of imprisonment or minimal 

criminal histories. 12 

Federal courts have been obligated to impose stiff 

mandatory sentences on these defendants despite 

their low levels of engagement in the drug trade. 

This can be seen from both the average and extreme 

sentences being served by those in federal prisons: 

People serving a federal prison term for a drug 

offense were serving an average of 11.3 years 

in 2012. 13 

Almost half (49%) of the 3,861 individuals 

serving a federal life-without-parole sentence 

in 2016 were convicted of a drug crime." 

Federal Prison Population, 1980-2016 

250,000 

200,000 

150,000 

100,000 

50,000 
154 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 99 here 26561.099

THE 

SENTENCING 

PROJECT 

POLICY BRIEF: FEDERAL PRISONS AT A CROSSROADS 

II. THE RECENT DOWNSIZING OF THE 

FEDERAL PRISON POPULATION 

Several recent reforms have scaled back the federal 

prison population, without harming public safety. 

The population in the custody of the Bureau of 

Prisons reached a peak in 2013, with 219,000 

people." By 2016, this figure had declined by 12.5%, 

reaching 192,000. This was about twice the average 

nationwide rate of decarceration. 16 

The reduction in the federal prison population was 

achieved through changes in sentencing law, sentencing guidelines, and prosecutorial charging 

policies." In particular 

In 2007, the USSC reduced the sentencing 

guidelines used by judges for many crack 

cocaine convictions and applied this change 

retroactively, enabling sentence reductions for 

those already imprisoned. 18 

Congress passed the Fair Sentencing Act 

(FSA) in 2010, which reduced the sentencing 

disparity between crack and powder cocaine 

by shortening sentences for certain crack 

cocaine offenses and eliminated the f1ve-year 

mandatory-minimum sentence for simple 

possession of crack cocaine." The USSC 

revised its sentencing guidelines following the 

FSA and in 2011 applied the reduced crack 

cocaine guidelines retroactively.20 

In 2014, the USSC voted to reduce the sentencing guidelines for most drug crimes and 

applied this amendment retroactively. 

During the second term of the Obama administration federal prosecutors pursued fewer 

drug cases and Attorney General Eric Holder's 

2013 charging directive, part of the Smart on 

Crime Initiative, helped to reduce the proportion of federal drug cases carrying a mandatory minimum sentence.21 

Property and Violent Crime Rates, 1960-2015 

6,000 800 

700 

5,000 

600 

4,000 

~ 

5 3.000 

i 

500 ~-

[ 

400 "' 

~-

300 iii 2,000 

200 

1,000 

100 

0 Gl ~ ~ :g ~ ~ "' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ill ~ ~ 51 ~ ffi ~ g 11! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "' "' "' "' "' " 

n ~· 
155 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 100 here 26561.100

THE SENTENCING 

PROJECT 

POliCY BRIEF: FEDERAL PRISONS AT A CROSSROADS 

President Barack Obama also commuted 

federal drug sentences for 1,700 individuals-" 

Notably, over 500 people who were serving life 

sentences received sentence commutations. 

These reforms reflect a changing political climate 

for criminal justice policy produced in part by the 

historic drop in crime rates. Nationwide rates of 

property and violent crimes have fallen by half since 

reaching their peak levels in 1991. 

Researchers have shown that while this historic 

crime drop was not unique to the United States, the 

United States stands apart in its striking prison 

build-up during this period. Specifically: 

Between 1988 and 2004, the United States 

was among 26 countries that experienced 

comparable reductions in crimes such as 

assault and personal theft. 23 But countries 

that implemented more punitive carceral or 

policing policies, such as the United States 

and, to a lesser scale the United Kingdom, did 

not experience sharper crime reductions than 

those that did not. 

