Johnny Cash Goes to Washington
By: Zuri Davis
Tags: Prison Reform, Johnny Cash, Criminal Justice Reform, Senate

Senator Brock: Well, first let me present Johnny Cash. Johnny is no stranger to prisons or prisoners from either point of view, inside and out. He made his first major appearance at San Quentin in 1959, returning in 1960 and 1961. In 1969. when he sang for the first time, the classic rhyme, “San Quentin You’ve Been Living Hell to Me,” and on the lighter side, the famous song now, “A Boy Named Sue,”’ it was merely a sequel to his performances at the State prison in Huntsville, Texas, and two visits to Folsom.

In 1958, when he was at Folsom, he met and held out his hand to a man who had been serving time for over 10 years, a fine songwriter and performer who is with us here today, Mr. Glen Sherley. Following these appearances, John has subsequently performed, with his group, at Cummings State Prison in Arkansas, New Mexico State Prison, Leavenworth, Lansing for Men and Lansing State Prison for Women, and just last month at Western Federal in Pittsburgh.

He is also scheduled to do a show at the prison in Stockholm in September. All of these he has done voluntarily. On the involuntary side of the ledger, John has also seen the inside of a few jails. Between 1960 and 1967 he was inside of the Nashville City Jail, Carson City Jail, Starkville, Miss.; El Paso, Lafayette, Ga.

When having a doctor of humanities degree conferred on him last year, Dr. Tom Poston of Garden-Webb College, said:

In conferring: this degree, we recognize a man of the soil, who has worked so diligently in behalf of the poor and downtrodden — for those who are forgotten behind bars.

Dr. Johnny Cash has not forgotten these men. He goes there to help and he is here to help today.

And there is one other person that he has brought with him that I think he probably would want to introduce more fully, but we also have here Harlan Sanders, who like Glen Sherley, has had a considerable amount of experience behind bars and who is most recently out some 6 days now, I think.

So, Johnny, if you will proceed.

STATEMENT OF JOHNNY CASH, HENDERSONVILLE, TENN., ACCOMPANIED BY GLEN SHERLEY, EX-CONVICT; AND HARLAN SANDERS, EX-CONVICT

Mr. Cash: Thank you, Senator Brock. Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure to be with you this morning. I would like to read a paragraph from a newspaper editorial and, for the most part, this is my personal statement. I would like to say a few other things after that: When a man is sentenced for a crime he must feel a loss for transgressing the laws of society, but generally the system not only punishes men, it degrades them and, in many cases, that is all it cares to do. It is indifferent whether it sends the man out better or worse. As a consequence, our prisons are full of revolvers, men and women who are sentenced for short terms, then discharged to commit their old crimes or worse crimes. In many cases, the prison is an incubator for crime, a Crime school, crime being well-taught and well learned in the prison suit-culture under the unseen and at times the seeing eyes of the authorities. The true idea of prison is not only to punish, but to reform, to make convicts afterwards the better fitted for society. To effect this there must be an element of hope mingled in the treatment of moral discipline. Should not more philosophers and humaniarians be involved in the prison corrections systems. The dateline of that paragraph from that newspaper, Mr. Chairman, is December 1865. It is only recently that we have generally become aware of the great amount of recidivism in our prison system but it was a thing that did exist back then, as you see from the New York Times. I have been in the entertainment business now for 16 years and shortly after I began, I performed my first concert at a prison at the request of the inmates at Huntsville, Tex., State Prison. I went from there to Folsom, to San Quentin, to Arkansas State Prison, and I met many fine men, inmates, and the personnel who run the prisons in all of these places. And I found over a period of 17 years, I believe that possibly 25 percent of the men behind the bars really need to be in a prison. I think that with the program to cover the man from the time he is arrested all the way through his trial, conviction, his prison sentence and his parole, that there will [be] many less men actually admitted to prison to serve prison terms, to become a part of this outturn, of this incubator for crime in the systems. I have seen and heard of things at some of the concerts that would chill the blood of the average citizen, but I think possibly the blood of the average citizen needs to be chilled in order for public apathy and conviction to come about because right now we have 1972 problems and 1872 [jails]. And like Governor Bumpers of Arkansas recently said, unless the public becomes aware and wants to. and wants to help and becomes involved in prison reform and really cares, unless people begin to care, all of the money in the world will not help. Money cannot do the job. People have got to care in order for prison reform to come about. At a southern prison where [I] performed, the day before I arrived there, [I] was told by prison officials a 15-year-old boy was in prison for car theft and was raped continually all night long by his fellow inmates, and he died the next morning; 15 years old and his bunk — these bunks are all [jammed] up together in this prison and the young man, the first time living with three-time losers and sadistic killers, died. In another prison —

Senator Burdick: Where was this first episode?

Mr. Cash: In Arkansas. In another prison, a teenager was imprisoned and his clothes were taken away from him to shame him for his crime and he hanged himself. This was in Virginia. I think that there is one shortcut, a major shortcut, to prison reform that should be applied in conjunction with these, all of these measures that are being discussed here by Senator Brock. I think they are most important because Ave have to be practical in prison reform, and the purpose behind prison reform should also be that there should be less crime on the streets; that our streets, that our cities should be a safe place for a wife and children to walk down. But, in order for this to come about, the men in prison have to be treated as human beings. If they are not, when they are turned out on the streets, they are not going to act like human beings. Another big thing that would help with these bills that the Senator is working on here, is a great spiritual revival. I think the emphasis in a lot of these prisons needs to be on more religion, and the kind of religion that the man wants to hear about, ministers, rabbis, preachers that really care for these men, that are really concerned with them and not just somebody who comes here because he is paid $200 a week to do it. I would like to introduce to you — and let you hear from them — two men. These two men are as different as daylight and dark, but they are both ex-convicts. One man has been out of prison 6 days. He served a fairly short term. One man has been out for about 16 months and I think he was in for about a total of 15 years. Mr. Harlan Sanders and Mr. Glen Sherley. Thank you, sir.

