A proposal intended to study the efficacy of rehabilitation credits in California prisons was recently voted down by the Assembly Public Safety Committee. However, the committee did grant reconsideration, allowing for an amended version to be brought back for a hearing on an unspecified date.
The report would be required to analyze the difference between recidivism rates of incarcerated persons who do and do not participate in the state’s rehabilitation programs.
“SB 359 will help ensure that we support the most valuable rehabilitative programs in our correctional system by studying and determining which early release credits contribute to the lowest rates of recidivism,” Mr. Umberg said in support of his bill in the analysis provided by the committee. “Studying which credits correlate to the highest and lowest rates of recidivism would provide valuable insight for those seeking out these programs and the policymakers who fund them.”
Noting that the state will spend more than $14 billion in the coming fiscal year on its correctional institutions, the senator said that more information is needed to help guide funding allocations, with a goal of prioritizing those that prove sustainable.
“We need data to determine the most effective use of those resources,” Mr. Umberg told the committee while presenting his bill on June 27. “It’s one of the most expensive parts of the budget.”
The senator provided examples where prison programs have greatly improved recidivism rates, such as professional training opportunities, and told his colleagues that the bill would allow lawmakers to identify credits that are excelling and expand such efforts.
Law enforcement spokespersons rose to support the bill, and district attorneys from across the state said the issue was a matter of public safety and urged the committee to pass the legislation.
“[The CDCR] has been given unprecedented authority to award various types of conduct credit to nearly all inmates, including murderers, sex offenders and other violent offenders,” the California District Attorneys Association argued in support of the bill. “Many of the new conduct credits were created through a regulatory process and contradict existing statutory authority limiting the awarding of conduct credits to certain classes of inmates, including those convicted of murder and other violent offenses.”
Proponents of the bill say that by identifying credits that fail to produce results, funds can be better allocated, subsequently benefiting inmates by providing more opportunities.
While no opposition was listed in the committee’s analysis, and no experts testified against the bill, Democratic members of the committee blocked the measure from passing, with two advising the author that their mistrust in the CDCR prevents them from supporting the proposal.
“I know your goals and intentions are noble ... but I have high skepticism of CDCR being able to compile that data and do the requisite analysis needed,” Assemblyman Isaac Bryan (D-Los Angeles) said. “I don’t know that I trust the department can do it, and I don’t want to give them more money.”
The chair of the committee, Assemblyman Reginald Jones-Sawyer (D-Los Angeles), echoed his colleague’s sentiment and listed examples of times the department of corrections failed to provide data as requested.
“There are at least three members that sit on this committee ... that are extremely frustrated at the lack of participation, the lack of cooperation, at the outright disrespect for the Legislature that CDCR has had,” he said. “We’ve asked for budgetary information, and they’ve shown up and not given us the information and basically flaunted their noses at us.”
Before advising a no vote on the bill, Mr. Jones-Sawyer reiterated his disdain for the department and stressed that he would not support any measures that grant the agency more authority.
“I can not let CDCR be in charge of getting information. They will stonewall you, and you will get frustrated,” the committee chair said. “I don’t know if it’s management. I don’t know what’s going on over there because they won’t let us know what’s going on.”
In concluding his remarks, he told the author that while the committee supports data gathering and learning more about the variables affecting rehabilitation efforts, an outside agency would be better suited to handle the task.
“We can not give it to CDCR. It will be a waste of time, and waste of money,” Mr. Jones-Sawyer said. “It’s the most frustrating thing I’ve dealt with in my life.”
Mr. Umberg responded to the complaints by noting that while another firm could be responsible for analyzing the data, the department of corrections—as the primary source for all data originating in the system—would still play a vital role in any inquiry.
“I have no passion for CDCR doing the study, but the issue is whoever collects the data, it comes from the department of corrections, and I don’t think there’s any way to keep them from being involved,” Mr. Umberg said.
Following the discussion, the bill failed with a 3-2 vote, with only Republican members voting in support of the proposal authored by the Democratic senator.
