    [Senate Hearing 118-531]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 118-531

                   THE NATION'S CORRECTIONAL STAFFING CRISIS:
                       ASSESSING THE TOLL ON CORRECTIONAL
                       OFFICERS AND INCARCERATED PERSONS

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

             SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND COUNTERTERRORISM

                                     OF THE

                           COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   ----------

                               FEBRUARY 28, 2024

                                   ----------

                              Serial No. J-118-55

                                   ----------

             Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                                            S. Hrg. 118-531

                   THE NATION'S CORRECTIONAL STAFFING CRISIS:
                       ASSESSING THE TOLL ON CORRECTIONAL
                        OFFICERS AND INCARCERATED PERSONS

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

             SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND COUNTERTERRORISM

                                     OF THE

                           COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                               FEBRUARY 28, 2024

                                   __________

                              Serial No. J-118-55

                                   __________

             Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                            www.judiciary.senate.gov
                                www.govinfo.gov

                                    _______

                     U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    57-957                    WASHINGTON : 2025

                           COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                       RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois, Chair
    SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island     LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina,
    AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota                 Ranking Member
    CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware       CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa
    RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut      JOHN CORNYN, Texas
    MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii              MICHAEL S. LEE, Utah
    CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey           TED CRUZ, Texas
    ALEX PADILLA, California             JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
    JON OSSOFF, Georgia                  TOM COTTON, Arkansas
    PETER WELCH, Vermont                 JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
    LAPHONZA BUTLER, California          THOM TILLIS, North Carolina
                                         MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
                     Joseph Zogby, Majority Staff Director
                    Katherine Nikas, Minority Staff Director

             Subcommittee on Criminal Justice and Counterterrorism

                       CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey, Chair
    SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island     TOM COTTON, Arkansas, Ranking
    AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota                 Member
    CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware       CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa
    PADILLA, ALEX, California            JOHN CORNYN, Texas
    OSSOFF, JON, Georgia                 MICHAEL S. LEE, Utah
    LAPHONZA BUTLER, California          TED CRUZ, Texas
                                         JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
                     Lynda Garcia, Democratic Chief Counsel
                     Drew Hudson, Republican Chief Counsel

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                       Page

    Booker, Hon. Cory A..............................................     1
    Cotton, Hon. Tom.................................................     3

                                   WITNESSES

    Mangual, Rafael A................................................    14
        Prepared statement...........................................    40

    Nance, Santia....................................................     9
        Prepared statement...........................................    45
        Responses to written questions...............................    76

    Walker, Stephen B................................................    12
        Prepared statement...........................................    48
        Responses to written questions...............................    78

    Wetzel, John.....................................................     6
        Prepared statement...........................................    60
        Responses to written questions...............................    79

    White, Brandy Moore..............................................    10
        Prepared statement...........................................    69
        Responses to written questions...............................    81

                                    APPENDIX

    Items submitted for the record...................................    39

                           THE NATION'S CORRECTIONAL
                         STAFFING CRISIS: ASSESSING THE
                         TOLL ON CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS
                            AND INCARCERATED PERSONS

                                  ----------

                          WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2024

                          United States Senate,
                      Subcommittee on Criminal Justice
                                  and Counterterrorism,
                                    Committee on the Judiciary,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice at 2:30 p.m., in
    Room 226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Cory A. Booker,
    Chair of the Subcommittee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Booker [presiding], Whitehouse, Padilla,
    Ossoff, Butler, Cotton.
        Also present: Senator Welch.

               OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CORY A. BOOKER,
              A. U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

        Chair Booker. We are officially gaveled in. And I just want
    to say good afternoon, everybody. It means a lot that everyone
    is here for an important hearing in this discussion. And I just
    want to give a lot of gratitude to folks making time out of
    their schedule to be a part of this. I want to welcome our
    witnesses, many in whom journeyed really far to be a part of
    this Subcommittee hearing.
        And I'm also particularly grateful to have Tom Cotton as my
    Ranking Member in this work, that his staff and he has done to
    make this hearing successful. We face a stark reality today.
    Our national correctional system, I think it's fair to say, is
    in crisis.
        The Bureau of Prisons is undergoing a well-documented
    staffing shortage with 21 percent of correctional positions
    vacant, BOP has imposed more and more mandatory overtime
    forcing officers to work 10, 12, 15 and we heard earlier today,
    18-hour shifts.
        This disrupts their lives, makes it harder for them to find
    childcare or simply just to be with their families. The BOP has
    also relied on staff augmentation, pulling case managers,
    teachers, psychologists, away from their work to perform duties
    they aren't often fully trained for.
        Our State's prisons are also functioning with dangerously
    low levels of staff in a way that I think we'll elucidate
    today. Over the last few years, we've seen an increase in the
    prison--in the population of incarcerated individuals, which
    has now led to overcrowding.
        Correctional officers and their staffs are really
    struggling with this. These are some extraordinarily dedicated
    law enforcement Americans, yet they are overworked and
    underpaid and struggling with the resultant mental health
    challenges.
        I was stunned to find out how undercompensated they were
    when I sat down with Mrs. Brandy Moore White. It just did not
    compute to me how little we are paying them. And this, I want
    to say leads to chronic stress. It doesn't just dissipate once
    officers leave the facility, it really follows them home.
        Devastatingly it is estimated that 156 active-duty
    correctional officers take their own lives each year. That's
    three individuals a week. The Nation's correctional
    infrastructure is also in despair and more susceptible to
    extreme heat and cold, flooding, and other weather events.
        In Texas, more than two-thirds of the Texas prisons have no
    air conditioning, even after 10 incarcerated individuals have
    died from heat related illness in the month-long heat wave back
    in 2011. This crisis has a profound human toll.
        In Georgia, it took 5 days for correctional staff to
    discover an incarcerated person's decomposing body after their
    death. In Missouri, despite multiple complaints and requests to
    see a dentist, an incarcerated individual pulled out his own
    teeth because he never received adequate dental care.
        Earlier today, the Judiciary Committee held a hearing about
    the Inspector General's disturbing findings that staff
    shortages were a contributor to deaths of incarcerated people
    in the Bureau of Prisons, not to mention the challenges and
    hardships placed upon our correctional officers.
        Our prisons have a weighty mandate to promote public safety
    by maintaining a humane and secure correctional environment and
    preparing incarcerated individuals to reenter society. Plainly,
    it is not possible to accomplish this mandate with an
    overworked workforce laboring in unsafe and even undignified
    conditions.
        Look, the Ranking Member, and I have areas of agreement and
    areas of not, but one thing he and I feel fiercely about--I've
    heard him speak about it--is this importance of public safety,
    safe neighborhoods, safe communities, a safe country.
        If you look at our Founding Documents, so much of them, the
    establishment of our government was about keeping people safe,
    about public safety. Well, there's a direct connection between
    what happens in our prisons and the safety of our community
    because 95 percent, roughly of the people who go into prison
    come back out.
        An estimated 65 percent of the people incarcerated in the
    United States have a substance abuse disorder. But instead of
    providing services, we see that they're not getting basic
    medical care, which again, has a direct correlation to how they
    behave outside of prison as well.
        The proven way to lower recidivism rates is to ensure
    access to medical care, including mental health and substance
    use treatment, which empower individuals through programming to
    ensure that incarcerated individuals are able to be successful
    when they're released.
        We even know there's a connection between incarcerated
    individuals being connected to their children and their
    families and their recidivism rates. What we need is common
    sense, evidence-based policies that promote proven methods to
    lower recidivism rates, and empower people to succeed.
        Our correctional officers are public safety officials. They
    are critical to the safety of our Nation. They are law
    enforcement individuals, yet to deny them the resources or
    support we give to other members of law enforcement or to have
    them disproportionately underpaid, relative to the work of
    other law enforcement individuals, it's not just disrespect, it
    actually undermines their mission of public safety.
        This crisis is a public safety issue, and it is a moral
    issue. If you want to see the character of a country, don't
    look in our places of business, our fields of science and
    education alone, look within our prisons. The condition of our
    prisons says so much about the character of who we are as a
    country.
        The people that work there, the people incarcerated there,
    do their conditions, do their work environment, do the
    conditions of their incarceration reflect the highest standards
    of a Nation of our greatness. We should be setting the global
    example of incarceration and remediation, repair, and
    restoration.
        I look forward to this productive conversation with this
    extraordinary panel. I'm grateful again for everybody being
    that. And with that, I turn it over to the Ranking Member of
    this Subcommittee, my colleague from Arkansas, Senator Tom
    Cotton.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TOM COTTON,
               A. U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS

        Senator Cotton. Thank you, Senator Booker. This hearing
    touches on an important topic. I think we can all agree that
    our prisons are understaffed. In the Federal system alone, we
    have about 40 percent of our prison correctional officer
    positions unfilled, even though Congress has already
    appropriated money to fill those positions, and crime is
    increasing in the country, in part because we've been too eager
    to empty out our prisons and let violent, dangerous criminals
    back into our communities far too early.
        The revolving door of poorly resourced prisons and
    increasingly weak sentences is worsening crime nationwide. We
    need to reverse that trend. In 1992, as the Nation faced an
    epidemic of homicides and violent crime with people scared to
    leave their homes in some cities, then Attorney General Bill
    Barr released a report called The Case for More Incarceration.
        In that report, he argued that the failure to incarcerate
    leads to more crime and costs much more than spending on
    prisons. He was right then, and he's right now. And as Congress
    spent more on getting tougher on crime and setting up
    sufficient prison space, crime rates dropped dramatically.
        Unfortunately, too many would soon forget that success. You
    might even say that we were a victim of our success. A decade
    ago, when our prison population peaked, many argued that the
    high crime days of the 1990's were in the past, and we spent
    too much money on our prisons. If we had just let criminals
    out, they argued we could save money on prisons.
        After all, why would we need prisons anymore if crime has
    decreased by so much. It's astounding that anyone ever believed
    that. But the idea that increased prison populations were
    somehow unconnected to a declining crime was repeated over and
    over.
        The New York Times was especially fond of this line of
    argument. In August, 1998, they ran an article entitled Prison
    Population Growing, Although Crime Rate Drops. Almost exactly 2
    years later, the same reporter at the New York Times published
    an article entitled Number in Prison Grows Despite Crime
    Reduction. And in 2004, that very same reporter published yet
    another article in the New York Times. The headline was,
    Despite Drop in Crime, an Increase in Inmates.
        Now, maybe the New York Times was not getting its money's
    worth from that particular reporter, but eventually people
    started believing that prison populations were too high if
    crime rates weren't so bad. And over the past decade, the total
    State and Federal prison population in the United States has
    dropped by more than 20 percent.
        In the Federal system alone, it's decreased by 30 percent,
    and as prison started to empty in 2014, not surprisingly,
    violent crime rates shot up nationwide by more than 10 percent,
    in just 2 years. In big cities, the change has been even more
    dramatic as reduced prison populations combined with de
    policing, and so-called criminal justice reform measures, to
    weaken penalties for committing crimes were adopted.
        A study from Iowa State University researchers in the early
    2000's ran the numbers to find out how much crime cost our
    society. Each armed robbery, every single one cost society more
    than $335,000. The University of Chicago study similarly found
    that an armed robbery cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to
    society.
        These aren't just the immediate costs to the victim, like
    replacing stolen property and getting medical treatment after
    an assault or paying for the funeral if someone dies. It also
    includes other costs of crimes such as higher insurance costs,
    shuttered businesses and laid off employees, behavioral
    changes, from avoiding places and activities where you might
    become a crime victim. As well as the cost of increased police
    patrols in the high crime areas.
        The University of Chicago study put the total cost of crime
    in the United States at around $5.76 trillion per year, which
    means that the State and Federal prison costs only about 1
    percent of the total cost of crime.
        So, we should be spending more, not less because we have a
    under incarceration problem in this country. We need to cut
    government spending in many areas. But criminal justice and
    national security are two of the main areas where government
    needs to spend, has to spend whatever it takes to keep our
    people safe.
        The title of today's hearing is not exactly what I would've
    chosen. It mentions assessing the toll of understaffed prisons
    on correctional officers and incarcerated persons. The right
    word there would be criminals or inmates.
        But one group we can't forget is the victims of those
    crimes. Fully funding and staffing our criminal justice system
    and our prison leads to less crime, and it creates an
    environment where criminals have their best shot at
    rehabilitation.
        So maybe today's hearing should have instead borrowed from
    that old report from Attorney General Barr and been entitled,
    The Case for More Incarceration. We have a great panel of
    witnesses here, and I thank you all for your appearance. I look
    forward to hearing from you about how we can make our prisons
    safe, secure, and functional again.
        Chair Booker. All right. We have a distinguished panel of
    witnesses today. We will now introduce each of them and then
    after the introductions, we're going to have you guys stand,
    raise your right hand and we'll administer the oath.
        Our first witness is John E. Wetzel. Mr. Wetzel is the
    founder and board chair of Keystone Restituere Justice Center,
    KRJC. A nonprofit organization dedicated to providing
    assessable and translatable data-driven solutions in the fields
    of corrections and criminal justice. A strategic management
    policy and research organization.
        KRJC seeks to elevate institutions and agencies to new
    heights, to better serve communities. Mr. Wetzel served as a
    former Pennsylvania Secretary of Corrections from 2011 to 2021
    under both Republican and Democratic Governors, and began his
    career as a correctional officer. Mr. Wetzel is a graduate of
    Bloomsburg University.
        Our next witness is Santia Nance, co-founder of Sistas in
    Prison Reform. Ms. Nance has been a criminal justice reform
    advocate in Virginia since 2019. After reconnecting with a
    loved one, her fiance Quadaire Patterson, focused on
    decarceration and second chances. She centers her work around
    oversight of the Virginia Department of Corrections and ending
    mandatory minimums in Virginia. Ms. Nance is also the editor of
    brilliancebehindbars.com, A website that aims to humanize and
    uplift currently incarcerated individuals. Ms. Nance graduated
    from Virginia Commonwealth University with a BS in mass
    communication and is a senior advertising professional at a
    major agency.
        Next, we have Stephen B. Walker, National Wellness director
    of One Voice United. Mr. Walker is a California resident--we'll
    forgive him for that--and lifelong activist in the area of
    child protection and crime prevention. Along with his role at
    One Voice United, he's also the director of Governmental
    Affairs for the California Correctional Peace Officers
    Association. Mr. Walker previously worked within the California
    Youth Authority for 26 years as a youth correctional officer.
    And Senator Butler will have a moment for a rebuttal later on
    to that California comment.
        [Laughter.]
        Chair Booker. We also have two other witnesses that Ranking
    Member Senator Tom Cotton will introduce. I am pleased though
    to see that Brandy Moore White is here sending--sitting in the
    Center Square. The president of the Council of Prison Locals 33
    on this panel.
        Ms. White, I want to thank you and my staff actually wants
    to thank you for meeting with us a few weeks ago. It was
    enlightening to me and even more so in the longer conversation
    you had with my team, and we're looking forward to your
    testimony.
        But for the other introductions, I'm going to turn it over
    to Ranking Member Tom Cotton to introduce the final witnesses.
        Senator Cotton. Thank you. I'm pleased to introduce Brandy
    Moore White. Mrs. White is a highly qualified person to speak
    on prison staffing issues. She has been a career official at
    the Federal Bureau of Prisons for the past 2 decades. She's
    seen all of this firsthand and is still on the front lines
    today. She was elected last year as National President of the
    Council of Prison Locals, the union representing our Federal
    corrections officers.
        She has previously served in leadership roles in the
    Council of Prison Locals for virtually her entire career. Maybe
    most importantly, she is from the great State of Arkansas where
    she was born and raised, and where she has spent the entirety
    of her corrections career. Brandy, thank you for joining us
    today and welcome.
        I'm also pleased to introduce Ralph Mangual, Mr. Mangual is
    the Nick Ohnell Fellow and Head of Research for Policing and
    Public Safety Initiative at the Manhattan Institute for Policy
    Research----
        Chair Booker. That's right next to New Jersey.
        Senator Cotton [continuing]. He's also an accomplished
    author and a contributing editor of City Journal. And his work
    has been featured in a wide array of major publications. He's
    well known to us. He's also testified several times for this
    Subcommittee and other Committees.
        He currently serves on the New York State Advisory
    Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. He holds a BA
    from City University of New York, and a JD from DePaul
    University College of Law in Chicago. Ralph, welcome back and
    thank you for joining us today.
        Chair Booker. Will the witnesses please rise and raise your
    right hand.
        [Witnesses are sworn in.]
        Chair Booker. Let the record show that all of them said I
    do, as if they were getting married. Get down please.
        [Laughter.]
        Chair Booker. And appreciate your affirmative responses.
    You're each going to have 5 minutes for an opening statement.
    Mr. Wetzel, we'll start with you, please.

    STATEMENT OF JOHN E. WETZEL, FOUNDER AND BOARD CHAIR, KEYSTONE
                      RESTITUERE JUSTICE CENTER,
       FORMER PENNSYLVANIA SECRETARY OF CORRECTIONS, HARRISBURG,
                              PENNSYLVANIA

        Mr. Wetzel. Thank you, and, thanks for the opportunity to
    once again talk about corrections, a field I spent my entire
    life doing. Part-time correctional officer at age 20, while at
    Bloomsburg University. Nine years as a correctional officer,
    counselor, head of the counseling department at a large county
    jail in Pennsylvania. Head of the training academy, county
    warden, longest serving corrections secretary in the history of
    Pennsylvania.
        This field means everything to me. And you know, I can't
    imagine any of the centers in here have been in a hearing in
    the last 2 years that hasn't been about a crisis. I mean, it
    may be the most over overused word in our vocabulary right now
    as it comes to the public sector because everything's in
    crisis. But I think we need to use accurate language. We have a
    system on a brink of failure, and it's a system we all need.
        It doesn't matter what side of the aisle you're on, what
    you want out of your correction system, whether you think it's
    underused or overused. What we need--what our mandate is, what
    our covenant is, and as it relates to corrections, is that we
    do something to impact the trajectory of people who couldn't
    follow the rules.
        So, in--I mean, you don't, you know, to many people's
    point, you don't get sent to a State prison or Federal prison
    for jaywalking. All right. So implicit in that is that someone
    who comes to us, has not been--has not complied with what we
    expect out of our citizenry, right?
        So, if we want to make a good investment in our correction
    system, we should do something to take them off that
    trajectory, right? That no--that's not happening anywhere.
    There may be a handful of systems, there may be a handful of
    jails who are actually delivering this covenant of making
    people--having people at least not get worse, if not come out
    better and less likely to commit a crime.
        You know, we talk about public safety. I would argue it's
    actually broader. It's community safety, and our communities
    are less safe because of this crisis, if you want to use that
    term, this on the brink of failure correction system. I'm from
    Pennsylvania, born, raised, will never live in another State.
    And I will tell you that it's not just public safety in
    Pennsylvania.
        We spent a very nervous week in Pennsylvania because of a
    jail escape. It closed down major events right outside of
    Philadelphia. People who were not adjacent to the correction
    system in Pennsylvania are adjacent to the correction system.
    It's critical that we understand in America, we're all adjacent
    to the correction system.
        Nobody should feel good about the fact that we have
    National Guard members, people who--and listen, I spent 11
    years--all but 11 years, 3 months short of 11 years running the
    sixth biggest prison system in America. All right. I've worked
    a lot with the National Guard.
        We had floods, we have major events, that's what they're
    there for. They're covering the position of correctional
    officers at a time where people who aren't in this city are
    concerned about what's going on over the country, all over the
    world. And we're using soldiers to man our jails and or prisons
    because we don't--we have inadequate staff.
        And the notion that some--we're going to push some idea to
    this field that's going to now work, where we've been pushing
    ideas forever, we have to think differently about this. And,
    you know, we can look to history and I love looking to history,
    especially when you're in this building.
        You know, 50 years ago as a result of Attica, the National
    Institute of Corrections was created. Some of you may not have
    heard about that, and that's part of the indictment of the
    divestment in the intellectual development of this field.
        Listen, we're not going to fix problems if we don't have
    our correctional staff, who are remarkable people who dedicate
    their lives. You don't even hear about them, you don't know
    about them. Heck, it--now you don't even wear your uniform home
    because you don't know what someone's going to say to you at
    the grocery store, all right.
        But they're dedicating their life, and they don't have a
    mechanism to develop professionally. Like, I would not be
    sitting here if the National Institute of Corrections did not
    offer what was called a clip course for some of your old
    people, they used to have to send you a course and you'd
    actually fill it out and send it back. It wasn't online. That's
    how I learned how to staff, all right. That's not available
    today.
        So, the National Institute of Corrections, just to give you
    a little history, was invented out of--came about after Attica,
    right. And Attica was not at a Federal prison, right. But
    Warren Berger, who was the Supreme Court Justice at the time,
    as or Chief of the Supreme Court, as well as other--the
    Attorney General, others were so bothered by what happened and
    what led to it that they felt like we needed a different
    approach.
        So, they developed this National Institute of Corrections
    that was not actually part of the Bureau of Prisons, which it
    is now. It was adjacent, what it was designed to do was tap the
    best and brightest from corrections, right. To solve these
    problems, to sync through the--to advise you guys. So, you
    actually made decisions on data that used to happen. Believe it
    or not, it used to happen that you'd make decisions based on
    actual data.
        You can't even get data on one of your biggest
    expenditures. You can't get accurate data and, you know, thank
    God I'm not the director of Bureau of Prisons. I have a world
    of respect for her stepping up in the system. But let me give
    you context as somebody sits in, she's been a job maybe 2
    years, a year and a half, I'm sure for her it probably feels
    like 20 years.
        And she's asked questions about data. You have mainframe
    computers, haven't updated it, like you have old data systems.
    So, you look at any other sector and you look at how you would
    resolve problems. You would use technology, you would use
    innovation. Look at the work of Clayton Christiansen Institute
    of Disruptive Innovation. Look at the medical field, look at
    poverty, attacking it by bringing technology to a field, right.
    By identifying individuals in the field, like incarcerated
    people, like correctional officers that are ignored by the
    market, right.
        There's no research and development. You don't see patents
    flying out at how we address this issue.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Wetzel appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chair Booker. I'm going to hold you to 5 minutes.
        Mr. Wetzel. Sorry.
        Chair Booker. No, I'm sorry. It's a real 5 minutes, not a
    senatorial 5 minutes.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Wetzel. Sorry.
        Chair Booker. No, no worries. No, we really appreciate it.
    We're looking forward to hearing more of your testimony, and
    it's an insightful presentation. I'm going to move on to Ms.
    Nance and for her actual 5 minutes.