Senator Burdick: Well, I will hear from Mr. Sherley and Mr. Sanders, and when they conclude, we will have some questions for the whole panel and we will proceed from there.

Which one of you gentlemen wishes to proceed first? Mr. Sherley?

Mr. Sherley: Mr. Chairman, well, I think that the bill that Senator Brock is trying to get through is — could be one of the changing factors, because once you reach prison and you become involved in that subculture, that society, and become a cog in that wheel, then to get out of it it takes an awful lot more than it does if you can be deferred before you get there, if you can be stopped some way, if you do not have to start. Because once you become a cog in that wheel, and the people working there they play a part, and I played a part as a convict in there. And then it becomes a much tougher job. You have really got — you are fighting an uphill battle because to change that society where your life is only worth a pack of cigarettes, and where people do — kids do get raped by another man and he has decided that his only life is prison so he does not care anything about himself. He does not care anything about you when you get there and if you reach prison as a youngster, 18, 20, and you do care, if you do not have or do not get an I-don’t-give-a-damn attitude, then you are in trouble, because these people are going to take advantage of you, and they are going to molest you. they are going to take anything that you might have, pride or anything of monetary value. It becomes theirs. And to change in that society is very difficult.

And the only way to stop all of the repeaters is to not let them become a first to become a repeater. And this can be done with this bill. If it can be channeled into the community, if the people in a community will become involved and concerned with the problem, and realize that it is a problem before the man gets there, then very possibly he will not commit another crime. If he has people that he feels care enough about him to come to court and to take an interest in him and give him some responsibility that he can meet and a goal that he can reach, because I have seen men stabbed over a pack of cigarettes, killed over an insult or an imagined insult, and this is not a society for a man to become a useful citizen outside. And criminals are not born, they are made. I do not think any man would rather be recognized for bad than good.

But, if the only way of getting attention as a youngster is being bad, then it becomes a way of life and the only way it can be changed is to recognize the good points in a man and praise them rather than recognize the bad and praise that. I do not believe that you can ever stop the repeaters as long as you are putting them there first. I believe it will continue to grow because it becomes a way of life. Once a man loses his fear of prison, has been subjected to it, and survived the first hitch, then it becomes a way of life, and the sad part is that after that maybe lie does not want to get changed and the people working there do not want it changed because it is a way of life for them also. They become as institutionalized as the men behind the bars. It is a way of life for them to go to work and spend 8 hours there, not caring what happens to the men around them, so that this 15-year-old boy was raped to death. They coudn’t go home and it does not really bother them. They become hard. It is like an ambulance driver. He becomes used to the blood, and to the corruption, and to the guts that he has got to scrape up off the street. They become used to this as a way of life.

And I will say again, the only way to change it, is to stop it before it starts.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Sanders?

Mr. Sanders: Mr. Chairman, I guess Glen and I might be different, but in this respect, the most important part of this bill to me is stopping them before they are going. You have got to stop them before they go.

Senator Burdick: Can you bring that [mic] a little closer?

Mr. Sanders: How’s that?

Senator Burdick: Fine.

Mr. Sanders: I have got a lot of friends doing a lot of time in a lot of prisons and I love them to death. There are some good people out there that need to be saved but I see people here, I saw them coming in, you know, and you see one of these fellows with a flower in their hair, and they are going to come out wearing a miniskirt. It is humiliating. I have had people come at me with razor blades and had to break a guitar over one’s head, and you show weakness — friendship is weakness sometimes, and I have had a hell of a lot of hassles with it, with a lot on the surface good guys. But, nothing is — that is dehumanizing, but nothing hurts as bad as those bulls. Let me tell you about some of those officers.

They are good people, you know. There is a hell of a lot of good people there. When you bend that rule, as long as it is bent their way, they can laugh, they can joke and say, hey, how are you doing, Sandy; hey, man, what’s happening? If you want to bend it this way, accidentally, because you learn to walk on tiptoe, if you want to bend it this way, then, man, your skin shows.

And after I began to get some of my pride back, after a man named Johnny Cash and Glen Sherley began to look at me and say, hey, you know, you are worthwhile, then about 6 months later I was thinking I was pretty worthwhile and I was all right. Nobody could give me a pill, nobody could give me anything, you know, and I did not want to talk about it, you know. I said, I have got friends and they are depending on me to be a friend.

I walked out of an Alcoholic Anonymous meeting. I had a chance where I could just go in and meet people, and people would smile and I walked out of there feeling good, like I am one of them, you know, and it would not be long before I am out there again, and the bull grabs me and he says, you over in the corner, take off your clothes, you know, and you know, the man gets hurt and it hurts and I grabbed him one time and I said, hold it, and let’s talk about it and I got the officer down and we were able to sit down and talk. And I find that although I am changing, although other people in the joint are changing, they want to get a hold of themselves, the system is not; nothing changes. You have to go to change and do it all yourself. You have got to walk it and so sometimes it is pretty hard and when you send that youngster in there that don’t know what he is up against, Mr. Chairman, it is going to kill him. If it does not kill him, then he is going to come out wearing a miniskirt or carrying a gun or he is going to have to go through a lot of gut-caring to find that he is worthwhile.

That is all I have got to say. I sure do hope that we get this bill.

Senator Burdick: Well, thank you, gentlemen, for your contribution. It has been very helpful to us.

Mr. Sherley, you said that once you are in prison you become a cog in the wheel and Mr. Sanders, you said that you have got to stop it before it starts. This thesis was developed last week also and one of the leading witnesses was the District Attorney Seymour from New York in support of a bill we call early diversion. This is a new concept and the theory is that if this early offender can be diverted into either educational work or put on probation before the wheels of the cars begin to grind, such as the court procedures, such as the plea of guilty, not guilty, the trial, and so forth. But, if something can be done to rehabilitate that man before the doors of the prison clang behind him, that we have a better chance for rehabilitation than after the doors are shut. Do you agree with that?

