The Good-Time Program
By: New Leaders Council
Tags: Criminal Justice, Parole, Tnlcjreform, Recidivism, Prison Reform

The Good-Time Program

Jeremy Rankins, NLC Houston

Part twenty of The New Leader series The Arc of Justice: Examining the Failures of the Criminal Justice System and the Hope of Progressive Reforms.

There are several day-to-day motivations that keeps the convicted felon encouraged to live each day behind bars. For example, most offenders look forward to the daily event of ‘mail-call,’ because it is an intimate contact with “the world”. ‘Mail-call’ is when a jailer walks into the unit dayroom and begins calling names of offenders who received letters, books, pictures, etc. for the evening. Commissary-day is another event that is held with high regard. Commissary-day is king. Mail-call is crucial. Parole hearings are the most stressful. Every inmate who has a chance at making parole knows exactly the month when they are to be reevaluated for an early release. After serving five years in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice System, I know first-hand how it is to live and what to live for while in prison. The parole date is the most anxious, stressful, and hopeful day for an inmate who has a chance at early release.

Parole

Texas and approximately 29 other states award its inmates with “Good-Time.”

It has been marketed to inmates as a means for reducing time on overall sentences. Good time is a program developed as a replacement for paying inmates rather than reimbursing them with monetary value for services rendered while in confinement. In theory, the program is supposed to be working in favor of prisoners by reducing their sentence in exchange for good behavior. Instead of reimbursing inmate labor, the states developed this incentive that allows an inmate to “shave several days off original sentences.” In other states, inmates are reimbursed (in monetary value) for labor rendered while incarcerated at a significant lower pay rate than civilians in the community. Often times, those rates are less than a dollar for a day’s work. All federal prisons reimburse their inmates with monetary allowances for work rendered while in confinement.

There are several problems with how the Good-Time Program works in relation to how inmates earn early release. A file that includes time served an offender has completed is reviewed at some point during the parole process. The good-time an inmate has earned is a small factor when determining the inmate’s eligibility for early release. On the other hand, any good- time lost due to disciplinary infractions accumulated while in prison has a greater effect to board members. An ethical concern with the “Good-Time” program is the deception given to an inmate and their families. When a judge sentences a felon to a set amount of time in prison, there is no program that can reduce the time or terms on that judgment. If an offender was to be released on community supervision because they were awarded parole, the remainder of the original sentence would need to be fulfilled in the community. In Retrospect, this means that the idea of having good-time-days awarded to an inmate for good behavior is purposeless. It is not truly applied to the judgment of the sentence. A judge issued a sentence and to stretch the imagination of a vulnerable inmate to say that there is a chance in reducing the terms on that judgment, it’s far and false to believe in. Unfortunately, an inmate places any hope in coming home sooner than later thus believes in these false hopes.

Although all cases do not fit the nations model on inmate reimbursement for services rendered while confined, I have learned that leaning on the shoulders of parole boards to release inmates based on merit and good behavior is an unrealistic ambition for most offenders. The hope rests in the influence from what is referred to as a “Free-World Attorney” by inmates. Attorneys hired from the community to represent those inmates incarcerated inside the walls of prisons and jails provide hope and realistic expectations for many of the cases presented to the parole board. Indigent offenders, like I was, are all at a disadvantage for the lack of having resources to afford a professional advocate to place a magnifying glass under over their files for board members to look at closer.

Parole is a convoluted and bigoted trial progression that continues to mature through trial and error. Parole boards have specific stipulations and guidelines for considering each individual for early release. The autonomy of board members, however, is not sternly regulated, and thus offenders and their families are constantly questioning the integrity of the Board of Pardons and Parole. I believe a collaborative approach with inmates should be taken when he or she is up for review. One addition to the process of reviewing inmate files should be to evaluate a formal yet brief document of how he or she plans to avoid re-offending. The formal document submitted by an inmate could be as simple as providing a list of 3–5 goals he or she plans to achieve or maintain upon release under the stringent terms of community supervision. By submitting this document, the inmate has the opportunity to really evaluate their goals and intentions once released and it also provides them with a since of engagement with the overall decision process. The parole board is also presented the opportunity to really investigate each case and evaluate the plans each potential parolee has for themselves. By assessing inmates plans and reviewing additional information offered through inmate records, the parole board increases the likelihood of making a right decision versus a judgment call.

This read is inspired by personal ecounters with the justice department at the state level. Saving the Convicted Felon is a series of entries dedicated to bringing to light initiatives for putting felons in better positions to succeed once released. By informing the reader, it is the intent to increase awareness that brings about change in the prison systems all across the board.

Jeremy (Jer-ruh-My) Rankins M.A., Convicted Felon inspired to decrease minority youth incarceration and a determined activist committed to fighting recidivism rates amongst other felons by education, mentorship, and programming.

“Minor to Major” Turning Minor setbacks into Major comebacks.