    STATEMENT OF SANTIA NANCE, CO-FOUNDER, SISTAS IN PRISON REFORM,
                           RICHMOND, VIRGINIA

        Ms. Nance. Don't worry, I'll give you 5 minutes. Chair
    Booker, Ranking Member, Senator Cotton, and Members of the
    Subcommittee, thank you all for having me today. My name is
    Santia Nance. I'm the mother of a middle schooler, a Virginia
    voter, vice president of an advertising company and fiance to
    Quadaire Patterson, who has served 15 years on a 20-year
    sentence.
        Quadaire made some poor decisions when he was a young
    adult, only 20 years old, and he was homeless. He takes full
    responsibility for the decisions that led to his current
    incarceration. But spending all of his 20's and half of his
    30's in prison, he's made the most of his time in prison and
    seized every opportunity to prepare for his successful reentry.
        He received his GED in 2012 and has taken college courses
    through Ohio University and studying to be a paralegal. He has
    a trade in brick masonry and assist with reentry efforts and
    mentorship through Brilliance Behind Bars.
        Quadaire is housed at Lawrenceville Correctional Center,
    which has been facing a lot of staffing shortages since at
    least 2018, and the Virginia Department of Corrections has
    estimated that they need a number--almost 100 incarcerated
    officer, or sorry, correctional officers.
        While a partnership during incarceration is already hard
    enough for me and my family, short staffing there has impacted
    us tremendously. Quadaire was diagnosed with glaucoma in 2012,
    and he needs his eye drop medication called latanoprost.
    Without this medication, it's not only difficult for him to do
    everyday tasks, but to keep up with his coursework and his
    studies.
        Quadaire has filed multiple grievances in the past couple
    years and requests to see the eye doctor, and this eye doctor
    only comes to the facility once a month. But he's only been met
    with, you're on the waiting list. So, it's just been
    ridiculously hard to get him in front of the eye doctor to get
    his prescription renewed.
        Because of short staffing, he's seen how--at firsthand--how
    this has affected services and programming necessary for
    rehabilitation. For example, religious gatherings like church
    on Sunday, they get canceled at the last minute.
        Now only one correctional officer runs the gym instead of
    four. So, music, anger management, substance abuse programming,
    those have all been interrupted, causing difficulty to
    encourage rehabilitation for the people at Lawrenceville.
        While prison does require physical separation, we stay in
    contact through visitation a couple times a month, phone all
    day when we can and email when we can. But short staffing has
    interfered with our ability to maintain our family bond. My
    visits on January 28 and February 4 of this year were canceled
    due to staffing concerns.
        And my recent 2-hour visit on February 18 was cut short by
    45-50 minutes due to the wait time of the long line of visitors
    and it was staffed by only one correctional officer where there
    should have been four or five in the office processing us.
        But she was the only one who knew how to do all five jobs
    and was willing to step up. Whether there are lockdowns in the
    prison or an extended count time due to lack of employees to
    cover shifts, I suffer not knowing the reason why Quadaire is
    not calling. I haven't heard from him since Sunday of this
    week, and I often fear the worst when I'm unable to reach
    anybody At Lawrenceville.
        There's a trend of these events that happen during
    holidays, bad weather, and evenings as people might be calling
    out of work. Quadaire knows that he has to be held accountable
    for the mistakes he made, but the issues caused by
    understaffing go well beyond affecting those behind the prison
    walls. It punishes me and my son as well.
        After reconnecting with Quadaire 6 years ago, I co-founded
    an organization called Sistas in Prison Reform. Our mission and
    purpose is to bring humanization to those behind the walls and
    collaborate with Virginia's lawmakers.
        Through this work and my personal experience. I believe
    that the answer to this crisis--if we're going to use that
    word--to identify those who have received harsh sentences and
    have rehabilitated themselves, and to release those who have
    proven they're ready to come home and do not pose a public
    safety risk.
        Like many others in Virginia, Quadaire sentence includes 13
    years of mandatory time, but this harsh mandatory sentence was
    not necessary to protect the public or to prepare Quadaire to
    reenter society. Quadaire is rehabilitated and ready to join
    our communities. There are many mechanisms to identify what
    rehabilitation looks like, good behavioral records while in
    prison, educational milestones, safe environments to go home
    to, secure jobs, and the list goes on.
        There are people like Quadaire, my fiance, that our State
    and Federal tax dollars are wasting money on when these
    incarcerated people could be home and paying taxes and giving
    back to their communities.
        Reducing the population would lessen the burden of the
    officers and allow them to maintain a manageable environment
    that focuses on those who still need rehabilitation. Thank you
    for your time and for the opportunity to share my story today.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Nance appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chair Booker. Thank you, Ms. Nance. Mrs. Moore White.

      STATEMENT OF BRANDY MOORE WHITE, PRESIDENT AFGE, COUNCIL OF
                 PRISON LOCALS 33, FOREST CITY, ARIZONA

        Mrs. White. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Booker,
    Ranking Member Cotton, Members of the Subcommittee and
    distinguished guests. I want to sincerely thank the
    Subcommittee for the opportunity to present the perspective of
    our Federal prison system and from the professional hardworking
    men and women of the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
        For far too long, this conversation has been missing a key
    element. That's the professional law enforcement officers who
    have dedicated their lives to protecting their coworkers and
    communities and safely housing inmates. The Council of Prison
    Locals represents nearly 30,000 correctional professionals
    across the country and 121 Federal prisons.
        These professional law enforcement officers who work
    tirelessly in some of the most violent, self-contained cities
    in the country keep us all safe from some of the world's most
    dangerous human beings.
        Today I would like to discuss our primary concerns, which
    are the current critical staffing levels and pay structure
    within the Bureau of Prisons, both of which must be addressed
    urgently.
        Staffing levels in the Bureau of Prisons have reached
    alarming levels. Over the past 7 years, the authorized
    positions within the Bureau have decreased from 43,369 to the
    current count of 34,470 staff members. This reduction of nearly
    8,900 staff members not only compromises the safety and
    security of both staff and inmates, but it also raises major
    concern and hinders our ability to effectively carry out the
    Bureau's mission and rehabilitate and reintegrate.
        The impact of these staffing cuts is particularly evident
    among our correctional officers. Despite the President's
    request and subsequent legislation, the number of correctional
    officer positions has drastically fallen short of what has been
    appropriated by Congress.
        At the close of 2023, we had approximately 12,300
    correctional officers, which is more than 8,000 less or 40
    percent below of the appropriated number of 20,446 officers.
    This number follows a year of hiring initiatives enacted by our
    agency. Within the current staffing levels, the Bureau of
    Prison, the First Step Act cannot be successfully enacted.
    Staff used for programming are often pulled from their
    positions and used to backfill shortages of correctional
    officers.
        Augmentation, reduces inmate access to recidivism, reducing
    activities like programming, recreation, and educational
    initiatives. Additionally, because of the lack of staffing,
    correctional officers are forced to do mandatory overtime.
    Overtime officers are frequently mandated--at the last minute--
    to stay in additional eight plus hours, often several times a
    week.
        This diminishes skills and awareness, it reduces acuity and
    causes general fatigue, which greatly hinders supervision.
    Augmentation, and mandatory overtime have become the norm. This
    detracts from our programming. It compromises the safety and
    security of the institutions, but it also greatly affects the
    mental health and well-being of our employees.
        The union believes that the staffing crisis can only be
    resolved by addressing our insufficient pay band issues. The
    current pay structure within the Bureau is significantly lower
    than that of other Federal law enforcement agencies, including
    the U.S. Marshals, Immigration and Customs, and Border Patrol.
        The Bureau's pay scale is non-competitive with State and
    local law enforcement and even the private sector market.
    Without addressing these pay disparities, the Bureau will
    continue to struggle and attract and retain employees. The
    Bureau must be required to increase the pay bands to correct
    the staffing crisis.
        Because the Bureau is unable to solve its biggest problem,
    it now requires the direct intervention of the administration,
    OPM and the Legislative Authority of Congress to immediately
    correct. The Council of Prison Locals has worked diligently
    with Members of Congress to properly fund the Federal Bureau of
    Prisons.
        However, even with additional funding, there continues to
    be a decline in correctional officers. Congress must now demand
    oversight and accountability. The Bureau of Prison staffing has
    graduated from a crisis to a catastrophe with real human
    consequence. The Bureau must use the funding that has been
    appropriated to fully hire the correctional officers needed to
    safely house incarcerated inmates.
        In order to achieve this, efforts must be made to raise the
    pay bands and make our Federal law enforcement officers
    competitive with other law enforcement agencies. Chairman
    Booker, Ranking Member Cotton, and Members of the Subcommittee,
    this concludes my formal statement, and I truly look forward to
    answering any of your questions and providing additional
    insight.
        [The prepared statement of Mrs. White appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chair Booker. I'm grateful for your testimony. Mr. Walker.

    STATEMENT OF STEPHEN B. WALKER, NATIONAL WELLNESS DIRECTOR, ONE
                  VOICE UNITED, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA

        Mr. Walker. Thank you, sir, Chairman Booker, Ranking Member
    Cotton and--that would help, wouldn't it? Chairman Booker,
    Ranking Member Cotton, and esteemed Members of the Committee, I
    would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak with you
    today.
        My name is Stephan Walker. I am a representative of One
    Voice United, a national organization advocating for the
    welfare of correctional officers and other frontline staff and
    ensuring that our expertise and perspectives are included in
    the national debate around criminal justice reform.
        Before One Voice, I served as a youth correctional officer
    for 35 years in the California Department of Corrections and
    Rehabilitations. And currently serve as the director of
    Correctional Health for the California Correctional Peace
    Officers Association.
        Today, I sit before you to address the existential staffing
    crisis in America's prisons and jails, in hopes of advancing a
    national nationally sanctioned dialog. This crisis has no
    borders, is not one State's issue and cannot be solved by a
    single department or entity.
        It is a systemic, and a systemic issue and impacts every
    aspect of corrections, by asking staff to do more with less and
    often resulting in excessive work hours and multiple mandated
    shifts leading to increased burnout, less job satisfaction, and
    an inability to perform everyday security and rehabilitative
    functions.
        We are in full support of the position Mrs. Moore White
    offered on augmentation. From experience, I can tell you that
    it is not enough to just find a warm body to fill a vacant
    position. To be a competent and professional correctional
    officer takes time, supervision, and training.
        Not to mention the fact that augmentation takes key
    personnel and nurses, teachers, and administrators out of their
    primary functions without replacement of the services loss. For
    staff, personnel shortages lead to diminished observational
    skills, less intelligence gathering, overtime surges, slow
    response and strained family relationships and collective
    wellness.
        In fact, multiple studies indicate that correctional
    officers suffer from PTSD, depression, suicide, heart disease,
    and shortened lifespan and other physical and psychological
    ailments at a rate well above the general public.
        For those in our care personnel shortages mean programs are
    slashed, visits are reduced. Time on lockdown is increased and
    the patience of everyone behind the walls wears thin. The ratio
    often surpasses 60 to 1, especially in yards and chow halls.
    And unpredictable staffing patterns force policy mandated
    prioritization of institutional safety, which limits
    programming rehabilitative services, which are essential for
    promoting positive behavior and reducing recidivism.
        Addressing this staffing crisis is crucial for creating a
    secure environment for both staff and incarcerated individuals.
    To combat this reality, well-meaning attempts are being
    initiated by agencies in various States, by lowering entrance
    requirements for new recruits, shortening academy times, and
    offering signing bonuses, none of which has successfully
    addressed this crisis to scale of lasting impact.
        Retaining staff is equally important and we must transform
    employment conditions by moving beyond the traditional top-down
    paramilitary administrative model. Research and studies done on
    retention show overwhelmingly that it is not the incarcerated
    that drive good employees away. It is a lack of communication,
    recognition, and transparency along with outdated and
    uninformed policies.
        The expectation and demands of today's corrections have
    outgrown the systemic administrative model, leading to a
    profession where staff feel devalued and expendable. This has
    resulted in a growing reluctance among officers to silently
    endure this challenge, highlighting a clear misalignment
    between the needs and values of new officers and the prevailing
    culture and operations of corrections. Fortunately, there are
    remedies and actions that can be taken to address these issues,
    but they require thoughtful planning and input from all
    stakeholders.
        Addressing this crisis requires appealing to potential
    employees by valuing their goals, integrating them into a
    respected team from day one, providing empirical training,
    better pay, lower healthcare costs, holistic wellness programs
    and attractive incentives such as educational benefits,
    pensions, and reducing vesting periods.
        In concluding without achieving these--including the--
    without achieving these objectives and including the voices and
    experiences of those who will be impacted by their success or
    failure, true rehabilitation is unrealistic and prisons will
    continue to fall short of their primary mission of creating a
    safe and humane atmosphere for successful reentry back into
    society.
        I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today and
    look forward to answering any questions you may have.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Walker appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chair Booker. Thank you very much. Mr. Mangual, and you've
    been so generous because you testify often and I pronouncing
    that well, right, Mangual?
        Mr. Mangual. Mangual. Yes.
        Chair Booker. Mangual?
        Mr. Mangual. Close enough.
        Chair Booker. Thanks. I had a phonetic that's wrong. It
    says
    M-A-I-N. Mangu. Mangu.
        Mr. Mangual. Mangu. Mangu.
        Chair Booker. Mangual. Thank you, sir.

