Page images


s 1722, again, essentially the Justice Department's

criminal code, eliminates parole without cutting prison

sentence lengths but lengthening them in some cases.


parole can come after 1/3 of the sentence maximum, maximum

sentences, if parole is eliminated, should be reduced 2/3s, but

there is no reduction in the Senate bill.)

The House bill

retains parole for 5 years and then drops it.

Statutory maximums

rre cut only 1/2 which still sums up to longer sentences.


sentences with no parole will cause more overcrowding and

greatly increase the likelihood of unrest and rioting.

Good time:

S 1722 makes a severe cut-back in "good time" (days

to serve eliminated from a sentence for good conduct).

HR 6915

abolishes good time altogether.

This violates the double

jeopardy clause of the Constitution and provides prosecutors with

a convenient threat to get pleas accepted (either the offender

accepts the plea or the Government will appeal).

A death penalty

bill was passed in the same session of the Senate Judiciary committee

as the Senate Code and may be tacked onto S 1722 as an amendment on

the Senate floor.

It is likely that a death penalty amendment will

also be tacked onto HR 6915 in the Judiciary committee.


We strongly recommend that you and your

colleagues draft amendments to introduce in the full Judiciary that

will remedy the above inadequacies in HR 6915 and that you alert

your colleagues to the above provisions on government appeal and

the death penalty likely to be offered in full committee.

We also

recomend that you and your colleagues make every effort to attend

every full Judiciary meeting in which HR 6915 is to be discussed.

Respectfully submitted,

Citizens Commission on Human Rights
Washington Office



Icoleman McCarthy, "The World Learns America's Dirty Secret, Its Prisons," Los Angeles Times, March 20, 1979, p.

2 James L. Potts, "Alternative Punishment for Being Poor Won't Reduce Crime. A Proposal for Non-Correctional Alternatives to Punishment," The Prison Law Monitor, 160, Nov. - Dec., 1979.

31ra M. Lowe, Esq., Testimony before the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Senate Judiciary Committee, Oct. 5, 1979.

4L.A. Nkoloric, "Getting Tough' With All Convicts is a Prescription for More Crime," The Washington Post, Oct. 14, 1979.

5Thomas Whittle, exclusive to Freedom News Journal, 23 March, '79.
6" When Will It Happen Again," Newsweek, 70, Feb. 18, 1980.
7 Ibid., p. 68.
8- The Killing Ground," Newsweek, 66 68, February 18, 1980.


307 Yookum Parkway, Suite #1717. Alexandria, Virginia 22304
Telephone: (703) 379-1171. Answering Service, Unit #3-1717: (703) 370-0100

October 29, 1979

Subcommittee Members and Staff
Criminal Justice Subcommittee
Judiciary Committee
U. S. House of Representatives


The following is a summary of studies which demonstrate that utilization of sentencing alternatives can be responsibly, substantially increased. Britain has demonstrated that courts can successfully match offenders to suitable alternative programs, which reduces recidivism, which has a multiple reduction effect on the crime rate. Many u. s. alternative programs exercise tight control over program participants and thereby provide excellent security to the community. Many alternative programs are available which can upgrade offender job-skills and thereby reduce unemployment, as well as reduce the micro-economic incentives for criminal activities. At this time, there is sufficiently solid justification for you to enact legislation providing for the full utilization of suitable alternative programs.

NCJRS numbers have been provided in most of the footnotes in the Appendix to facilitate your acquisition of the full text of the studies cited, from either the Department of Justice or the LEAA library.

You may also refer to my October 5, 1979 testimony before the U. S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]


save a Substantial Amount of

Alternative Programs can
Tax Money,

P. 1

Can Alternatives to Imprisonment Deter Crime as Effectively as Imprisonment? P. 3

Can Alternatives to Prison Provide More Effective Punishment than Imprisonment? P. 7

Alternative Programs Can Provide Excellent Security to the Community, P. 8

Reducing Recidivism with Alternatives to Prison Will Reduce the Crime Rate,

P. 10

Alternatives Coupled with Probation Can Greatly Increase
Deterrence and Reduce Recidivism over Probation Alone,

[blocks in formation]

Can Public Opinion Accept Alternatives to Imprisonment,

P. 20

Does the Authority to Impose Alternatives to Imprisonment Need to be Legislated? P. 22

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »