[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
______
FEDERAL CORRECTIONS IN FOCUS:
OVERSIGHT OF THE BUREAU OF PRISONS
=======================================================================
JOINT HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SURVEILLANCE
JOINT WITH THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
TUESDAY, MAY 6, 2025
__________
Serial No. 119-18
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
Available via: http://judiciary.house.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
60-301 WASHINGTON : 2025
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Chair
DARRELL ISSA, California JAMIE RASKIN, Maryland, Ranking
ANDY BIGGS, Arizona Member
TOM McCLINTOCK, California JERROLD NADLER, New York
THOMAS P. TIFFANY, Wisconsin ZOE LOFGREN, California
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
CHIP ROY, Texas HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
SCOTT FITZGERALD, Wisconsin Georgia
BEN CLINE, Virginia ERIC SWALWELL, California
LANCE GOODEN, Texas TED LIEU, California
JEFFERSON VAN DREW, New Jersey PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington
TROY E. NEHLS, Texas J. LUIS CORREA, California
BARRY MOORE, Alabama MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania
KEVIN KILEY, California JOE NEGUSE, Colorado
HARRIET M. HAGEMAN, Wyoming LUCY McBATH, Georgia
LAUREL M. LEE, Florida DEBORAH K. ROSS, North Carolina
WESLEY HUNT, Texas BECCA BALINT, Vermont
RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin SYDNEY KAMLAGER-DOVE, California
BRAD KNOTT, North Carolina JARED MOSKOWITZ, Florida
MARK HARRIS, North Carolina DANIEL S. GOLDMAN, New York
ROBERT F. ONDER, Jr., Missouri JASMINE CROCKETT, Texas
DEREK SCHMIDT, Kansas
BRANDON GILL, Texas
MICHAEL BAUMGARTNER, Washington
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME AND FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT SURVEILLANCE
ANDY BIGGS, Arizona, Chair
TOM TIFFANY, Wisconsin LUCY McBATH, Georgia, Ranking
TROY NEHLS, Texas Member
BARRY MOORE, Alabama JARED MOSKOWITZ, Florida
KEVIN KILEY, California DAN GOLDMAN, New York
LAUREL LEE, Florida STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
BRAD KNOTT, North Carolina ERIC SWALWELL, California
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
JEFFERSON VAN DREW, New Jersey, Chair
BARRY MOORE, Alabama JASMINE CROCKETT, Texas, Ranking
ROBERT F. ONDER, Jr., Missouri Member
DEREK SCHMIDT, Kansas JARED MOSKOWITZ, Florida
BRANDON GILL, Texas HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
Georgia
CHRISTOPHER HIXON, Majority Staff Director
JULIE TAGEN, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Tuesday, May 6, 2025
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
The Honorable Jefferson Van Drew, Chair of the Subcommittee on
Oversight from the State of New Jersey......................... 1
The Honorable Jasmine Crockett, Ranking Member of the
Subcommittee on Oversight from the State of Texas.............. 4
The Honorable Andy Biggs, Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime and
Federal Government Surveillance from the State of Arizona...... 5
The Honorable Lucy McBath, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on
Crime and Federal Government Surveillance from the State of
Georgia........................................................ 6
The Honorable Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member of the Committee on
the Judiciary from the State of Maryland....................... 9
WITNESSES
Andy Potter, Founder, Executive Director, One Voice United
Oral Testimony................................................. 11
Prepared Testimony............................................. 13
Patrick D. Purtill, Executive Vice President, General Counsel,
Unify.US; Charels Evans Hughes Lecturer, Co-Director,
Washington Study Group, Colgate University
Oral Testimony................................................. 168
Prepared Testimony............................................. 170
Cody Wilde, Senior Vice President, Correctional Programs, Prison
Fellowship
Oral Testimony................................................. 176
Prepared Testimony............................................. 178
Kandia Milton, Government Affairs Director, Dream.Org
Oral Testimony................................................. 182
Prepared Testimony............................................. 184
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC. SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
All materials submitted by the Subcommittee on Crime and Federal
Government Surveillance and the Subcommittee on Oversight, for
the record..................................................... 219
A letter to the Hon. William Marshall, III, Director, Federal
Bureau of Prisons, May 5, 2025, from The Sentencing Project and
other advocacy groups, submitted by the Honorable Lucy McBath,
Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Crime and Federal
Government Surveillance from the State of Georgia, for the
record
Materials submitted by the Honorable Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member
of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Maryland,
for the record
An article entitled, ``BOP slashes retention bonuses,
impacting thousands of correctional officers,'' Feb. 27,
2025, Corrections 1
An article entitled, ``Days ahead of coming BOP pay cuts,
some employees already resigning,'' Mar. 14, 2025,
Federal News Network
Materials submitted by the Honorable Jasmine Crockett, Ranking
Member of the Subcommittee on Oversight from the State of
Texas, for the record
An article entitled, ``Under Trump, U.S. Prisons Offered
Gender-Affirming Care,'' Oct. 16, 2024, The New York
Times
A report entitled, ``Noncitizens in the U.S.: Public
Information on Federal Incarcerations,'' Sept. 3, 2024,
GAO
An article entitled, ``What happens with US citizen children
caught up in Trump's deportation push,'' May 3, 2025, CNN
An article entitled, ``Newborn U.S. citizen and Guatemalan
mom detained as she faces deportation,'' May 4, 2025, NBC
News
An article entitled, ``Judge says 2-year-old US citizen
appears to have been deported with `no meaningful
process,' '' Apr. 26, 2025, Politico
An article entitled, ``Video shows masked ICE agents
detaining 2 outside Douglas County courthouse,'' Apr. 21,
2025, 9 News
An article entitled, ``ICE Agents in Ski Masks Snatch
Migrants Out of Lawyer's Car,'' Feb. 28, 2025, Newsweek
An article entitled, ``Survey: Transgender inmates more
likely to be victims of sexual assault,'' Jul. 31, 2015,
CBS News
An article entitled, ``Prison Fellowship Applauds
Congressional Funding of Prison Rape Elimination Act,''
Mar 28, 2018, Prison Fellowship
Materials submitted by the Honorable Andy Biggs, Chair of the
Subcommittee on Oversight from the State of Arizona, for the
record
An article entitled, ``US federal women's prison plagued by
rampant staff sexual abuse to close,'' Apr. 15, 2024, The
Guardian
A statement from Colette S. Peters, Director, Federal Bureau
of Prisons, The Department of Justice. Jul. 23, 2024
Materials submitted by the Honorable Jared Moskowitz, a Member of
the Subcommittee on Oversight from the State of Florida, for
the record
An article entitled, ``DOGE making cuts to Federal workforce:
FCI Thomson union expresses frustration,'' Feb. 25, 2025,
WQAD
An article entitled, ``Thomson Prison on lockdown since
Sunday,'' Mar. 11, 2025, KWQC
An article entitled, ``15 FCI Thomson corrections officers
hospitalized after suspected drug exposure in mailroom,''
Apr. 17, 2025, Corrections 1
QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES FOR THE RECORD
Questions to Kandia Milton, Government Affairs Director,
Dream.Org, submitted by the Honorable Derek Schmidt, a Member
of the Subcommittee on Oversight from the State of Kansas, and
the Honorable Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member of the Committee on
the Judiciary from the State of Maryland, for the record
Questions submitted by the Honorable Derek Schmidt, a Member of
the Subcommittee on Oversight from the State of Kansas, for the
record
Questions to Andy Potter, Founder, Executive Director, One
Voice United
Responses from Andy Potter, Founder, Executive Director, One
Voice United, for the record
Questions to Patrick D. Purtill, Executive Vice President,
General Counsel, Unify.US; Charels Evans Hughes Lecturer,
Co-Director, Washington Study Group, Colgate University
FEDERAL CORRECTIONS IN FOCUS:
OVERSIGHT OF THE BUREAU OF PRISONS
----------
Tuesday, May 6, 2025
House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance
joint with the
Subcommittee on Oversight
Committee on the Judiciary
Washington, DC
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:14 a.m., in
Room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, the Hon. Jefferson
Van Drew [Chair of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Van Drew, Biggs, Jordan, Moore,
Onder, Schmidt, Gill, Tiffany, Kiley, Lee, Knott, Crockett,
McBath, Raskin, Moskowitz, Johnson, Goldman, and Cohen.
Mr. Van Drew. Good morning. The Oversight and Crime
Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee will come to
order. Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a
recess at any time.
We welcome everyone to today's hearing on oversight of the
Federal Bureau of Prisons.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from the great State
of Kansas, Mr. Schmidt, to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Please stay risen; we are going to have a moment of silence
afterward.
All. I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States
of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one
Nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for
all.
Mr. Van Drew. Moment of silence.
[Moment of silence.]