     STATEMENT OF RAFAEL A. MANGUAL, NICK OHNELL FELLOW, MANHATTAN
                     INSTITUTE, NEW YORK, NEW YORK

        Mr. Mangual. All right. Well, Chairman Booker, Ranking
    Member Cotton, and other Members of the distinguished body, I'd
    like to begin by thanking you for the opportunity to offer
    remarks on this important topic. As was said earlier today, the
    first duty of any government, whether local, State, or Federal,
    is to keep its people and their property secure.
        And one of the primary ways in which governments provide
    that security is through criminal justice systems. The police
    are the most visible elements of these systems, but they're
    certainly not the only ones. Indeed, their effectiveness
    depends in large part on other criminal justice actors.
        Prosecutors still need to prosecute, judges still need to
    adjudicate and sentence, and crucially, correctional
    institutions need to secure and hopefully better the prisoners
    that they take in. Effectively managing a correctional
    population however, requires investment.
        Unfortunately, we have seen throughout this country an
    unwillingness to adequately invest in corrections, as
    decarceration, the pursuit of correctional population declines,
    has become both a policy priority in its own right and also the
    preferred means of alleviating the pressures on correction
    systems created by staffing shortages, facility maintenance
    costs gross and overcrowding.
        I'd like to use the remainder of my time to make three
    points. First, decarceration where the pursuit is a public
    policy good unto itself or as a means of cost saving is not a
    cost-free endeavor.
        Second, the potential cost saving effects of decarceration,
    at least in the short and intermediate terms, are more limited
    than they might appear to be based on average cost per inmate
    figures.
        And third, making the necessary investments in our criminal
    justice system to address issues like understaffing
    overcrowding and security concerns will not only help improve
    correctional outcomes, but it will keep the government out of a
    position in which budget constraints require it to make choices
    that ultimately harm public safety.
        On the first point, most of the public safety risk
    associated with any significant scale decarceration effort
    derives from the loss of incapacitation benefits. Those are the
    beneficial effects of an active offender's removal from
    society, which come in the form of crimes not committed as a
    result of that offender being behind bars.
        One study recently found that for the period of 1991 to
    2004, proved each additional prison year served prevented
    approximately eight index crimes. And that's an estimate that's
    based on both Federal and State prisoner populations.
        Now, the Federal prison population consists of inmates who
    on average pose a somewhat lower risk of recidivism, but the
    risk of recidivism posed by Federal offenders is far from zero.
    An analysis of more than 25,000 offenders released in 2005
    found that just under 50 percent were rearrested over an 8-year
    observation period.
        Now, some might be tempted to argue that the recidivism
    data of those released pursuant to the First Step Act, or FSA,
    strengthens the case for decarceration. But those data do just
    the opposite. While it's true that only about 12 percent of FSA
    beneficiaries have recidivated, according to the April, 2023
    annual report, the recidivism data for FSA beneficiaries
    nevertheless illustrates just how little low hanging fruit
    there is in the Federal population.
        According to that report, nearly 9 in 10, or 88.3 percent
    of the more than 24,000 releasees who had a risk assessment
    done were rated minimum risk or low risk. Moreover, the bulk of
    those offenders, more than 20,000 of them in fact, had only
    been released for a year prior to that report's publication,
    meaning that their lack of rearrest may simply be a function of
    the short observation period.
        The much larger State prison population, more than two
    thirds of which is in primarily for a violent or weapons
    offense, poses an even more pronounced risk of recidivism with
    9-and 10-year recidivism rates for releasees breaking 80
    percent.
        So, while it's certainly the case that some small subset of
    the country's prison population consists of inmates whose
    incarceration no longer serves a legitimate phenological end,
    the vast majority of prisoners in the U.S. both State and
    Federal pose a significant risk of re-offending.
        As for the second point, the cost savings potential of
    decarceration efforts may not be what they seem. It's often
    noted that it costs an average of $42,000 a year to incarcerate
    a single Federal prison inmate. However, the problem with using
    this figure is that it might give you the impression that you
    save $42,000 if you incarcerate one fewer inmate.
        But the lion's share of the average cost per inmate is a
    function of fixed costs. The marginal cost per inmate tends to
    be a much lower figure, albeit more difficult to calculate.
    Moreover, the potential savings associated with decarceration
    are also going to be eaten into by the costs associated with
    the additional crimes that might occur as a result.
        Indeed, the estimated annual cost of crime in the U.S. is
    in the trillions and a single homicide has been estimated to
    cost nearly $9 million. While an assault can carry a societal
    price tag of more than $107,000.
        Third, and finally, despite the numbers that can be thrown
    around with regard to the cost of doing criminal justice in the
    United States, it remains the case that our criminal justice
    system is underfunded and in need of an upgrade, that includes
    staffing. It is almost certainly the case, that there are
    measures on which the Federal and State correctional
    authorities can perform better.
        But it is also likely the case that boosting performance
    and improving outcomes will depend on the degree to which
    Congress and State legislatures are willing to direct resources
    to these institutions in order to facilitate such improvement.
        And that is a political choice, one with dire consequences
    for those inside and ultimately, outside of our nation's,
    prisons populations. We can and should choose wisely.
        Thank you very much. I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Mangual appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chair Booker. Mr. Mangual, thank you very much for that
    testimony. I appreciate that. And if there's no objection, I'm
    going to save my questions for the end and go straight to
    Senator Butler for her California rebuttal.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Butler. It's nothing like coming to a hearing with
    Senator Booker in the Chair. Thank you, sir for your continued
    generosity, Senator Cotton, bless you for serving with Senator
    Booker.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Butler. Yes. And thank you to the witnesses and all
    of you, I am assuming that a number of you are correctional
    officers yourself and I appreciate you being here and being
    present in the work that you do.
        A couple of questions and I'm going to take the privilege
    of starting with my California resident, Mr. Walker. Good to
    see you. Again, it was--I was excited to hear that you were
    coming to today's panel because I know you as an advocate for
    officers, and it is in our working together that I have really
    seen your heart and indeed your legacy--your family's legacy
    for doing this work.
        Not just you, but as I understand, your father and your
    son. Three generations in your family have contributed your
    time and talent to public service in this way. And we're
    grateful. Can you talk about the evolution of the profession
    and the catastrophe or crisis or and fill in the blank of what
    it is that officers are experiencing today, just from the lens
    of that generational engagement?
        Mr. Walker. Thank you, Senator. It is a pleasure to see you
    again. Yes, my family has--we've literally given our lives to
    this occupation. And unfortunately, it's taken more from us
    than is advertised, your commitment is supposed to be.
        And, it's not just my family. It's every one of these
    people sitting behind me. It's taking from them silently. And
    as far as the evolution of it, that it's hard to say because I
    started in the 80's, where we were legitimately tasked with
    rehabilitation, and we had the capacity to do that.
        We had the staffing for it, we had the resources for it,
    and the population was managed. And we went through that tough
    on crime era where, we literally went from having single bunked
    individuals to triple bunked, to unconventional sleeping
    arrangements.
        And that ability of rehabilitation, that ability of
    engagement, of socializing, to understand what the needs were
    of the individuals we were tasked with supervising and caring
    for, went out the window. Unfortunately, my father didn't do a
    good job of telling me what the job was and I came into the
    agency. I didn't, likewise--didn't communicate with my family
    what I was enduring. And my son came into the agency, and it
    cost him his life.
        We cannot keep operating the way we are. It is literally
    killing people slowly. We are poisoning ourselves every time we
    walk back into, and every time we introduce someone to this
    environment, in the absence of having the services, resource,
    and personnel to adequately manage the new mission. Because
    society is asking for something different, and we're still
    operating off of an antiquated model of incarceration. It's the
    default. It's what we know best.
        Helping people, serving people is the challenge that I
    think that we're--society and this body actually wants to see.
    They want to see people return to their communities better.
        Senator Butler. Yes.
        Mr. Walker. And if not, then we keep them.
        Senator Butler. Yes. Mr. Chair, that response was worth my
    entire 5 minutes.
        Mr. Walker. I'm sorry.
        Senator Butler. No, don't. Your family has given more than
    5 minutes' worth. And so, I appreciate you sharing that. I
    would love to, Mr. Chairman, submit questions to the panel
    after the hearing.
        Chair Booker. Of course. And before I defer to the Ranking
    Member, Mr. Walker, I think I could speak for the whole entire
    Subcommittee about our grief and our sorrow about your son's
    loss. The story of dedication of your family through
    generations in and of itself is extraordinary.
        But the circumstances of your son's death, should not have
    happened. And we're grateful for you sharing that, what has got
    to be unimaginable grief with this Committee, so thank you. And
    I'll now defer to the Ranking Member Tom Cotton.
        Senator Cotton. Mr. Walker, I also express my condolences.
    And your family's story is an important reminder for many
    people that, like military service, law enforcement is often a
    family affair in this country. And some families bear the brunt
    of that service to keep our country and our people safe.
        Ms. White, this morning, the director of the Bureau of
    Prisons testified in front of the full Committee. She said that
    the Bureau has only 14,899 correctional officer slots. Those
    slots are 82 percent filled. In other words, the Bureau has
    approximately 12,300 correctional officers, officers today. Is
    she correct in your understanding that the Bureau is nearly
    fully staffed?
        Mrs. White. No, sir.
        Senator Cotton. Could you explain a little bit more why?
        Mrs. White. Sure. So, I have one of her staffing reports in
    front of me. The agency is very protective of their numbers. As
    you guys have seen in many hearings. As of pay period 26, which
    was December 30 we are showing 12,306 officers. Typically, I
    have to reach out to 121 institutions and get their staffing
    reports to compile those, to get those numbers.
        But that's the number I show, and that's why I testified to
    those numbers. I did hear, she testified this morning to 14,000
    and some change, and I have a hard time believing that since
    December 30, she has brought on over 2000 officers.
        Senator Cotton. Yes. As it happens, I just went on their
    website and since the hearing, and I looked up any potential
    openings, and they list openings and it says location, prisons
    nationwide. And the number of openings is many vacancies.
        Mrs. White. Correct.
        Senator Cotton. Many is capitalized. Many vacancies to
    what? I think I'll submit that screenshot for the record, Mr.
    Chairman. While, I'm at that, I'm,----
        Chair Booker. That might be the first time in Senate
    history, a screenshot has been submitted, but no objection.
        [The information appears as a submission for the record.]
        Senator Cotton. Okay. And I think what happened this
    morning, is that the director was speaking--only if you might
    say--about frontline correctional officers, excluding things
    like lieutenants or supervisory correctional officers. Is that
    your understanding?
        Mrs. White. Yes, sir.
        Senator Cotton. So, it would be as if the Secretary of the
    Army gave you only the number of privates he had, not the
    number of NCOs and officers he had; is that right?
        Mrs. White. Right. So many times we disagree on numbers,
    and again, they're not very public with their numbers----
        Senator Cotton. Okay.
        Mrs. White [continuing]. But oftentimes when I've discussed
    with them, there is a series, it's a 007, and there's other
    individuals that are included in that series, counselors,
    lieutenants, other individuals that are not primary
    correctional officers.
        So, I don't know if that's the confusion or the difference
    in the numbers, but according to my records, we have----
        Senator Cotton. Okay.
        Mrs. White. Right around 12,000 officers.
        Senator Cotton. And you believe that the number of Bureau
    of Prison correctional officers over the last year has
    decreased, not increased. Correct?
        Mrs. White. Absolutely.
        Senator Cotton. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Mangual, the total
    Federal and State prison population has declined by more than
    20 percent since it peaked in 2013. Has violent crime increased
    or decreased as the prison population declined?
        Mr. Mangual. It's gone up significantly.
        Senator Cotton. That's right. All right. Would you say that
    there's been at least some inmates in Federal and State prisons
    who don't necessarily need to be there? At least maybe not as
    long as they are, at least some?
        Mr. Mangual. Sure.
        Senator Cotton. Okay.
        Mr. Mangual. But I think it's also important to recognize
    that there is a significant number of individuals on the street
    today who need to be inmates.
        Senator Cotton. All right. My next question. At least some
    criminals out on the streets who maybe should be in prisons
    today?
        Mr. Mangual. Quite a few more.
        Senator Cotton. And which one is higher? The number of
    people in prison who maybe don't need to be there, and the
    number of people on the streets who maybe do need to be in
    prison?
        Mr. Mangual. I would say certainly it's the number of
    people on the street who do need to be in prison. And one
    indicator of that, it's just the clearance rate numbers in this
    country.
        If you look at the eight index felonies that are
    consistently tracked by the Federal Government, the clearance
    rate only hovers at about 50 percent for the violent ones and
    about 20 percent for the nonviolent ones. Which indicates that
    a vast majority of the crime--the serious felony crime goes
    unanswered for. So that in and of itself should tell you.
        Senator Cotton. Isn't it the case that the vast majority of
    crimes are committed by a very small percentage of the