Mr. Sherley: Definitely.

Mr. Sanders: I surely do.

Senator Burdick: Now, that is called early diversion. Now, it is going to be in the discretion of the prosecuting attorney and the judge as to whether or not this particular candidate, this particular offender, fits the mold for early diversion.

We also find that this would also help the offender in another way. We have some of our statutes in the States, various States, that preclude a man from getting a living. They say in some States that he must have a license for barbering, for example, and a criminal record will stop that. So, if we can divert this man, put him on the right track before he gets that record, before he gets into the atmosphere that [you] have described so vividly this morning, we have a chance to reduce his recidivism rate.

Mr. Sherley: That is true.

Senator Burdick: Have we got the right line here?

Mr. Sherley: That is right.

Senator Burdick: What else can we do?

Mr. Sherley: First, you have got to convince the district attorney all over the world that that conviction is not as important as that man’s life, so that he can become a judge. You have got to convince him of that first so that he can be more concerned over whether this man, how guilty he is, this man what is the crime. That is not important. That man’s life is more important than him becoming a judge, because he had x amount of convictions against x amount of losses. And this is going to be hard to do also.

Senator Brock: Mr. Chairman, if I can add one point, this particular bill 3185, creates these District Disposition Boards and that is a third party really. You have got normally the judge and the prosecutor, but a prosecutor, just by the very nature of his job, is going to be somewhat cynical and somewhat difficult to convince, by and large. And I think the intervention of the third party, which investigates the whole background of the individual and the case itself, can be a balance factor on behalf of good justice that would be extremely beneficial. I do not really think we can stay with and leave the determination to just the judge and the prosecutor and the defendant’s lawyer.

Senator Burdick: We are talking here about the theory and concept, and how we get the diversion into operation if we can. If we can figure how, first of all, we have to accept the theory, we have to have the American people accept the theory that the man commits the offense, and he does not necessarily have to go to jail, that he might be diverted into an educational program, a vocational program and stopped, as you say, Mr. Sanders, before it starts. Now, the mechanics, the third party you mention, is probably excellent and we are just trying to develop a new approach because the old approaches apparently are not working, not only are they not saving people but they are costing the taxpayers of this country an awful lot of money.

Now, Mr. Cash, based on your experience, what else can we do?

Mr. Cash: I would encourage the passing of this bill that will put some consistency in the laws of this land concerning first offenders, and, in particular, for instance, such as possession of marihuana. As the system is now, when an 18-year-old is put into prison for possession of marihuana, you have made a criminal out of him, as Glen said, and in 5 years he comes out an educated, well-trained criminal in the ways and in the skills of crime. And I think that is a crime in itself to do that to a man. We are into something else entirely really when you are talking about the laws on marihuana, but it is a good instance. I would urge the passing of this bill that would put some consistency in the law throughout the land on things such as marihuana, because there are many, many young innocent inquiring lives that are destroyed because of it. It is in the fire and in the blood of youth today to try things and I know, practically every kid I know and I know a lot of kids, and have got a lot of young friends around where I live, and I guess probably every one of them at the age of 18 has tried marihuana. This is unnecessary. I realize that many new buildings, a lot of money and many billions would have to be appropriated to build new buildings, to house these people, and to separate them. But, I would urge the separation of the young men from the old ones, and at all times when it is possible to separate the first offenders from the others. I believe that is all I have right now. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Burdick: I think you gentlemen will recognize there are certain assaultive types that have to be incarcerated for the sake of the community. We are dealing with a large number of people, [first] offenders and young offenders which I think can be diverted, can be rehabilitated, and when incarceration is necessary, I fully agree that the first offender and young offender should [be] separated. A lot of our prison officials come back and say, we do not have the money, and the legislatures do not give us the money, but I think that is a must. I think it is absolutely inhuman to place the young man in with a hardened man, and you just graphically described what happens sometimes.

No, I think the staff has one or two questions.

Senator Brock: May I just add one point to that, Senator, because I think it is important.

Senator Burdick: Yes.

Senator Brock: I spent Saturday afternoon at the State penitentiary in Nashville, and I talked to a group of inmates, just 20 or 30 in the same room, and me, and nobody else, and talked about these rehabilitation programs and the first offender programs and things like that. And one of them said something that was important to me. He said we believe in what you are trying to do on the first offenders, and we fully support it, but do not put all of your fire on the first offender program, because there are other things that can help, too. They described at considerable length, and I have included in my testimony a very brief summary of something they call the Seventh Step Foundation. Now, frankly, I had not heard of the program in any detail until I talked to these men, but, boy, they have done a job of selling me on a prisoners-helping-prisoners-inside program and it really got exciting to listen to. I am not sure that the [Federal] Government should tamper with it because we would foul it up. But I do think that kind of thing needs to be encouraged too in any possible way we can, [because] these are men relating to men in similar circumstances and who know each other’s problems and can more easily relate. And I think there is a real possibility for improvement [beyond] just the first offender and I hope our legislation will not simply limit itself to the presentencing and first offender areas, because I think we can do an awful lot of good elsewhere.

Mr. Cash: Mr. Chairman, could I say one other thing?

Senator Burdick: Yes.