Though Canada has had a much lower homicide rate and incarceration rate than the 

United States, changes in the two countries' 

homicide rates have "tracked each other very 

closely" since the 1960s." Yet unlike the 

United States, the drop in Canada's homicide 

rate has occurred alongside only modest 

growth in its incarceration rate. 25 

Studies have also demonstrated that recent efforts 

to reduce prison sentences and downsize the prison 

population have not harmed public safety. For 

example: 

In 2014, the USSC determined that individuals 

who had served reduced federal drug sentences following a 2007 reform did not have higher 

recidivism rates than their counterparts who 

had served longer sentences.26 

States have also shown that making dramatic 

cuts in incarceration levels is not at odds with 

the goal of improving public safety. New 

Jersey, New York, and California have been 

national leaders in decarceration-downsizing 

their prison populations by over 25%-while 

often outperforming the nationwide crime 

drop.27 

Ill. UPENDING REFORMS DESPITE RESEARCH 

AND EVIDENCE OF SUCCESS 

Amidst this context, violent crime rates have begun 

to increase in certain cities and a growing number 

of Americans have been dying from opioid-related 

overdoses, especially in suburban and rural areas.28 

Yet increasing already harsh federal sentences runs 

counter to research on effective crime and sub~ 

stance abuse policy. 

As criminologists and many policymakers have 

cautioned, ratcheting up already punitive policies, in 

this case largely for non-violent offenses, is ineffective and harmful." Given the United States' excessively high rate of incarceration, many people now 

entering the system are in the lower- and middle-levels of a drug operation. Incarcerating these individuals often results in their being replaced by other 

sellers willing to fill their roles, and does nothing to 

address the substance abuse problems that users, 

and sometimes the sellers themselves, struggle 

with. Increasing prison terms for these individuals 

also has a limited deterrent effect since most people 

do not expect to be apprehended for a crime, are not 

familiar with relevant legal penalties, or criminally 

offend with their judgment compromised by substance abuse or mental health problems. 
156 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 101 here 26561.101

THE 

SENTENCING 

PROJECT 

POLICY BRIEF: FEDERAL PRISONS AT A CROSSROADS 

Reviewing decades of research, the authors of a 

comprehensive 2014 National Research Council 

report explain that the best available data suggest 

"the successive iterations of the war on drugs ... are 

unlikely to have markedly or clearly reduced drug 

crime over the past three decades:''0 Reflecting 

more broadly on current levels of incarceration and 

crime, they conclude: 

Given the small crime prevention effects of 

long prison sentences and the possibly high 

fmancial, social, and human costs of incarceration, federal and state policy makers should 

revise current criminal justice policies to 

significantly reduce the rate of incarceration 

in the United States'' 

Crime rates remain near 40-year lows and areas with 

rising crime and substance abuse problems require 

more effective policies than tougher sentences that 

have limited effect while causing great harm. This 

would include expanding access to community-based drug treatment programs and mental 

health services, as well as prison-based rehabilitative programs and subsequent re-entry services." 

ENDNOTES 

IV. CONCLUSION 

Federal prisons are overcrowded and disproportionately comprised of people of color serving sentences for low-level drug offenses. The federal system 

may now be drifting away from smarter criminal 

justice policies that sought to end the era of mass 

incarceration, reduce racial and ethnic disparities in 

the criminal justice system, and enable better 

investments in public safety. Rather than turn away 

from the recent reforms in federal sentencing, 

President Trump's administration and Congress 

should rely on research and evidence of successful 

reforms to develop more fair and effective substance abuse and crime policies. 
157 

Æ 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 102 here 26561.102

13 

18 

THE 

SENTENCING 

PROJECT 

THE 

SENTENCING 

PROJECT RESEARCH AND ADVOCACY FOR REFORM 

1705 DeSales Street NW, 8th Floor 

Washington, D,C, 20036 

sentencingprojectorg 

POLICY BRIEF: FEDERAL PRISONS AT A CROSSROADS 

' In 

' ' Sentencmg 

Nazgol Ghandnoosh, Ph.D., 

The S'entenc:ing Project Publtshed June 2017 

The Sentencing ProJect works for a fair and effective US JUStice 

system by promoting retorms in sentenc1ng policy, addressing 

unjust ,·acial disparities and practices, and advocat;ng for 

Jlternattves to tncarceratton