    population?
        Mr. Mangual. That's exactly right. I mean, the bulk of our
    crime problem is and has long been driven by very, very
    active--overactive offenders. And so, you can actually get a
    lot of bang for your buck by, you know, targeting correctional
    resources appropriately.
        Senator Cotton. And I think you testified earlier that
    something like eight crimes are avoided for every person in
    prison.
        Mr. Mangual. Per year. Yes. And that's a pretty
    conservative estimate because it's an estimate derived from
    official crime reports. And one of the other things that we
    know is that most crime that occurs in this country does not
    get reported, and that's evidenced----
        Senator Cotton. Okay.
        Mr. Mangual [continuing]. By the consistent disparity
    between the National Crime Victimization Survey, and UCR.
        Senator Cotton. Okay. My time's almost up, Mr. Chairman.
    One more administrative matter. I have a letter dated yesterday
    from the Major County Sheriffs of America urging Congress to
    prioritize legislation that supports the recruitment and
    retention of law enforcement in all areas to include
    corrections.
        Of course, the county sheriffs also have an important
    correctional role of play as they run our county jails as well.
    I ask for consent that this letter be added to the hearing
    record.
        [The information appears as a submission for the record.]
        Chair Booker. I will add it with considerable alacrity. Is
    that it?
        Senator Cotton. That is all.
        Chair Booker. I'm going to now defer to Senator Whitehouse.
        Senator Whitehouse. Thanks very much. I'm sorry I had to
    step out for a minute. I had a Federal agency in my office with
    a project in Rhode Island that needs a little attention, and
    that's what we do.
        I'm delighted that you-all are here. Thank you very much.
    My Rhode Island experience has been that we've been pretty
    successful at being able to reduce prison populations. I think
    the numbers are 23 percent reduction from 2008 to 2016, and
    another 34 percent from 2017 to 2021.
        A lot of that has been diverting people away at early
    stages. I helped launch the drug court when I was attorney
    general. We also now have a very well-run Veterans Court that
    helps, again, divert people away from the criminal justice
    system in a way that is very effective.
        And if you've ever been to what they call a Veterans Court
    graduation and compared that to the day of a district court
    conviction, in one case, the guy's going out the back door in
    Manacles and the family is crying, and in the other case, he's
    coming back to a cheering family and their balloons.
        And they've had very, very, very good results with reduced
    re-offending and reincarceration. And we're launching a Mental
    Health Court as well to try to manage better the interaction
    between the mental health system and the criminal justice
    system.
        So, we have a relatively small population, so it helps
    because there's quite a lot of direct hands-on care and all of
    this. But I do want to express my appreciation to the Rhode
    Island Brotherhood of Correction Officers who say that they
    walk the toughest beat in the State. Mr. Wetzel, I'm sure you
    appreciate that.
        But we've worked on--earned time credits. We've reduced
    mandatory sentencing. We've had the diversion programs that I
    mentioned apart from just the attorney general's own regular
    diversion. And it's had that result and it's been really
    essential to do that.
        Mrs. White, I'm sorry about these results with the First
    Step Act. I was the author of the Reentry part of the First
    Step Act, along with my colleague Senator Cornyn on this
    Committee.
        And it's frustrating that an act that bodes so well and has
    produced quite good results and has reduced re-offending and
    re-incarceration and has prepared people better for reentry,
    particularly set them up to deal better with addiction issues
    can't get the attention it needs to succeed because of all
    these multiple demands on the staff to try to get there.
        So, if there are specific recommendations that you have
    from your closeup perch as to things we should be poking at the
    Bureau over or things that we should be particularly focused on
    funding, I guess my point here is that I have seen a lot of
    stuff work in Rhode Island to dramatically reduce prison
    populations and make it--the difficult job of the Brotherhood
    of Correction Officers safer and easier.
        And to me, the First Step Act was an effort to take some of
    those lessons and move them into the Federal system. So, as I
    said, it's irritating and frustrating that we are where we are
    on that.
        So, any comments that you have, and if you want to think
    about it and get back to me with a more precise list.
        Mrs. White. Sure.
        Senator Whitehouse. Please take it also as a question for
    the record.
        Mrs. White. Absolutely. I can definitely speak on, we did
    testify, one of my board members on the committee for First
    Step Act. And, as we testified, we do think it's a, a
    phenomenal program. And I think if we can get the staffing that
    we need, it would be a much more successful program in the
    Federal Bureau of Prisons. There is more detailed stuff that I
    will submit to your office.
        Senator Whitehouse. Okay. I'm assuming that there are sort
    of mandatory staffing requirements at various posts in the
    prison that require people to be pulled off to go and hit those
    mandatory posting requirements that generally the problem?
        Mrs. White. So, we do what we call augmentation. And so,
    anyone who works, say education, health services, anywhere, if
    there is a vacancy and we start our day every day in almost
    every prison with vacancies.----
        Senator Whitehouse. Yes.
        Mrs. White--for the correctional roster, you get pulled or
    augmented to a correctional officer post. And so that's part of
    the issue. And that's why I said staffing. If we can get our
    staffing to where it needs to be, those individuals would not
    have to be pulled off with their post and they could provide
    the class or the training, or the programming or whatever that
    they should be doing instead of being a correctional officer
    for the day.
        Senator Whitehouse. Yes. Okay. Well, my time's up,
    Chairman, thank you for the hearing. Thank you to this
    distinguished panel, and Mr. Wetzel, thank you for your
    service.
        Chair Booker. Senator Whitehouse, I'm grateful. I'm told by
    my staff the order of appearance and this is the order we'll go
    in. And Senator Ossoff, Senator Padilla, and no disrespect to
    the two aforementioned gentlemen, the best for last Senator
    Welch.
        Senator Ossoff. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for
    bringing us together grateful also to Senator Cotton for
    supporting this hearing. And thank you to our panelists for
    your expertise and experience. Mrs. White, as you know, Senator
    Braun, Chair Durbin, and I have introduced bipartisan
    legislation to overhaul Federal prison oversight and
    strengthened security at Federal prisons.
        And the purpose of this bill is to help identify and
    address threats to the safety and welfare of both incarcerated
    people and the thousands of correctional officers and others
    who work in our Federal prisons every day. And that's the
    Federal Prison Oversight Act.
        Mrs. White, the Council of Prison Locals, which represents
    more than 30,000 correctional officers, worked with us to
    develop this legislation, and has endorsed the legislation. Can
    you speak to the Committee about why correctional officers
    support our bill and what it would mean for your members who
    are working in Federal prisons every day?
        Mrs. White. Sure. So, as you said, we have been in support
    and we have worked really hard to help get this. We have--for
    years the Council Prison Locals, the union has gone to bar and
    ask for additional funding. For years we thought funding was
    our only issue, if we could get more money, we could fix the
    problems.
        And the union was very successful in doing so. But over the
    years, we have come to know that funding is not the issue.
    Sometimes it might be an oversight issue of where the funding
    is going.
        So, we have been strategic in where we ask for funding the
    last couple of years. This year we probably will be a little
    even more strategic. But as I said in my opening and in the
    written statement, we welcome any oversight. We need
    accountability. We need help. The Bureau, I think, is the
    second largest in DOJ budget. And we're not sure where all of
    that money is going. And so, any oversight from anyone I think
    would be super helpful.
        Senator Ossoff. Well, I'm grateful to you and your
    organization for helping us to develop this legislation----
        Mrs. White. Thank you.
        Senator Ossoff [continuing]. And for the advocacy of the
    correctional officers across the country who are urging
    Congress to pass it. It's a bipartisan bill aimed at improving
    oversight within BOP, strengthening the security of Federal
    prisons.
        It's got strong support from the Council of Prison Locals,
    strong support from Reform Advocates, and look forward to
    working with it to continue to urge it across the finish line
    here in the Senate and in the House.
        Mr. Wetzel you, I believe, are also familiar with the
    legislation. And based upon your extensive experience working
    in corrections, what impact do you believe it would have on
    conditions and safety in Federal prisons, both for incarcerated
    people and staff?
        Mr. Wetzel. It's essential. I don't see how you make
    progress in the Federal system without knowing--you can't even
    lay out a data-driven, or problem Statement because you don't
    have enough information. The very essence of fixing a problem
    is being able to define it, and come up with a problem
    statement, independent oversight. And that kind of forced
    transparency, real time on a regular basis is essential to
    moving the Bureau of Prisons and any agency forward.
        Senator Ossoff. Well, I appreciate your input and your
    support for the legislation as well. And I want to talk a
    little bit about the impact of understaffing on some of these
    specific safety issues. I led a PSI investigation a couple
    years ago, found that female inmates in more than two thirds of
    Federal prisons that housed female inmates, had faced sexual
    abuse from BOP employees.
        How do chronic understaffing issues lead to a higher
    incidence of abuse? And again, just to clarify, make sure I
    present the statistic correctly. In two thirds of Federal
    prisons that housed female inmates, female inmates faced sexual
    abuse from BOP employees, how is this linked to understaffing?
        Mr. Wetzel. Yes. I think assault by a staff member, assault
    by another incarcerated person, name any bad event, and the
    very essence of stopping bad events is supervision. And you
    design facilities and you design them with a staffing plan.
        And so, when you have half the people to do that staffing
    plan, and you have a hundred--let's say you have a hundred
    housing units and you have 50 people to cover them, there's no
    one on those housing units.
        And at some point, the human beings on those housing units
    who are locked in cells, have to come out of those cells. They
    have to be fed, they have to get medication. There's a series
    of things that happen, without people, it doesn't happen.
        And so, when you get people out and there's nobody there,
    there may be some folks who are among them who want to do harm
    to them. So, it undermines supervision and that this--the
    staffing shortages filter the whole way up.
        One of the things that I think is a really good
    illustration for you of what, how staffing impacts other things
    is we heard about BOP issuing a memo about something, I forget
    what it--what it was, but the memo was issued from the
    director, and this is pre Collette, and you observed it,
    several--the IG observed at several prisons that it wasn't
    happening, right.
        That communication has to happen through people. You're
    talking about a 40 percent vacancy rate. These, I mean, these
    guys need roller skates. I mean, if you've done a round, just a
    round in a Federal prison, right, you think you can just walk
    through and not get stopped by someone, or if something's going
    on the, I mean, it--just, it's wide open for what can happen
    when you have half the people you need. There's no kiosks in
    corrections. It doesn't work like that.
        Senator Ossoff. Well, thank you Mr. Wetzel, and thank you.
    And one thing that's become very clear to me through the
    oversight that I've worked on, on these issues is a shocking
    statistic like that. It's not an indictment of the overall BOP
    workforce. The overwhelming majority of correctional officers
    are hardworking public servants who try to do the right thing
    every day.
        Failures by management, failures at headquarters, failures
    at high levels of the Federal Government have put these teams
    in impossible circumstances. And the Federal Prison Oversight
    Act--a bipartisan bill with strong support across the board--is
    vital to addressing these issues. Thank you all for your
    testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chair Booker. Thank you, Senator Ossoff, for your, not just
    questions in this hearing, but for your work on these issues as
    a senator and even before. And someone else who's worked with--
    on these issues for a lot of his career. Senator Padilla you're
    up for questioning.
        Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to all the
    panelists especially my friend Stephen Walker for being here
    today. Come back to you in a minute. But we've--a lot of the
    discussion I've tracked has dealt with the consequences of the
    staffing shortages that has brought us to this point.
        My first question is, in the spirit of a little bit of the
    problem solving, you know, for years we know that BOP has been
    experienced a staffing crisis with the consequences both for
    correction staff as well as incarcerated individuals and know
    that there's officers from California facilities who regularly
    contact my office sharing what's going on in facilities
    throughout the State and sharing the frustrations that they
    face.
        So, my question is actually for Mrs. White, what are the
    greatest barriers in your opinion, not just to recruitment, and
    not just to retention, but also to morale of correctional staff
    and what recommendations you have for how they can be
    addressed? You already started touching on it's more than just
    funding, so.
        Mrs. White. Correct. So, funding in my opinion, is the
    biggest, compared to border patrol or ICE. Our officers make an
    average of $37,000 a year less. That in itself would be a
    morale booster to up their pay. But when we can address the pay
    issue and bring more staff on board--I started 20 years ago and
    it was a great place to work.
        We had enough staff, we had enough staff to do the vast
    majority of the duties that we needed to do. And that in
    itself, having people, we had it--was more like a family than a
    coworker. We had each other's back, we supported each other. If
    I was running behind, my coworker would help.
        We don't have that now because people are so frustrated. If
    I call in sick, it leaves someone to get mandated and then
    they're angry with me, it doesn't matter if I have a sick child
    or anything like that. So, I think the staffing, the effect
    it's had on the morale is huge. So, getting the staffing back
    to where it could be is--would be my top priority.
        Outside of that, we do absolutely have to focus on wellness
    because as Mr. Walker was testifying to the PTSD rate of
    correctional officers, our correctional staff is far above--