Mr. Cash: I agree with you that there are men who [must] be [incarcerated]. I want them to keep my family safe and your family safe and keep the streets safe but, you [know], I think that progress even with those men, it comes down to even no matter how tough and hard they are, it comes down to the fact that we have got to care to have any progress with them. I recently performed at West Pennsylvania State Prison, last month it was, and I took my entire concert in there. And as these men came in, some thousand of them, there was a group of them right down front center, the pushy, violent ones, that came down in front and folded their arms, just like this. And as I came on stage, they said, “OK, show me something”. And they had on sunglasses and a beard which was their mask, to mask out anybody trying to get through to them. So, I started performing, and as I got about half-way into my concert, I remembered that I had performed at Folsom Prison and I took my 75-year-old father with me. So I said, I am going to dedicate a song to my Daddy, and I said, my Daddy was good to me most of the time. Usually he was the greatest Daddy in the world. And I said, any of you guys got a Daddy like that? And, you know, they started pushing each other, yeah, my old man, you know, and I could see them talking. Well, after about two-thirds of the way through the concert, I think about two-thirds of them dropped their arms, and when I saw I was getting through to them, I said, I performed last night in Chicago, and tonight [in]downtown Pittsburgh, and tomorrow afternoon in Dallas. And they do not pay very good at West Pennsylvania State, you know, and I got to be here because I care, right? Because we would not allow the press into that concert and they said, you know, they started nodding and so I felt that by the end of that concert, when they saw that I really did care, that all of us cared in my concert, and most all of them but about two of them had dropped their arms, and were tapping their toes, or smiling along with us. And if we could have come in with some good program and hit them with it right then, and started working on them, you know, with the [attitude] of good spirit, and a caring spirit, I believe a lot of good could be done.

Senator [Burdick]: We need more Johnny Cashes, I guess.

Mr. Cash: Well, thank you. I was just trying to point out the fact that if you let men know you care for them, you can do something with them.

Senator Burdick: Senator Cook, do you have a question?

Senator Cook: I apologize for being late, Mr. Cash, and Senator Brock and Jim. I have been in a meeting on methadone so we can kind of catch up. I want to elaborate on what Senator Brock said, because I think as far as the young offender, Mr. Cash, is concerned, we have got to establish some open campus institutions in the United States. And relative to the remarks that you said about the prison Saturday, we have an institution in Kentucky that is called South Field and it is a peer group operation. And they sit and talk with each other, and let me tell you when you get five or six young offenders that sit down and talk to each other and then some guy gives a big story and con about how he out there, and all of a sudden four or five of them sitting in the group start tearing in at him and they say, don’t give us that [baloney] and, you know, one of the real serious problems we had at that institution is that they will run it. They not only run it, but they run the punishment within it, and we had to get over some real traumatic experiences because of the punishment they meted out their own being a lot tougher than the institution would ordinarily mete out to them. But, the recidivism in that institution is down to almost nothing, because they handle their own problems, and they evaluate their own problems, and they come up with the answers. And what you are saying and also, Senator, when you say, maybe the Federal Government had better not fool with it because we had Mr. [Hoffa] who proceeded to tell us when he tried to get additional books into the library or some other things into the facility, or tried to help somebody, he was told by the Federal prison officials that he could not do it, and it was not allowed. So, I guess you are right. If we got into it we would probably foul it up real good.

Senator Brock: Well, I am not saying there aren’t a lot of areas that we should get into. There are. But, what I am saying is when you’ve got a con-to-con program where guys are sitting there and the whole idea behind this Seventh Step program is to have a guy face the truth about himself. It was not society that pulled that gun, it was him. Now, he has got to admit that before he is ever going to be able to rehabilitate himself, and their idea is to remotivate, not rehabilitate. They say you can give us all of the rehabilitation in the world, with all of your Federal and LEAA programs and all of the rest, but unless we are motivated it doesn’t mean anything.

Senator Cook: You know, we are talking about [communication] in this country, and the unfortunate part of it is there is very little communication in the Federal prison system, because you are told to be quiet all of the time and stand in line, and march around.

Mr. Sherley: You cannot have communication when you are told to shut up every time you open your mouth.

Senator Cook: That is right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Burdick: Senator Mathias?

Senator Mathias: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I [approached] this hearing and the consideration of this bill with considerable sympathy, because S. 3185 is a component part of the overall reform of the criminal justice bill which I have cosponsored and I feel very deeply about the purposes of it. I do have several questions, one or two for Senator Brock because before I came to the House of Representatives and to the Senate, he had a business experience, and I think we would all recognize that the ultimate test of success of a criminal or a rehabilitation program is going to be how he is accepted by the business community, and the jobs that are made available, and the acceptance of the graduates of these programs going back to normal life. So. I would say to Senator Brock that as a businessman how do you feel about the present fragmented Federal criminal justice system as compared with the integrated, orchestrated, or coordinated bridge which I would feel that the bill we have cosponsored envisions?

Senator Brock: You know, I can approach that from almost any number of answers, but I remember a little company that went broke in New Orleans and they were two of the finest men I ever knew in my life and they worked 12 hours a day to keep that company on its feet. They sold the product, and on their books they had a profit and they paid income taxes every year and they went broke making a profit. And they could not understand it until somebody went in there, an accountant and said, where is your depreciation figure and they said, what is depreciation, and he said, depreciation is how you age your equipment so that you can set aside enough money to buy new equipment. Well, they had never heard of that and I think that is the way we are running our penal system in America today.

It is insane to say we are spending a billion and a half dollars on penal justice, and then we are spending $50 billion a year on crime. I mean, the thing is way out of whack. If the penal system today is contributing to the crime problem of America, and nobody denies that it is, then we are absolutely penny wise and pound foolish not to do something about solving the problem and putting our money where our mouth is and doing something to reduce crime on the streets. That means you have got to do something about diversion, it means you have got to do something about uniform sentencing. It means you have got to do something about equity and parole opportunity. It means you have got to do something about motivation and rehabilitation. All of these things work together and it is terribly inefficient, not only immoral, but inefficient in dollars and cents terms for us to subject our wives and children to a system which continues to expand the cause of crime instead of reduce it.