Mr. Van Drew. I will now recognize myself for an opening
statement.
I want to welcome everyone to today's joint hearing. I want
to thank our witnesses for being here today, especially those
who have served or are currently serving in our Federal
correctional institutions and are working from the outside to
support and enhance the Bureau of Prisons, which, God help us,
it needs. I welcome those officers and employees from the
Bureau of Prisons who join us in the gallery or watching from
across the country.
This week marks National Corrections Officers Week. It's a
time when we should honor the professionalism, the discipline,
and the sacrifice of those who serve behind those walls. The
men and women who staff our Federal prisons are law enforcement
officers in every sense of the word. They walk the toughest
beats in the United States of America. It is our duty to ensure
that they have the tools, the training, and the leadership they
need to do their jobs safely and effectively.
Let me be blunt. The Bureau of Prisons is not a system in
need of some minor improvements. It is in need of a true
reckoning.
That's not my opinion. It's a fact. The DOJ Inspector
General has published over 100 reports since the early 2000s
documenting the systemic failure of the Bureau of Prisons:
Deteriorating facilities, chronic understaffing and failure to
retain staff, low morale, breakdowns in safety, and resource
mismanagement.
This hearing is an opportunity to begin that work in
earnest that we need to do. It should not only be an apolitical
exercise. It is a roadmap and an educational and constructive
platform for the new Director of the Bureau of Prisons, Mr.
William K. Marshall, III.
Director Marshall steps into this role at a pivotal and
promising moment. With decades of public service in
corrections, decades of experience, and he will be useful and
helpful. Director Marshall now has the opportunity to chart a
bold, credible, and accountable path into the future.
To frame today's discussion, I want to identify some of the
specific challenges that require urgent attention.
First, staffing. The Bureau is currently operating with
thousands of vacancies, including nearly 6,000 fewer staff than
its authorized level. This is not sustainable to go in this
direction.
As I've worked on this issue over the years, I've come to
learn a lot about correctional officers, not just what they do,
but what they endure. I'm going to give you some stats. I was
in the State Senate, I was in the State legislature in the
State of New Jersey for 16 years, and we had the prison gang
task force. We went to every single prison in the State of New
Jersey and to see what they had to put up with, what was going
on, and the challenges they had. It was a real eye-opener for
me. I have always had a special place in my heart for
correctional officers.
We know their life span is shorter. Correctional officers,
on average live to just 59 years old, nearly 20 years below the
national average. I know their rates of suicide are higher. The
rate is more than seven times the national average. I know they
get sick more. Stress, sleep deprivation, and trauma drive
higher rates of heart disease and high blood pressure. I know
they get divorced more often. Their divorce rate outpaces
nearly every other law enforcement official. I know they get
paid less. In New Jersey, I know for a fact Federal correction
officers make nearly--just about half of what their State
counterparts earn. This job has a price. These men and women
pay this price every day.
Second, physical infrastructure. From broken security doors
to outdated HVAC systems, our institutions deteriorate daily.
The Inspector General estimates a multibillion dollar backlog
in critical repairs all across the 122 BOP institutions. Some
of these prisons actually cost more now to maintain than they
are actually worth. That's a waste of taxpayer dollars, and
real solutions are needed to ensure that government facilities
are both safe and efficient.
Third, accountability and reform implementation. Congress
recently passed the bipartisan Federal Prison Oversight Act,
creating an independent ombudsman to handle complaints. That
office has yet to be set up.
The Bureau has also been tasked with implementing the First
Step Act to ensure public confidence in Federal detention.
Thankfully, the Trump Administration has recognized the urgent
need to course correct.
For example, under President Trump's leadership, the Bureau
has reversed misguided policies from the previous
administration, including restoring the principle that Federal
inmates will be housed according to their biological sex and
eliminating taxpayer-funded gender ideology in our prisons. It
does not belong there.
Additionally, a new interagency agreement with DHS and ICE
is helping to alleviate the border crisis by utilizing BOP
facilities to house illegal immigrants. It's a prudent use of
existing resources during unprecedented times.
There is a lot more progress to be made. Director Marshall
and his team now have both the mandate and the responsibility
of finishing the job.
When Federal prisons are mismanaged, it affects
communities, victims, and law enforcement across the United
States of America. I've seen it myself in my own district.
South Jersey is home to FCI Fairton, where I've heard currently
from officers and families on the ground who are deeply
concerned about the future of the institution itself and
maintaining professionalism and their profession.