    even studies show--even higher than military. Because we are
    exposed to inmates or criminals who have been convicted day in
    and day out.
        None of them are happy to be in the location that they are.
    They--not all of them--but a vast majority of them are not
    pleasant to deal with. And we deal with that 5 to 7 days a
    week, 8 to 16 hours a day, depending on--so if we can up our
    wellness programs and get it back to more of a family, where we
    support each other outside of the pay and increasing the
    staffing. I think those are the biggest things on our plate
    right now.
        Senator Padilla. Thank you, both your comments and your
    reference to Mr. Walker's. Good transition to my next question.
    It's a--first is a comment for Mr. Walker and he can respond or
    not respond is your choice. Because it's good to see you again.
    The comment is this, I love you, brother. Thank you for being
    here.
        But let me tee up my question, you know, because I made
    reference earlier that my office does hear from my officers
    facilities throughout the State. Just most recently within the
    last couple of weeks, FCI Victorville, FCI Mendota visited my
    office to highlight how staffing shortages have compromised
    their safety with specific examples, impeded their ability to
    fulfill their responsibilities, and of course, negatively
    impacts their lives outside of work, not just inside of work,
    but outside of work, right.
        They describe the emotional toll and strains on family that
    it causes especially when it comes to you know, mandatory
    overtime. Imagine those who are trying to make sure their young
    children are taken care of, who we could give example after
    example.
        So, to address the staffing shortages, in addition to pay,
    to your point Mrs. White, the Bureau must support its
    corrections officers by ensuring they have that sufficient time
    off and provide them with the necessary mental health and
    wellness resources that they need.
        So, Mr. Walker, you described some personal experience with
    the Committee earlier in your testimony, whether it's specific
    to the back-to-back mandatory shifts or anything else. Can you
    give other examples of how the staffing shortages impacts
    officers' lives and wellness and what are the suggestions you
    have for the Senate?
        Mr. Walker. Wow, that's a lot. First off, thank you Senator
    and I love you too, sincerely, thank you for your friendship.
    The problem of wellness within corrections is that they treat
    it like it's a one off. This is not--it has to be something
    preventative and it has to be comprehensive, ongoing,
    continuous, because the environment that you're steeped in
    every single day is relentless in its assault.
        As Ms. White testified to, prisons are not happy places. No
    one wants to be there. So, the ability to mitigate, to address
    the impact that you are walking into a place where your
    hypervigilance is continuously activated, and the amount of
    dopamine and cortisol, and epinephrine and everything else is
    continuously flooding you. And you have no idea that that's
    happening. There has to be an education process to help you
    understand and to help your family understand those--the
    ramifications of that, so that you can create the preventative
    measures internally, externally, and personally.
        Because it--there's no way you get away from it. And, and I
    know we're running over time, but there's a tremendous amount
    of work that has to be done, and we can't simply believe it's
    the blue pill and that we're just going to keep on in the
    excitement of existence in the system.
        Senator Padilla. Right. Mr. Chairman, I know my time is up.
    I'll just end with this comment because based on Mr. Walker's
    response and for consideration of the panelists and this
    Committee, what is PTSD when there is no P? That's what you
    just described.
        Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Chair Booker. Wow. Before I go to Mr. Welch, I just want to
    warn Mr. Walker, given the power and potency of Senator Padilla
    love, you've exceeded your amount of love you're allowed to
    receive in a Senate hearing.
        And for the sense of proportionality and balance, I just
    want to let all the other witnesses know, that I love you, as
    well.
        [Laughter.]
        Chair Booker. Senator Welch.
        Senator Welch. I love you too.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Welch. And it's nice to meet you.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Welch. It is just a chill place when we got Senator
    Booker in charge, right?
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Welch. But you know what, I really do--we do
    appreciate you. I mean, it's incredible work you do. It's hard
    work and dangerous work at times. And so, thank you. I just
    want to express that gratitude to you. You know, I want to ask
    you--a couple of you--on the basis of your experience,
    something is relevant to us in Vermont. We don't have a
    residential reentry facility. We're one of only two States, in
    fact, I think we're really the only one. Hawaii had one, and
    there were some issues there. They want to get another one.
        But and I'm a former public defender, so I've dealt with a
    lot of people that you deal with after the court process. But I
    know Mr. Wetzel, you've had a lot of experience with this in
    Pennsylvania, and I would like you to just explain why
    residential reentry programs are really beneficial for the
    criminal justice system, for public safety and of course for
    the well-being of the person who's moving from the end of their
    sentence in that last 12 months to the community. Could you do
    that for us?
        Mr. Wetzel. I could, and thank you. And I got to tell you,
    let me pander a little bit in prepping and the work we're
    doing, really----
        Senator Welch. You know, you--my experience here, you don't
    get resistance on pandering from U.S. Senators.
        Mr. Wetzel. Well, I figured I felt all the love in the room
    from the Chairman, so I figured I'd share it myself. But I got
    to spend some time with your director Nick Demel----
        Senator Welch. Right.
        Mr. Wetzel [continuing]. And in several of your prisons
    actually looking at national staffing with the Correctional
    Leaders Association. And I think if you'd ask him or ask
    anyone, imagine somebody being locked up for 1, 3, 5, 7 years,
    10 years, imagine just the amount of technology that's been
    developed----
        Senator Welch. Right.
        Mr. Wetzel [continuing]. To go from incarceration--and
    incarceration right now--and I keep looking back to these guys
    because it's never felt like this inside facilities before. I
    mean, 30 years, 35 years, you know, even systems that didn't
    put an emphasis on rehabilitation necessarily. There was a
    relationship, like it was relational between correctional staff
    and incarcerated people.
        And some of that modeling modified behavior, that--so the--
    and on top of just the need to give people tools to adjust to
    society after being locked up, just decisionmaking.
        Mr. Wetzel. Right. You don't make decisions when you're
    incarcerated. You don't pick what to eat. So, just kind of
    getting used to that in a world that's flying was always
    important. There are no services inside prisons. You don't have
    a 40 percent vacancy rate and think you're delivering high
    quality programming and preparing people to get out.
        So, I mean, right now I think it's even more important that
    you have these--you guys call them residential reentry centers
    at the Federal level or halfway houses where people can come up
    first, take a breath, right?
        Senator Welch. Right.
        Mr. Wetzel. Get out, get used to it, and then start
    plugging them into services, like in Pennsylvania, we have a
    great career link network, right. That we can leverage off
    other systems from the State to get people and help people get
    back on their feet and become contributing members. So, it's a
    really critical, really critical.
        Senator Welch. Thank you. And I'll ask you, Mrs. Moore
    White, as well to get your thoughts on that.
        Mrs. White. I mean, I have to second what he said.
    Typically, in prison, you don't have a cell phone. We do--we
    now have tablets and stuff like that, but it--I can only
    imagine it is life altering walking out of a prison into
    society today.
        And I flash back to Shawshank Redemption, and when they
    released the guy from prison or whatever, he truly, like, he
    asked his boss, can I go to the restroom boss? It's a different
    world. And so, any transition time that they could have from
    prison until fully outside without supervision, I think is
    extremely helpful.
        Senator Welch. Okay. I thank you very much. And I yield
    back, Mr. Chairman.
        Chair Booker. I'm very grateful. Ms. Nance, you have an
    interesting perspective that I think is really valuable that
    I'd like to pull out a little bit more. And I'd like to ask you
    the question of understanding your--what the inmates are going
    through and the lack of support from the understaffing.
        How does that affect, in your opinion, the preparedness of
    inmates to reenter society? Why is this conversation we're
    having so vital, not just for the inmates being released, but
    also the communities into which they're being released?
        Ms. Nance. Thank you, Chair. I definitely want to echo
    everything that has been said amongst the other witnesses. I do
    think that there's a very high relationship that could happen
    when it comes to the people who are working in facilities and
    the incarcerated people.
        So, I've seen personally, in my experience, the best
    outcome when those relationships are strong. So, I talk a
    little bit about my loved one, but one of the things that's
    been very beneficial to him is when there is someone like a
    unit manager who is in his building that is trying to have
    their back and really trying to make sure that they do have
    access to the resources that they need.
        So, for instance, even paperwork. Like, I've been trying to
    get this paperwork, get this request in so that I can go to the
    law library and people aren't listening, they're not getting my
    paperwork. I'm trying to request medicine.
        There's a unit manager in my loved one's building that will
    say, I got you. And it might take a week, it might take a
    couple weeks, it might take a few days, but she always gets
    back to them. And that really makes a difference.
        And I do know that he's told me that she suffers from
    burnout and depression because she might be one of the only
    people who's willing to go there and give her all like a 100
    percent, to her job just because she cares about the human
    beings that are behind the walls.
        So, it really does impact those individuals because at the
    end of the day, like you said, 95, 90 percent, whatever that
    figure is, people are going to come home. So, the better we can
    make the environment for them, the better they're going to be
    when they do reenter society.
        Chair Booker. So, no, I really appreciate you testifying
    to--really the fact that there are so many people that are
    working in corrections that are trying to do the right thing by
    their inmates, but are unable because they're stressed out,
    they're overtaxed, they're unable to do the jobs that they were
    designed to do.
        But just to push a little bit more on the impact, not
    specifically your loved one, individually, but on an issue, I
    think Mr. Mangual explored really well in his testimony about
    this idea of recidivism rates and how high they are.
        Is it your experience that should inmates get the kind of
    resources they were intended to get, not just for the First
    Step Act, but even go back 10, 15 years ago, that these
    recidivism rates could come down?
        Ms. Nance. Absolutely, Senator. I think what's really,
    really interesting about programming in prisons is it gets
    talked about in a way that feels very, very frequent, right.
    But what happens is there are people who have case plans, there
    are people who also have interests.
        So, the more that we can connect them to things that are
    not necessarily them sitting inside a cell, the more likely
    they're going to be to have hope, to have morale, to be able to
    do something that's bigger than themselves and take their
    journey on rehabilitation.
        Like I heard Mr. Walker say that there was a time where
    people were really trying to do their job of rehabilitation and
    say, Okay, this is what I'm doing when I go to work. And I do
    think that that mentality could really have an impact on our
    system and have an impact on recidivism.
        Chair Booker. And what I've found, I think every human has
    found that when you apply yourself to some task that demands
    discipline and hard work, and you begin to see the rewards of
    that, whether it's advancing in your own education or in
    programs to deal with alcohol and drug abuse, that that sort of
    training you get from grit prepares you for other areas.
        And when you're denied choices or the opportunity to
    experience that, it has an impact on what your behavioral
    patterns will be when you're released from incarceration,
    correct?
        Ms. Nance. Absolutely. So, I would say that even as a human
    being, like all of us, we've all experienced accomplishments,
    we've all experienced what that looks like to be able to say, I
    did it. Like that pushes you forward, that makes you a better
    person, that makes you a more productive member of society,
    that makes you better in yourself.
        And that is no different for incarcerated people. And they
    need to have that opportunity to be able to do that and feel
    accomplished and be better for when they come home.
        Chair Booker. Right. And I live in a community that I would
    consider being over incarceration, but I talk to young men that
    come home, and if they haven't had exposure to opportunities to
    develop these skills and often felt like they were treated like
    an animal inside, that when they come back out, you often see
    them not able to rehabilitate and going back to the same kind
    of patterns and often coming with mental health conditions and
    others that were worsened while they were there. That really
    has an impact on the safety of communities. Would you agree?
        Ms. Nance. Absolutely, Senator. There's so big of a hole in
    mental health resources behind the walls. And I--my personal
    therapist, she'll say, does he have access to mental health
    services? And I'm like, no, he does not.
        But I do think that really trying to shift that mindset,
    from behind the walls and really being able to communicate with
    people in a way that is not an institutionalized mindset would
    definitely prepare them for reentering society.
        Chair Booker. And so, when I was mayor of the city of
    Newark and I started seeing the recidivism rates, I knew that I
    could lower my crime rates in my community if I could do
    something to lower those recidivism rates.
        And we did a lot of things in partnership with the
    Manhattan Institute, was which actually one of my best allies
    when I was mayor and setting up programs to attack what I
    thought was a source--one of the sources of crimes is these
    populations coming out of prison that were not prepared to
    reintegrate.
        Mr. Walker and Mrs. White, my heart is really heavy about
    knowing what correctional officers face every single day. I
    thought the wise comment--he shouldn't just come in here and
    drop wisdom and then just walk out like that.
        But Senator Padilla, who talked about PTSD, not--the P is
    really not there. One of my best experiences as mayor was
    working with law enforcement and seeing the trials and
    tribulations of my police officers, but yet they're also in
    environments where they get to be a hero, they get the