Senator Mathias: Aside from the humane aspects and the moral aspects, it is just hard dollars and cents, commonsense to do so.

Senator Brock: I do not think we can afford not to do something. That is the size of it.

Senator Mathias: Now, to make sure Ave are on the same ground, because I am concerned as Mr. Cash has expressed himself earlier, about the state of first offenders. How do you envision this bill will affect the assignment of first offenders?

Senator Brock: Well, in the first place we allow for diversion; we allow for a preconference, precharge conference between the district board, the judge, the lawyer and the prosecutor, so that all of the elements in this particular individual’s case can be taken into account. There is a great deal of difference between somebody who goes out and breaks into a whiskey store just for the sheer hell-raising fun of it, or just to destroy and somebody whose kid is suffering from appendicitis and he has not got the money to make the operation, you know. There are all kinds of things that should be considered in whether or not an individual can be rehabilitated. There is no way today that we can judge that with the present system. He goes in court, he goes to trial, he goes before a jury, he is sentenced and put in jail for 5 years without any real consistency of sentencing, without any regard as to what opportunity he has to be a contributing member, a responsible member of society. And there just must be a better way of doing it. So, what we do, we allow the precharge conference to divert those people that can be salvaged and to make sure that those who cannot are isolated from society, because society does need that protection, too.

Mr. [Sherley]: And isolated from the ones that cannot be helped.

Senator Brock: That is right.

Senator Mathias: Now, two further brief questions. I think you and I both share the feeling that the role of the States in giving some local control is still an important part of our system.

Senator Brock: Right.

Senator Mathias: Do you have any concern that the recommendations of the advisory council regarding State standards as a condition for receiving Federal money would tip the scales too far in the direction of Federal control?

Senator Brock: No, I do not. Well, now, let me say this. I think Glen will tell you that the worst jails in the whole world are the city jails and next is the county jail, and the next is the State and then the Federal. Boy, ours is awful. So, I do not know but what the Federal system should be a model for everybody and we should make it the best possible. Now, that is our obligation right here but I think we have also got an obligation if we are going to fund State programs to have them meet minimum standards. We are not saying you have got to have this kind of a rehabilitation program, but we do have the right to say, I think, if taxpayers’ money is going to be spent that you have got to have a rehabilitation program. So, I think —

Senator Mathias: With a certain minimum degree of success.

Senator Brock: Of course. And in Tennessee, just a week before this, I went out to a school, not a reformatory, it is a school for first offender juveniles and, by golly, it is just a refreshing thing. It is beautiful. There are no walls or fences. It looks like a school and yet the kids are there, and they are going to stay there as long as that parole man says you are there and you are not corrected, or you are not ready for society. But, the minute he decides that those kids, or that particular kid is ready to rejoin society and will be a contributing member, he is out. During that time, he does not have bars, he does not have wardens, he does not have guards. lie has got teachers and these kids have a chance for a change. It is working and it is a thing of beauty. This legislation would encourage that kind of thing, it would not discourage it.

Senator Mathias: I would agree. We have had some experience in Maryland with the seven steps and I have visited the program and it is impressive really.

Senator Brock: It works, it really yorks. We have only had one repeat out of the seven-step program in the last year in Tennessee. That is quite a change.

Senator Mathias: Senator Cook just commented here that the real test of success of these programs is the rate of recidivism.

Senator Cook: That is it; that is right.

Senator Brock: Our State [system] is now from [66] to 40 percent. We are making progress.

Senator Mathias: One final question to Senator Brock on the same vein. Do you think that the District Court Disposition Board would usurp the traditional functions of the court, and the judicial function?

Senator Brock: No, not at all. I think it is an asset to the court. It would serve as an additional arm of the court to do pretrial investigation, to advise on sentencing and to achieve uniformity. But, in no way, does it interfere with the legal function of the court to make an adjudication. That is the court’s function but this is an additional tool for the court to use to make the court apply the law with justice, because that is not always the case. And what we are trying to do is to make the law work for the common good [of] the people of this country, and blind law does not necessarily do that. This is law with its eyes opened, with all of the facts.

Senator Mathias: Mr. Chairman, just a couple of questions to Mr. Cash.

I was very much interested in the picture you painted for us a minute ago of the convicts sitting with arms folded, and resisting any human contact. I suspect that as you saw them, they may see a great many prison officials, and the men in charge of parole and probation who to their eyes are sitting with arms folded and who seem detached and unconcerned, so it is impossible to [create] communication.

On the other hand, viewing the problems of these men, we have eight members of the Federal Parole Board, and eight hearing examiners and together they make some 17,500 decisions a year. But, since two members have to concur in each decision, that means there are really 35,000 decisions that have to be made, and so that means each one has to make about 2,500 decisions a year, which allows about 2 minutes per man in a normal working day. So, if you get some of this folded-arm detachment, perhaps the system that we are trying to work with now invites it.

Mr. Cash: Yes.

Senator Mathias: And prevents some of that communication.

Mr. Cash: Yes, sir.

Senator Mathias: And what I would like to ask Mr. Cash, because of the contact that he has had, and the contribution that he has made in this area, is whether you think that the present parole decision procedures do contribute to the frustration of prisoners?

Mr. Cash: Yes, sir, I am certain, I am sure they do because if a man is in for 10 years, he knows that when his time comes, he is going to be allocated approximately 2 minutes of consideration and they are going to listen to him for only 2 minutes to tell what kind of a man he is, and they may be spending the biggest part of those 2 minutes telling him what kind of a man they think he is. The last sentence of my first statement today from this newspaper, which is. should there not be more philosophers, and humanitarians involved in the workings of this criminal system, I think these people in probation need a lot of help from the citizenry. I think for the people to become involved in this reform program, they are going to have to be and maybe they will have to be drafted like jurors to assist the parole board. They need attorneys, they need ministers, they need deacons of the church, rabbis, to assist parole men so that each inmate can know that he is [going]; to get a fair shake when he comes up. That would be my recommendation, sir.