Fairton is designed specifically, now, to house inmates who
can't be placed in the general population for a variety of
reasons. Gang dropouts would be in trouble if they were in the
general population, sex offenders, and former law enforcement
officials.
This facility is facing a wide range of issues. The chronic
understaffing and rising inmate numbers have created an
increasingly unsafe environment for everyone on the inside.
These conditions put correctional officers at risk every single
day of the week. What's happening at Fairton is not unique.
It's symptomatic. It's a reflection of what's happening across
the Federal system across the country.
We are committed to ensuring that the Bureau of Prisons
operates with integrity, transparency, and respect for both its
workforce and respect for the rule of law. To every
correctional officer here listening today and around the
country, your service matters. We see your sacrifice, and we
will not let this opportunity pass without pushing for real and
lasting change that reflects the seriousness of your issues and
your job.
I'd like to say too, I believe that this is an area where
on some issues, not on all, but on some issues where we can
come together in a bipartisan way. There will be issues in
which we disagree, but I do believe there are issues in which
we come together.
I want to thank you for that. I will now recognize the
Ranking Member--I want to make sure I get this right--the
Ranking Member, yes, Ms. Crockett, for her opening statement.
Ms. Crockett. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you so much
for your opening.
I think that we are living in a time in which the American
people are hoping that we can agree on something, anything, in
Congress. The fact is, the vast majority of your opening
statement I could not disagree with. The question is, while we
agree that there is a problem, let's hope that Congress can do
what we are supposed to do, which is agree on a solution.
Today's hearing could not come at a timelier moment, with
this being National Correctional Officers Week. Thank you to
all our correctional officers.
Today, approximately 35,000 correctional officers and staff
are under the control of the Bureau of Prisons. During the last
100-plus days of this administration, we've seen just how
little Trump cares about the BOP staff's ability to do their
job overseeing and protecting roughly 155,000 incarcerated
people in our Federal prison system.
Having been a former public defender and civil rights
attorney, I can tell you that I have seen the inside of a few
prisons myself. I've seen the conditions these individuals are
living in, I've seen the conditions that staff are working
under, and based on my experience, I can tell you correctional
officers' staff have one of the most difficult jobs, as well as
the most dangerous. These jobs are now only getting harder.
Just 2\1/2\ months ago, Ms. Kathleen Toomey, the Deputy
Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, testified before
Congress that the Bureau had over 4,000 vacant positions that
need to be filled. Yet, rather than doing anything to ensure
adequate staffing and protect officers and inmates, Trump's
Justice Department terminated the Bureau's incentive pay plan,
effectively cutting Bureau officers' and other employees' pay
anywhere between 10-25 percent. This plan, of course, helped to
retain and recruit people for jobs within the BOP.
On March 27, 2025, Trump issued an Executive Order
eliminating BOP's labor union, which is comprised of roughly
30,000 officers and staff. All this comes after U.S. Government
Accountability Office (GAO) added the BOP to its 2025 high-risk
list in January due to all the problems the BOP is facing.
The GAO highlighted BOP's quote,
Long-standing staffing challenges present a serious threat to
the safety of staff and incarcerated people. BOP also faces
challenges with aging and deteriorating infrastructure, which,
likewise, affects safety. It also needs improvements in
planning for programs to prepare incarcerated persons for
release. Better monitoring and evaluation are needed to improve
management of the Federal prison system.
Does Trump take these issues and threats to safety
seriously? Absolutely not. Instead, he made the deranged,
delusional decision over the weekend to open Alcatraz as a
prison that was literally shut down because it was too
expensive and too impractical to run. Honestly, you can't make
this stuff up.
Please tell me how any of this makes sense. Stripping
Bureau employees of their collective bargaining rights; cutting
pay and benefits at a time where the Bureau was ranked the
worst place to work among all Federal subagencies and offices--
and we have more than 450 offices--having staff like prison
teachers, cooks, nurses, and monitors being forced to serve as
correctional officers because BOP has too few officers to
actually do the job; wanting to place even more of a strain on
the system by trying to house migrants and children in Bureau
facilities. It's absolutely ridiculous.
Let me be clear. This isn't just a staff issue. It's a life
or death issue. Reports by the Justice Department's Inspector
General detailed how over a third of the inmate suicides that
occurred between fiscal years 2014-2021, BOP staff didn't
sufficiently conduct the required inmate rounds or counts to
check on the inmates.