    approbation of communities, they get the support.
        But I look at my correctional officers, and they're not in
    those kind of environments. And they don't have the same,
    unimaginable stressors. It's just a disproportionate amount of
    that. And Mr. Walker, before I get to Mrs. White, I think you
    can speak to that in a personal way about us as a society
    creating these institutions that put so much stress and strain
    on the correctional officers themselves.
        And not only don't support our correctional officers, but
    put them in environments where there has in been increased
    deterioration of their well-being and what the consequences of
    that are. And I'm wondering if you can speak to that for me
        Mr. Walker. Mr. Chair, yes. Look, these systems were
    designed to punish people. And the byproduct of it, of the not
    fully continuing to consider it, is that the people that you
    put into that environment are also being traumatized.
        They are experiencing traumatic incidents every day, and
    there's nothing in the hiring description or the job
    description that forewarns you of what you're going to
    experience, and how to not vicariously pass that on to your
    loved ones, to your children. Because the thing that I'll--I'm
    willing to bet you, any one of these officers sitting behind me
    or Mrs. White will tell you that their significant other has
    told them at some point, ``don't talk to me like I'm an
    inmate''.
        Because we flip this switch when we walk into this
    environment. And it's not that anybody ever tells you that you
    have to do it. It's so ingrained in the culture and the
    institution that you pick it up as a survival mechanism. It's a
    human that--it's one of the traits of,----
        Chair Booker. So, under normal circumstances, Mr. Walker,
    we should be doing more for the mental health and well-being of
    our correctional officers. But that the added stressor of under
    staffing to me, and again I----
        Mr. Walker. Yes.
        Chair Booker [continuing]. Talked to a lot of the Capitol
    police officers, when we had our worst period post January 6,
    where officers were being held over again and again and I would
    talk to parents and things--I didn't even think through, not as
    a parent myself, about what kind of chaos it throws your family
    into----
        Mr. Walker. Yes.
        Chair Booker [continuing]. So now you have the stressors of
    the job plus the stressors of understaffing and what that
    means. It just seems to me almost like you're throwing your
    correctional officers into a kind of punishment prison
    environment in and of itself----
        Mr. Walker. Yes.
        Chair Booker [continuing]. Not to mention then being
    underpaid and feeling the financial strains----
        Mr. Walker. And the lack of public not--appreciation's not
    the appropriate word, because nobody's doing it for the pat on
    the back, but there's this stigma attached to being a
    correctional officer and people just don't look at the job as
    something of value to the--to society.
        Chair Booker. And so, you said something Mrs. White in your
    testimony, and I put it in quotes here because I just wanted to
    come back to you on it. You talked about upping our wellness
    programs.
        Mrs. White. Correct.
        Chair Booker. I really--and I've talked to FOP, I've talked
    to a lot of law enforcement organizations, because they're all
    concerned about suicide rates in law enforcement in general.
    And I don't think Americans fully understand what--from our
    border patrol agents all the way to our correctional officer
    what it means to do this work.
        But I just want that ``up our wellness programs.'' I just
    want you to flash that out. Like, what would you want from
    Congress if we were--if you had a chance to help mandate when
    it comes to that kind of wellness, what would you tell us to
    do?
        Because I know in the last panel, I could see it in a
    bipartisan way, it affecting people when they started hearing
    these issues of mental health for our correctional officers.
        Mrs. White. Sure. I think the list is extremely lengthy.
    Something that I didn't get to hit on with Mr. Padilla, that I
    think also would increase wellness and staff morale is support
    from the top of our agency. We hear a lot of policy changes and
    you going to get this and you going to get that. And, you know,
    we're so busy dotting our i's and crossing our t's with
    paperwork that we don't truly see the human aspect anymore.
        And that's what I was trying to hit on 20 years ago. It
    felt more like a family. We had bonfires together. We would go
    get a drink together or, or hang out. For birthdays we would,
    you know, I started in health services, we would take an after-
    hours trip and go to a restaurant and celebrate. And people
    were so burned out that they don't even do that.
        My husband is a former combat veteran and correctional
    officer. So, we, you know, just activities outside of our
    house, we don't typically do because of the PTSD and the stress
    and the, things that we take home. I think there's a ton of
    things, exercise programs.
        I think that exploring additional activities because we get
    so locked into our careers and what we do that we don't, if you
    ask me right now what I enjoy doing outside of here, I do union
    stuff 24/7.
        I don't have an activity that I could tell you I enjoy. I
    think those things are essential to helping the wellness of our
    staff. And as Mr. Walker had said, actually identifying that we
    are under stress is a huge thing. A lot of our officers are
    assaulted and they want to go straight back to post because
    that's who we are.
        We don't want to accept that we have been harmed in any way
    that we may need to decompress and take a moment. It's--that's
    huge in corrections. We're, you know, we have to prove that we
    are big and bad and somebody, and so we walk back into a place
    where we just got assaulted from.
        I think things of that nature are detrimental to us. I
    think that we have to be able to identify, first that we're
    under stress and we're not good at that. But then at offer
    programs, our--the Bureau offers something called EAP, Employee
    Assistance Program. You can call, you get like six free
    sessions a year. But the stigma behind actually utilizing that
    service is horrendous. And so, our employees will not do that.
        Chair Booker. So, I hope you'll work with my staff----
        Mrs. White. Absolutely.
        Chair Booker. Will kind of move across the law enforcement
    about how can we start emphasizing mental health.
        Mrs. White. Absolutely.
        Chair Booker. I just want to pull this out because my staff
    really thought it was an important point. Seven years ago, I
    guess we did a hiring freeze----
        Mrs. White. Yes.
        Senator Booker [continuing]. And it was one of the--it was
    almost like the straw that broke the camel's back? Mrs. White.
    Absolutely.
        Chair Booker. Could you explain that to--for the record?
        Mrs. White. Sure. So, 2016, we had a lot of vacant
    positions. I think that was kind of the start of what I call
    the perfect storm. Twenty years ago, people were knocking down
    the door to come to the Bureau of Prisons. It was a great
    salary. I doubled my salary. I was a pharmacy technician prior
    to coming into the prison. I applied three different times.
        People were knocking down the door to get into our agency.
    The pay and the benefits were phenomenal. You didn't really
    think about the--like Mr. Walker said, you don't really read,
    and know the mental toll that it will take on you. It was the
    pay and the benefits that was the pull to coming in--and I
    totally lost my train of thought. Tell me your question again--
    --
        Chair Booker. No, no.
        Mrs. White. I'm so sorry.
        Chair Booker. No. What happened 7 years ago?----
        Mrs. White. Sure.
        Chair Booker [continuing]. That was with straw that broke
    the camel's back.
        Mrs. Walker. So, it was a unspoken, we had 6 or 7,000
    vacant positions, and the agency was unofficially told to
    freeze them----
        Chair Booker. Right.
        Mrs. White [continuing]. And from that point the agency has
    shuffled and juggled numbers and percentages to the point that
    it wasn't a true, we are not hiring. It wasn't a true cutoff,
    but they weren't hiring. And so even--because they weren't
    hiring and then through attrition, we lost even more
    individuals.
        And honestly, I can't tell you that it's the agency, or,
    DOJ or who we for many years have tried to pull out where these
    freezes are coming from. But it is detrimental, and that was
    the start. 2016 was the start of the downfall.
        I came in, in 2004, 2003, we had a legal decision we called
    mission critical. And prior to me coming, my home institution
    for a city, Arkansas, we had four people on the compound to
    basically just monitor and run the compound and the traffic. We
    now on a good day, have two individuals to do that. They called
    it mission critical, and they cut a lot of positions.
        And then the 2016, they froze all the positions. And so, it
    has just been a constant decline from that point. And so that's
    what I was telling, I think Senator Ossoff as far as when we--
    when the council goes out and meets with congressional
    officials, we have asked for staffing. We have asked for pay,
    we have asked for a lot of things, but we have tried to hone in
    because while every year we've been successful in getting
    additional pay and stuff like that, we have not truly been
    successful in getting additional officers added, even though
    the number is 20,446 and we set around 12,000 officers.
        Chair Booker. Could you just inform the floor if I'm not
    necessary for this vote, you can close the vote out. Okay. I'm
    just being pushed because there's a floor vote going on right
    now, but if I'm not essential for it. I want to stay on point
    just because we have this extraordinary opportunity to flesh
    some of this out.
        And so that seemed in the previous panel this afternoon to
    Mr. Wetzel, the problem that I saw, is there's just no way to
    catch up, when the competition for people who are willing to do
    this kind of work is so fierce.
        And I want you to flesh that out for me because she's
    saying I'm trying to hire people when I'm offering them less
    pay, more difficult working conditions and hours. I mean, who
    would choose this job if I could work in State corrections,
    county corrections, in the free market where we're in a high
    labor demand market, there's just no way out of this hole
    unless Congress does something to create financial incentives.
    Am I wrong or am I right?
        Mr. Wetzel. No. You're a hundred percent right. And, plus
    you don't even have the agility to be competitive in a market
    where you're competing with everyone. So, what's left is folks
    who--I mean 5 to 15 year. So, you're in so long you can't get
    out. I mean, one of the things that is a cautionary tale that
    should scare us to death is the retention rate of new people
    coming into corrections.
        I saw reported in Pennsylvania Department of Corrections
    budget hearing, 37 percent within 18 months. There's systems
    that are--have about a 20 percent retention rate, year one. So,
    what that signals is that look, when you're in it at some
    period of time, it's all you know, you talk about rallying.
        Sadly, for us, it's the get it done kind of mentality means
    we're going to get it done and the folks who are in are going
    to stay in. It's running new people out, because when you have
    no point of reference and you go through training and you hear
    this aspirational stuff, and you look at this generation who
    wants to be mission driven, and you come in and there's
    supposed to be two people working with you, and you're by
    yourself and it doesn't recognize anything, and you can make
    the same amount of money across the street, it's not going to
    happen.
        Chair Booker. And so, you're one of the people I look to,
    and I have a ton of respect for, because I think you have a
    view of the whole--the sort of correctional complex in the
    country. There's no way out of this trap--you can just give me
    yes or no. There's no way out of this trap we're in right now,
    unless we find ways to make a more financially attractive
    career, not job, a career path for people who are thinking
    about going into corrections. Is that correct, yes?
        Mr. Wetzel. No. Actually, you can't throw money at it, it's
    not--that's not going to fix it.
        Chair Booker. Okay.
        Mr. Wetzel. You have to fundamentally change the work
    conditions. Yes. I mean, if this was a warehouse, you won't
    work in a warehouse where you have a chance of getting stabbed
    every day.
        Senator Booker. Right.
        Mr. Wetzel. And if you could work at a warehouse and make
    less, and you're not invested in the pension and the kind of
    stuff, why wouldn't you?
        Chair Booker. Right.
        Mr. Wetzel. We have to fund, I mean, there's no--when you
    look at--just look at the State employers and State prison
    systems are two or three employer, add county jails. You're
    talking about huge numbers of correctional officers around the
    country, right. So, you would think there'd be career
    concentrations in corrections. You would think academia, we
    need other sectors to pay attention. We need strategies for
    other sectors that have worked in this crisis.
        We can't keep--this is like Henry Ford said, ``If I asked
    what people what they wanted, they would've said build faster
    horses.'' We're well beyond--you can't throw money at a
    situation.
        Chair Booker. Right.
        Mr. Wetzel. How much can I pay you to go risk your life?
        Chair Booker. Right. Now, that's wise. And I see Mr.
    Walker, Mrs. White just shaking their heads up and down and
    smiling like----
        Mr. Wetzel. Well, in any other world, it wouldn't even be a
    question----
        Chair Booker. Right.
        Mr. Wetzel [continuing]. Just in corrections, all of a
    sudden, we think--we apply different rules that defy logic
    anywhere else in the world, and then we expect good outcomes
    from that, it may--it defies logic even more than most things
    in this building do. I'm sorry.
        Chair Booker. I want to get into two more things real
    quick. There was a lot of--the Inspector General was talking
    about contraband being snuck into prisons. The danger of
    telephones in prisons and more. And I figure I--it would be
    nice to ask people who actually have been correctional officers
    about how do you stop contraband coming into prisons. Because I
    think that was something else that I think people left thinking
    about. Well, if we just make it a felony and not a misdemeanor
    and some quick answers and solutions.
        But I think you-all probably have some wisdom on this. How
    do you stop this contraband that endangers officers as well.
    How do you stop the contraband from coming into prisons? I'm
    going to allow it a jump ball.
        [Laughter.]
        Mrs. White. I can start.
        Chair Booker. Yes.
        Mrs. White. More equipment, more staff are definitely
    helpful. But----
        Chair Booker. More equipment, meaning screeners and----
        Mrs. White. Not necessarily, so they're--Senator Cotton is
    on like a cell phone jamming bill----
        Chair Booker. Yes.
        Mrs. White [continuing]. That's super helpful, if we could
    jam the signal to the cell phones and the drones that are
    dropping drugs into our prison----
        Chair Booker. Yes.
        Mrs. White [continuing]. That's incredibly helpful. There
    is technology out there. It is costly.
        Chair Booker. Yes. Okay. Excellent. Mr. Walker, did you
    have something to add?
        Mr. Walker. Creating penalties for it is not the answer.
    Look, I'm sitting in a cell and I know that it's illegal and
    I'm going to do it anyway because I have a need. So, I think