Senator Mathias: How about Mr. Sherley? Do you think the present parole procedures diminish or increase prison tensions?

Mr. Sherley: I am sorry, Senator. I did not understand the question.

Senator Mathias: How about Mr. Sherley? Do you think the present parole procedures diminish or increase prison tensions?

Mr. Sherley: They increase it. It is just like John said. If I go up there and I have had. as Senator Brock has said, a child who needed an operation, and I did not have the money to get it or my family is starving and I stole some money to feed them, I want more consideration than this guy that is robbing and stealing just for the hell of it. And with 2 minutes’ time [alloted] me. I do not think they can give me the proper consideration. I think they are bunching me up with them and I am [going] to resent that. So, I am not going to open [up] to them, you know, like I am going to sit there with my arms folded because I think that is what they are [doing] with me. And we [reach] a lack of communication.

Senator Mathias: Well, if rehabilitation is the real goal, and certainly it is not only from the prisoners’ point of view, ‘out from the point of view of society, because these people are coming back to [society] —

Mr. Sherley: Excuse me. I think it should be pointed out that most people in there, their growth was aborted in childhood and so they are as children. I do not care how old or how tough they are, they are still as children, and they have never been — rehabilitate means to go back to a former state, and well, the only place they can revert to is a child, childhood, where they got sidetracked so they have not been rehabilitated to start with and it is like a question not of rehabilitating, but to habilitate them to start with.

Senator Mathias: To make a positive advance?

Mr. Sherley: Right. Show them some means of reaching a good goal instead of a bad goal.

Senator Mathias: You think it is the negative, the bad goal, that we are reaching today?

Mr. Sherley: I am sure, I am positive. I think the figures will prove it, But I think that money is, the moneys that are allocated for building, should be [allotted] for hiring people, psychologists, psychiatrists, people that know where they are because if a 21-year-old guard approaches me and I strike out at him, and he does not know where he is as a person, then how is he going to help me find out where I am, because he strikes out, too, because he does not know where he is, as a man. And I call him a bastard and he is going to write me up and put me in solitary confinement, and when I get out of solitary confinement, every time I see him, I am going to see red. There is no way in the world that he can reach me. And every time he sees me he gets angry because I put a question to him whether he is a bastard or not, and he does not really know.

Senator Mathias: But, in the meantime, you build a wall between you that you cannot get through?

Mr. Sherley: That is what we have done. We have built a wall and there is no chance of us communicating, him helping me because I do not feel that he is qualified.

Senator Mathias: In your judgment, Mr. Cash, on this, do you think if there were goals set at the time of sentencing which were tied to parole release, will this contribute to the prisoner’s attitude, would it [prevent] this kind of wall being erected?

Mr. Sherley: Not as long as you have the 21-year-old enforcer who does not know where he is. He is the preventive. Of course, the convict is also because he is there, but he is there whether it is a 21-year-old guard that is going to try to lead him out, or whether it is a person who has been well-educated and trained in psychology. Every problem with a man is psychological. This is so intricate that it is hard to get down to you, you know, why you put on a certain shoe first in the morning. I mean, there is a reason for it psychologically. It is [the] same thing with men in prison.

Senator Mathias: Would you [agree] with that, Mr. Cash?

Mr. Cash: Yes. One thing that I see that I just love about this bill. Senator Brock is involved in here, that we talked about this morning is that to give a man some ambition, some motivation to try to be paroled early. I mean, this [program] covers the thing that if a man. whose record is good while he is in prison, if he shows progress, if he shows reform, in other words, walks the line, then give him the motivation to try to obtain an early release, I think this is a very important thing; to give a man some hope in prison, to give a man some encouragement to be a better citizen while he is there and if he is a better citizen, while he is there, he is going to come out a better citizen.

Senator Mathias: Do you think that this would have some effect on the repeater?

Mr. Cash: Definitely it would.

Senator Mathias: Because it gives him a more positive experience in his first, and, hopefully, his only prison experience.

Mr. Cash: All of the things would cut down on repeaters but that one thing alone will cut down a lot of repeaters, to get a man inside to work for an early release, to be a productive citizen of the prison community which will be a productive citizen of our community.

Senator Brock: I think it is awfully hard, if I can interject, for us to feel what Glen Sherley would feel or any other person who is on the inside what it is like, perhaps, like trying to feel black. It is very difficult for a white person to feel exactly the same kind of thing. There is a subculture in prison that is absolutely different from anything we have ever experienced or could experience. Glen was very much a part of it, ran it and I think unless there is some way of breaking that pattern you are never going to break the recidivism. If a guy is convicted and he says I am going to be here for 20 years, come hell or high water, and there is nothing that can happen to get me out any earlier, then the only thing I can do is make it work to my advantage. He accepts it and he says I am going to have to let it dictate my life style, and I am going to have to adjust my whole pattern of thinking and he starts delving into narcotics, he starts talking rape, things that are just out of the [normal] cycle of our thought process.

Mr. Sherley: That is true. He becomes a wheeler and dealer to survive and be one of the top dogs in the prison, and he becomes a wheeler and a dealer in narcotics, homosexuality. He becomes aggressive and homosexual, and if he is going to have to be there 20 years, then he is going to make it his home, so he gets him. as the saying goes, an old lady and he sets up housekeeping and the whole smear, and to get him once he sets the shield, and has decided this is his life, then you have got to just bust him in the head with something to get his attention diverted, because everything is applied in this one direction and everything that he can manipulate to reach those ends, he will, as you would.

Mr. Sanders: Senator Mathias.

Senator Mathias: Yes, Mr. Sanders.