Let me tell you all something. Realizing this fact took me
back. I don't know what it's like to be a family member and to
receive that phone call about your loved one that you would
imagine is in one of the safest places ever, regardless of why
they are there, and to find out that they somehow committed
suicide. I don't know what it's like to be that loved one, but
I do know what it's like to be that attorney and to get that
call, to get the call that one of my clients somehow has
managed to, unfortunately, take his life. This is unacceptable,
and who knows how many lives could be saved.
While all this is bad on its own, let's not forget about
the fact that, in all of the 120 correctional institutions
under the Bureau's control, each needs some kind of repair at
any given time, like Seagoville Federal Correctional
Institution in Texas, for example, which is close to my
district. Six of the eight buildings housing inmates had broken
air-conditioning units during the summer where temperatures in
Texas facilities can reach up to 110 degrees, and at least one
unit topped 149 degrees.
We need to get to the bottom of this and fix this
organization before more and more deaths occur. Today's hearing
is one of the few moments where actually I believe we can do
something good in Congress, and I hope we do today, because at
the end of the day, this is about doing what's right. It's
about protecting employees, it's about protecting lives, it's
about ensuring we give people a second chance at life.
I want to thank the witnesses for being here today, and I
look forward to participating in this important discussion.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you. I will now recognize the Chair of
the Crime Subcommittee, from the great State of Arizona, Andy
Biggs.
Mr. Biggs. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I thank the Members of
both Subcommittees for coming together this morning. I thank
Chair Van Drew for his opening remarks. I thank the witnesses
for being here and appreciate you; look forward to your
testimony today.
Today's hearing is titled, ``Federal Corrections in Focus:
Oversight of the Bureau of Prisons.'' This hearing will serve
as a robust continuation of the oversight this Committee
conducted over BOP during the 118th Congress. I look forward to
continuing that important work today.
The Federal Bureau of Prisons, BOP, is a component of the
Department of Justice. BOP's mission is to protect society by
confining offenders in the controlled environments of prisons
and community-based facilities that are safe, humane, cost-
efficient, and appropriately secure, and that provide work and
other self-improvement opportunities to assist offenders in
becoming law-abiding citizens. It's critical that the BOP holds
people accountable, while also preparing those who will reenter
society.
This week we honor and celebrate National Correctional
Officers Week and recognize correctional employees, the brave
men and women who continue so much--excuse me--who contribute
so much to public safety. Unfortunately, we know corrections
officers continue to work difficult and demanding jobs between
staffing shortages and crumbling infrastructure throughout its
facilities.
The staff recruitment and retention remain a major
challenge for BOP. While BOP has attempted initiatives to boost
recruitment and retention, BOP still has thousands of
vacancies, including nearly 6,000 fewer staff than its
authorized level. It's no secret that morale is low, and that
causes ripple effects across all the Bureau.
To those corrections officers listening or watching or are
here today, we see you, we hear you, we appreciate you, we
thank you, and we hope that this hearing can serve as a
starting point that will lead to a better workplace with better
conditions.
One of the ways to move toward a better BOP is to implement
oversight and accountability. We've heard concerning
allegations about the BOP misappropriating funds. We've seen
this before; those at the top of government using taxpayer
funds to benefit themselves. The BOP needs accountability and
transparency through true fiscal responsibility, not turning a
blind eye to all the existing issues.
Thankfully, there's hope and optimism with Director
Marshall. We look forward to working with him to restore trust
in the BOP and bring it back to its original mission.
The BOP is also charged with much of the implementation of
the First Step Act. The First Step Act was signed into law by
President Trump and seeks to reduce the size of the Federal
prison population and reduce recidivism while still maintaining
public safety.
The First Step Act required DOJ to develop a system for BOP
to use to assess the risk of recidivism of Federal prisoners
and to assign prisoners to evidence-based recidivism reduction
programs. These programs include literacy programs,
occupational education programs, trade skill programs, and
substance use disorder programs.
This is why I said BOP needs to make sure they get this
right. We cannot allow individuals to leave our prisons early
unless we can ensure that they will not reoffend. The Crime
Subcommittee has examined the implementation of the First Step
Act on a bipartisan basis since its passage, and this oversight
of BOP continues today with more urgency and focus than ever
before.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses. Again, I
thank you.
Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes the
Ranking Member of the Crime Subcommittee, from the great State
of Georgia, Lucy McBath.
Ms. McBath. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to our
witnesses for being here today. We really appreciate your time
and your effort.