    that's part of the thought process or the thought exercise that
    has to take place is--not the illegal part obviously, but the
    part where the guy just needs a cell phone so he can stay in
    contact with his family, his--who--so the need part undercuts
    some of that contraband introduction into the system.
        Specifically, in the area of cell phones, I think the
    tablets--like California, we're doing the tablets now. So, it--
    so that communication of being able to talk with your children,
    talk to your loved one, that's cutting down some of that, the
    blockers--it's not a blocker, but it's an authorization
    process, so it's tracking everything. And someone mentioned it
    in the hearing this morning----
        Chair Booker. Yes.
        Mr. Walker [continuing]. Is that they can track every call
    that's made in----
        Chair Booker. And so those three things----
        Mr. Walker [continuing]. And around the State prisons.
        Chair Booker [continuing]. One is this--the rates at which,
    the cost at which to make these calls, the difficulties is to
    communicate your family. If you create ease of communication,
    the pressure for people getting phones for that--and those who
    want those phones to continue to do illegal activity outside,
    though, that's where the equipment that you're talking about.
        Mr. Walker. Yes.
        Chair Booker [continuing]. Is more helpful.
        Mr. Walker. Yes.
        Chair Booker. That's really helpful. I don't know if----
        Mr. Wetzel. Let me just add this. Any other sector, you'd
    say technology, for the military, they--you R and D, and you'd
    have this stuff that didn't require staff. Our answers in
    corrections, against this, we want to throw staff at it or we
    want to lock more people up that we don't have the resources to
    manage anyhow.
        Chair Booker. Right.
        Mr. Wetzel. So, all our discussion is around the two things
    we cannot do, this--we have to pull from other sectors. It's
    technology, it's creativity, it's academia. It's bright young
    minds coming in the field and thinking differently.
        Chair Booker. That's--I'm grateful you said that. Just Mr.
    Wetzel, I want to stay on you. There are thousands of released
    folks on home confinement. Their recidivism rates are
    dramatically low. If they're compliant right now, is there any
    reason to bring them back in?
        Mr. Wetzel. Absolutely not. At a hearing about staffing at
    a 40 percent vacancy rate. That should be criminal, if you're
    going to bring somebody back who's not committing a crime.
        Chair Booker. Okay. Before I close out Mr. Mangual, because
    I just love and respect the academic work you do and the
    studies you do, and you said something that I maybe want to
    have a hearing on. And it's a bipartisan bill that I have
    called the VICTIM Act, because in communities like mine, the
    closeout rates for serious violent crime is so low.
        And there's a great researcher that I read back in my
    mayoral days who said, inner city communities often have too
    much law enforcement that they don't need, which is low level
    drug crimes and not enough law enforcement that they do need.
        And so our bill, the VICTIM Act, is to try to get a lot
    more resources to close out those serious violent crimes, which
    the closeout rates are so low, really affirming, which my
    experience really was in line with what you said, that the
    number of people committing minor crimes when I was mayor were
    just a small group of individuals who, when I first became
    mayor, our closeout rate on murders was like 20 percent. I used
    to joke that this is the best place in America to kill somebody
    because it's so unlikely that you'll get caught.
        Would you affirm the part of what I just said that said
    that, like, something has to be done in getting law enforcement
    the resources they need to focus on the criminals that are at
    the center of a lot of the larger, more serious crimes?
        Mr. Mangual. Absolutely. But I do think it's important to
    recognize that there is a lot of overlap between offenders who
    commit the most serious crimes and offenders who commit some of
    them lower-level crimes.
        And one of the most interesting statistics out of the early
    1990's in New York when then Chief Bratton of the Transit
    Police Department in 1990 started a big fare evasion program,
    right. And, you know, I think people rightly think of fare
    evasion is a relatively low-level offense.
        Two statistics that came out of that enforcement program I
    think really shocked a lot of people and created a lot of
    support for the kind of broken window strategy that you know,
    caught hold after that. One was that somewhere around 1 in 20
    of the individuals who were arrested for evading the fare had
    an illegal weapon on them.
        And something like one in seven were found to have an
    outstanding felony warrant, which is, you know, a two pretty
    significant figures. And what that tells us is that most
    criminals don't specialize. I think the research makes this
    pretty clear, which means that tomorrow's shooter can be
    yesterday's retail thief. Yesterday's thief can be, you know,
    next week's car thief, et cetera.
        So, I wouldn't necessarily sort of push the paradigm that,
    you know, the only way to sort of solve the more serious crimes
    is to abandon enforcement on the lower level stuff. I think
    it's important to put ourselves in a situation in which we can
    do both.
        And one of the things that, you know, is very clear, and
    there's great research by Anthony Braga, who's a professor now
    at the University of Pennsylvania, which is developing into one
    of the best criminology departments in the country, frankly,
    looking at clearance rates for non-fatal shootings. Because we
    see so many resources get diverted into homicide
    investigations, which understandably so you know, non-fatal
    shootings, which are the only difference between a fatal
    shooting and a non-fatal shooting is usually aim and chance.
    They don't get as many resources.
        And when you increase those resources, when you put the
    same amount of time in, what they found is that you can
    increase the clearance rate, but all of that really comes down
    to a question of resources. And like I said, during my
    testimony, writ large across the board, the criminal justice
    systems throughout this country are underfunded on so many
    counts. A lot of the bad results that we see and that we want
    to improve are simply a function of our inability to correctly
    staff, to have morale, to have high quality individuals taking
    these positions and dedicating themselves and doing them well.
        And part of that is, you know, creating pay parity. You
    know, part of that is, you know, having incentives, you know,
    promotional ceilings being raised and giving people a sense of
    ownership and pride in the work that they do.
        But really, it's just a function of building out that
    infrastructure. So many departments, police departments,
    correctional departments are working off technology that's 30,
    40 years old, you know, there are no data scientists within
    these institutions doing the kinds of analysis to inform the
    deployment of resources in any kind of strategic way that----
        Chair Booker. So, there's enough head nodding on this
    Committee when as you're talking, you're getting a lot of
    affirmation. I want to just sort of end on this because when
    you fairly talked about the First Step Act and the analysis we
    have--so far is only a shorter period of time. It's not that 8-
    year window you were discussing.
        But I guess what frustrates me, not with anything you said,
    but just frustrates me in general, is what I started seeing
    when I was mayor, which was when we were punishing--thought we
    were this--better punishing inmates by taking away Pell Grants
    and all of these things, when all the data showed a dollar
    invested in allowing somebody a pathway, people with--coming
    out with BAs, where MAs have dramatically lower rates.
        And I don't remember the exact data point, but it was
    something like every dollar spent in education programs paid
    for itself, returned to the taxpayer in terms of just the
    reduced recidivism rates.
        And so, to have a First Step Act that, as Senator
    Whitehouse said, so passionately, that is not being done
    because we don't have the staff to do it. This is something
    good to pursue because the data you're talking about recidivism
    would go down even further if there was actually access to the
    programs that were articulated by the 86 members of the Senate
    that voted for that Act. Would you agree with that?
        Mr. Mangual. Yes. Look, I think that's certainly the hope,
    but it's again, it's hard to know if we don't have the
    resources to properly implement these things I mean, one of the
    most staggering statistics that came out of the last year
    annual report on the First Step Act was that about 29,000
    individuals had been released as a result of the First Step
    Act.
        And if you look at the breakdown of individuals who had
    received any of the evidence-based recidivism reduction
    programs, about 14,000, almost half hadn't received any
    programs. Now, part--a big part of that was because a good
    chunk of that number never actually entered a BOP facility.
        But, you know, also part--and partly because they just
    receive lower sentences, but, you know, being able to
    faithfully implement these things, they take time, they take
    resources. If you don't have those, you simply can't actually
    flesh out the plan for--to any level where we can, you know,
    say with any kind of, you know, scientific certainty whether it
    works.
        Chair Booker. Mr. Mangual, you and I are going to agree
    there, and I'm going to professionalize saying your name
    correctly. I just want to say a few points before we close
    because I have seen how--and this goes to the point we're
    talking about--how when a kid gets caught up in the system
    early it actually can create cycles of criminality, because of
    the experiences they have in the criminal justice system.
        And, you know, there's the very famous cases like Kalief
    Browder and others where he was accused of stealing a backpack,
    waited for 2 years before being even adjudicated. My first time
    I went to Rikers with Jared Kushner's father, Charlie Kushner,
    I asked the kids how long they'd been incarcerated, and they
    were like, you know, 6 months, 8 months, a year. And I said,
    well, what have you been convicted of? And they hadn't been
    convicted.
        And, many of them had spent time in solitary confinement.
    And the difference between that experience and the experience
    where I grew up in an affluent neighborhood where kids would
    often do the same kind of things, would have station house
    adjustments and never enter a system that traumatized them in
    the first place.
        And so, this idea that we create low-level penalties, and I
    struggled with this when I was mayor, that yes, when we
    stopped--we started saying, we're not going to ignore. And this
    idea of ignoring crimes, if there's no accountability, then
    you're inviting the thing to continue. It's just like common
    sense, right?
        So, we said this, open air drinking, which was the biggest
    complaints I got from citizens in my community. You know, we
    were going to start to talk, we weren't going to take people to
    prison, we weren't going to give them the kind of ticket that
    would create a poverty trap.
        And we did find people that had illegal possession of
    firearms and the likes. I'm not disagreeing with that. But what
    I'm disagreeing with in terms of policy is creating a system
    that takes our children into the system, traumatizes them, they
    come back out, they start falling further and further behind in
    school, or what have you.
        We have to find a way to create a system that reflects the
    best of our values. And it starts with supporting the
    professionals that are a part of doing a job. Ms. White, when
    you talked about the mission of corrections, it is not just
    punishment. It is not, no correctional officer will say that.
    It's so much of about this understanding that we are a society
    that believes in rehabilitation, that believes in redemption,
    and creating systems that promote and support that which
    ultimately doing that to public safety.
        I am really grateful for this panel and for you all,
    allowing this engagement. I'm grateful for my Ranking Member
    who I have a lot of respect for because I know he's seeking the
    same ends that I am in our society, safe, strong communities.
    I'm really happy that my friends, like Senator Padilla talked
    about love because we're ultimately trying to create a more
    beloved community here in our country.
        And today in the United States Senate, the five of you have
    really brought, I think the best of not just testimony, the
    best of heart and intention to help us to solve very, very
    difficult problems. I have learned a lot from you, and I know
    that the record will reflect. I hope the makings of some
    bipartisan ideas to really advance it, including the bill that
    we're looking at now as a result of this morning's hearing,
    which is Ranking Member Cotton's bill, directly to your idea of
    creating better equipment.
        Thank you everybody for your time, for your testimony. I
    know there's some official closing remarks I'm supposed to
    make, and I know the word love is not in them. Let me see.
    Closing, here it goes.
        Thank you to our Ranking Member, Senator Cotton. I think
    I've done that already. Yes, sufficiently. Thank you to each of
    our Subcommittee Members who are not here to hear this, special
    thank you to our witnesses. I think I've given you a special
    thank you. Federal and State prisons are suffering from
    overstaffing. There's language that reflects what I've already
    said.
        This is the stuff I have to say. I want to remind the
    Members of the Subcommittee that questions for the record are
    due a week from today, Wednesday, a week from today at 5 p.m.
    And I ask that the witnesses, and I know as busy as you are, as
    understaffed and undersupported as you are, might be in your
    job, please respond to those questions in a timely manner. They
    will be more helpful than you know from a Committee that really
    wants to do some substantive work in this area.
        And with that, this hearing is adjourned. I'm grateful.
        [Whereupon, at 4:30 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
        [Additional material submitted for the record follows.]

                                A P P E N D I X

    Submitted by Senator Booker:

     American Federation of State County (AFSCME) and Municipal
        Employees Correctional Staffing Crisis........................    84

     AMIRACLE4SURE, The Nation's Correctional Staffing Crisis:
        Assessing the Toll on Correctional Officers and Incarcerated
        Persons.......................................................   365

     Braggs v. Dunn (2017)............................................    87

     Braggs v. Dunn (2021)............................................   175

     Correctional Leaders Association (CLA)...........................   360

     Mount, Makayla, letter...........................................   363

     Major County Sheriffs of America (MCSA), The Nation's
        Correctional Staffing Crisis: Assessing the Toll on
        Correctional Officers and Incarcerated Persons................   368

     Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), Correctional Staffing........   370

    Submitted by Senator Cotton:

     Bureau of Prisions, MANY Vacancies, screenshot...................   380

     Major County Sheriffs of America (MCSA), The Nation's
        Correctional Staffing Crisis: Assessing the Toll on
        Correctional Officers and Incarcerated Persons................   368

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]