Mr. Sanders: I have a billfold here, not very dressy, but I have a friend of mine and he is in for [kidnapping] in California prison, and he has got 7 years to go to the board.

Senator [Mathias]: Seven years?

Mr. Sanders: Seven years. Those are the guidelines. He goes to the board in 7 years and he has these 7 years and he says like maybe I have this 7 years and after 7 years I am going to see what happens.

Mr. Sherley: He goes up automatically.

[Mr. Sanders]: Right. This guy, I hate to get down on the State of California, because they let me go, you know, but this guy is going to lose his legs. He has a disease and he has a life sentence in front of him. The State of California decided to wait awhile, checking into his legs, until he was too late, and now they say there is nothing they can do about it, and they are going to cut them off, cut off his legs, get him out of the way. This guy had nothing. I spent the last months of these last 4 years talking to that guy. I was worthwhile and let me see if we cannot make him worthwhile. That is what is happening here. You are worthwhile, now you help somebody else.

Mr. [Sherley]: It has got to be a chain reaction.

Mr. Sanders: I spent 6 months with this guy and he is an ex-Marine, a hard-headed son-of-a-bitch, you know, and a hell of a guy. Mr. Cash. That is part of the prison subculture, Senator.

Mr. Cash: That is part of the prison subculture, Senator.

Senator Brock: We get a little of that up here.

Senator Mathias: That one spreads around.

Mr. [Sanders]: This guy has no guidelines except what the prison system sets up. [No] guidelines. He is painting now and he digs it, you know. In fact, he sent the picture of John, a painting of John, and a painting of Glen. He is not a great painter, but he digs it and he is going to come out of that prison some day, I do not know when, without any legs and [painting] maybe on the sidewalk while [he] is selling pencils. But, my 6 months in there was meant to get him set up with his own guidelines, and that is you have got to do it, nobody else is going to do it for you.

Mr. Sherley: Did he make the wallet?

Mr. Sanders: He made the wallet and it has my name on it and I am proud of that wallet. There is not much money in that wallet but I am proud of that wallet. But, the whole thing is the return — you say, God, I wish, and I will say here the youngsters, man, they are the most important to me. you know. There are some old guys back there, too; if somebody came in and like I, I mean, did, and like this man did me, and said, you know, I care about you boys. What is going to happen with you, and you got to work for a guy like that. You have got to stand back and say, point me out, show me, you know.

Mr. Sherley: I was a three-time loser when John reached out his hand to me in [1968], and since then I sincerely believe that I have become a worthwhile person and can contribute to society outside as well as to contributing to society inside. And if it is always hinging on the first-timer then I would have been gone. If there was not any hope for a three-time loser, I would have been gone, because I was in Folsom and that is the end of the line in California. That is when they cannot do anything else with you, anywhere else, in the system and they send you to Folsom and that is where I was, and Johnny was and only that pulled me out of the muck because it made me want to try, it gave me the strength and the courage to try and only that. It has got to be concern and love and care. You have got to feel it and it has got to be from someone that you feel is worthwhile, too, otherwise it is not worth a damn. If it coming from your immediate family, you do not know whether they are putting you on or [saying], yeah, well, that is a good conning and you do not know whether it is or not because they are going to do that anyway, and the only thing that can help, the only way we can change it is with love and concern and care.

Senator Mathias: Those things cannot be faked.

Mr. Sherley: They cannot be faked because the convict is looking. He is the last one in the world you can trick because he is looking to be tricked and he is looking to be made a fool of. Consequently, he overcompensates a lot of times and as Mr. Cook says, the measures he takes are more drastic than he would take out here.

Senator Mathias: One final question to Mr. Sanders which conies to mind. I think where you described very dramatically, of course, this need for communication and what communication can do about how do you relate this to your own parole experience, for example? I think it is important to get this. What I am afraid you are going to tell us is a contrast.

Mr. Sanders: I am not sure I understand your question, Senator. Senator Mathias. Well, when you went through the parole, the whole [parole] procedure, did you get the same feeling of communication?

Mr. Sanders: You mean getting my parole, appearing before —

Senator Mathias: Yes, through the official route by which you officially paroled?

Mr. Sanders: I was lucky, Senator. I had a bunch of letters from the Johnny Cash organization.

Senator Mathias: But did you feel the same pull that you are talking about in terms of this person-to-person communication?

Senator Brock: Would it have been the same thing without Johnny Cash?

Mr. [Sanders]: Every time — I have spent about 7 years in prison and every time I have appeared before a parole board I am rushed. I am saying, God, just let them see me; God. just let them see me, and well, I will tell you it is kind of like yelling up, saying God, listen, listen, God, listen, and you continue, and you do not stop long enough to hear the voice saying. Sanders, listen, listen, listen, and you have got two people going together and they are out to tell you what it is about you. and you are out to tell them what you are, and I cannot see any kind of communication going on. They all go by this little 2-minute conversation and a whole backlog here that they can rush through, and —

Mr. [Sherley]: Your track record.

Mr. [Sanders] (continuing): And they have white slips there which tells you that the guy passed so and so test and the guy has a high IQ. And then they have pink slips that stand out, that this guy called the bull a bad name, this guy, you know, the bad always stand out much more than the good. You do not have a little piece of paper in bright red that says this guy helps another guy do this, this guy stood up for the warden because he dug the warden in a certain instance. You do not get those, you know, and the fact is that I would not want them, you know, because the convicts might see them.

Mr. Sherley: That is [right]. That is where your communication breaks down again.

