[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]