Senator Cook: Could I interrupt, and relative to Mr. Cash’s remarks to you, Senator Mathias, about how you [can] break this thing up, it seems to me, Bill, you kind of come close to it in your bill, but maybe not enough. Maybe what we really ought to look to is to have this parole board, Federal Parole Board as the last resort of appeal and break up the country into sections, and set [up] parole boards in the respective sections so that we do not have all of this 2-minute and 4- minute sort of thing. Maybe you can break that up, Bill. I mean the point that I am trying to make is if we have a system of appeal through the court system, then [let] us do the same thing, but let it originate at the [lower level], and let there be an option with it for the prisoner to appeal if the decision is bad and at one level, but if it is over there, then let it be over. If lie gets Irs parole there, then let it be over, but let us not have this situation of thousands and thousands and thousands of cases that have got to be determined by eight men.

Senator Brock: You know what I am trying to say is I would like to see the District Disposition Board assign a man to a case the day the guy is picked up and I want him to live with that man through the trial, pretrial —

Senator Cook: That is right, but when that man says he is ready to come out, it is accepted.

Senator Brock: That is right. There you go.

Senator Cook: Then you do not have any white slips and pink slips and all the rest of it.

Senator Brock: And a set of 30,000 decisions coming up here with access to one board and there would be a maximum of 400 decisions in any one district and there you can manage it. Then [you] have got it on a human personal basis then you can measure it man-to-man.

Senator Cook: That is right. That is where I think we are going to get close to it, because I think this regional concept, although even a State concept —

Senator Brock: Mine is a district concept, but the same thing.

Senator Cook: All right, and let it stop right there unless, in fact, the individual himself thinks that he has not been treated fairly and then he has the right to appeal.

Senator Brock: Give him an appellate process right to the top. Right. That is fine.

Senator Cook: And you have not got these men making 35,000 decisions or more than that.

Mr. Sherley: They cannot do it honestly. If they are doing their level best, they cannot do it honestly. It is impossible.

Senator Mathias: Mr. Chairman, I have just one further thought that occurs to me. There is a wide range of interest in this whole problem through the Senate. The chairman here has taken a great leadership and [he] comes from one of the Western States and Senator Brock, Senator Cook, and myself are all from border States, and Senator Percy of Illinois who has exhibited a great interest in this, in sponsoring bills in this area, represents one of the big, urban industrial States. Is there any difference in a prison population that you see depending on the kind of area it draws from, or do people pretty well lose whatever background personality they have once they get submerged in that prison population?

Mr. Sherley: No. There is definitely a line within a prison like the Okies and the blacks and the militants and the nonmilitants but it does not seem to matter which State you come from. Once you get in a category in a prison if I understand you right, if that is what you are talking about.

Senator Mathias: Yes, whether there was such differences within this subculture in the prison that you have to deal with, that you have to deal any differently with prisoners with a rural background, or small town background as against the people that come out of the slums and the ghettos of the biff cities?

Mr. Sherley: Yes, well the board would have to deal with them [differently]. They find their own niches once they get in prison. They fall into their own category in there, you know.

Senator Mathias: So that the procedure —

Mr. [Shirley]: They have their own taking order, so to speak.

Senator Mathias: The procedure we are talking about in this legislation, which allows for greater individual assessment of these kinds of problems —

Mr. Sherley: Right.

Senator Mathias: Does it adjust itself better then than this massive kind of effort that we are making today?

Senator Brock: Sure. That is the idea.

Senator Mathias: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Burdick: I have just one or two questions, gentlemen. I think we can agree that to the extent we can divert early offenders before they get into this chain, I think we can agree that we have to do more about the parole system and we can regionalize it, have more personnel in the regions, so that as has been said here this morning, we do not limit interviews to 2 minutes, and improve the parole procedures that are in. Can we agree on those areas at least?

Now, drawing upon your experience, what can we do to increase the awareness of our communities, of the public? As I said as this hearing opened, that the attitude of people has changed dramatically, I think, in these last 5 years. How can we do more to acquaint the public with the cost of crime to them as taxpayers, and how can we make the communities more readily accept the [exoffenders]. Do you have any general approach on that?

Mr. Sanders: Mr. Chairman, I think a beautiful way of doing it is like Senator Brock said, the Seventh Step Organization. Now, they send out speakers, you know, every chance, every opportunity, and you do not have to pay them, just get us there, you know, and let us talk to groups. That is what we will do. And they do a hell of a job. They will talk to you like I am talking, like the boys told me to talk, talk like I am, you know, and they will stand up in front of groups and do a hell of a job like that. I do not know how they are funded or anything, but I know they are working their tail ends off trying to get something done, you know. They are bringing realism right into the classroom, and into the Kiwanis Clubs, anything, you know.

Mr. Sherley: But up until the Seven Step Organization, I would point out the fact that you let a man out of prison that has been there 8 years, 6 years, and the only person he can [really] relate with is someone — well, if you cut your finger the only way I know how you feel is that I have to cut mine a little bit, and I say I know how you feel. But. it was against the law like it was a parole violation, and you could be sent back to prison to be caught talking to another convict. One convict outside a prison talking to another convict, you would be sent back for that. In other words, we are not going to let you communicate with anybody that you can. And I think before the Seventh Step Organization, I think we have got it now so they can communicate, have they not, and they can meet in clubs and try to help one another.

Senator Burdick: Have you any departing words for us, Mr. Cash, in this area?

Mr. Cash: I think a lot of good work could be done on a regional or State or city level, possibly even the mayor or the Governor of the State or the commissioner of corrections could ask for or enlist the aid in the rehabilitation programs and the parole program from, as I said before, ministers, the clerks, from the responsible businessmen and of other citizens that might possibly care. Thank you.

Senator [Burdick]: Well, before we conclude this hearing, I want to personally thank each one of you and I want to commend you. You have not been reluctant about telling about your own background, and I think you have made a contribution that will pay dividends in the future. So we are very grateful to all of you.

Thank you.

The hearing is still in session.

Our next witness is Dr. Nat Winston, psychiatrist from Nashville, Tenn. Doctor, will you approach the witness table?