Mr. Chair, I thank you for having this hearing on the
oversight of the Bureau of Prisons. While it's not been long
since we last discussed this issue, the problems in our Federal
prisons, many of which are decades in the making, continue to
demand our attention.
The many issues faced by the BOP are the result of year
after year of extremely limited resources. At a time when the
President and his allies in Congress are talking about radical
cuts, it's critical that we take note of how a severely limited
budget has already affected the health and safety of everyone
who enters a the BOP facility.
There are more than 150,000 Federal inmates and more than
35,000 BOP staff members depending on us to give them the tools
and resources that they need to keep everyone safe and even
themselves. Far too often the BOP has not guaranteed the basic
safety of everyone in its care.
These failures have often fallen especially hard on women
in BOP custody, like those at Federal Corrections Institution,
Dublin, California. For years, women at FCI Dublin faced
horrific sexual abuse, including harassment, coerced sexual
activity, and even rape. Inmates who tried to speak up faced
harsh retaliation, and those responsible managed to cover up
their conduct for years.
Seven correctional officers, including the prison's warden,
have been sentenced as a result of the years of misconduct, but
the abuse faced by their victims cannot be undone.
Last April, BOP abruptly shut down FCI Dublin, in some
cases sending inmates far from their families and the lawmakers
that were working to help them--excuse me--lawyers that were
working to help them. Some reported being singled out and
bullied at their new facilities, such as being denied soap,
served worse food, and being forced to sleep on soiled beds,
all because they were perceived as speaking out against the
abuses that shut down FCI Dublin.
Earlier this year, a judge signed a consent decree that,
among other things, requires the BOP to report on the medical
and mental health of former Dublin inmates, ensure that they
have access to rape crisis centers, review their disciplinary
records, expunge all disciplinary actions that were actually
retaliation, and limit the inappropriate use of solitary
confinement potentially used to retaliate against them or
isolate them so they might be subject to further abuse.
We must ensure that we do not allow an incident like this
to ever, ever happen again. Safety is simply the bare minimum.
The vast majority of imprisoned people will eventually be
released and rejoin our communities. How they spend their time
in prison has a profound effect on who they will be when they
are released.
This was a basic premise of the First Step Act, a
bipartisan bill that provided more opportunities for inmates to
make the most of their time through evidence-based programs
that reduce recidivism. These programs help inmates get the
treatment for addiction, gain job skills, learn how to read,
strengthen their family relationships, and learn how to resolve
conflicts, inmates who put in their time and effort to improve
themselves that they could earn an earlier release.
The First Step Act was a historic step toward providing
better opportunities for rehabilitation that will ultimately
benefit all our communities, because more people will come out
of prison prepared to make better choices and turn away from
crime.
Despite challenges in implementation, that positive change
is already happening. An analysis by the Council on Criminal
Justice found that people who participated in the First Step
Act programs and were released early were 55 percent less
likely to commit another crime.
If this administration and congressional Republicans don't
follow through by investing in the First Step Act, they'll be
locking people up without any plan for them for the future.
This country would be stuck in an old, failed policy in which
prisons would be dangerous, hostile places for inmates and
staff, and inmates would be released without any more skills
and even less hope than what they came in with.
If we don't invest in the First Step Act, a bipartisan bill
that's signed into law by President Trump, then we are setting
people up to fail even before they're released from custody. It
doesn't have to be this way.
The First Step Act can unlock a future with fewer people
incarcerated, more people contributing to their communities,
and safer places for all of us to live. We must invest in the
First Step Act to be sure that it reaches its full potential.
Likewise, we must fund the Federal Prison Oversight Act, a
bipartisan law that I was proud to lead, which was signed into
law last year. This law will require the Department of
Justice's Inspector General to assess the risk of problems at
our BOP facilities, to inspect high-risk facilities more
frequently, to provide recommendations to fix the problems, and
to report its findings and recommendations to Congress and to
the public. The law requires the BOP to respond to all
inspection reports within 60 days with a corrective action
plan.
This overhaul of BOP oversight can ensure the health and
safety of everyone in BOP facilities and is especially
important to uncover misconduct like what occurred at FCI
Dublin, and to find it much earlier so that swift action can be
taken to protect victims and discipline those who do not
fulfill their duty to treat inmates with basic human and
dignity--human dignity.
This law will only take effect--yes, once again--unless it
is funded. We already have bipartisan agreement that this is
the right action to take to address the BOP's problems. We must
continue this bipartisanship in investing in better oversight
of the BOP by providing funding that will make the Federal
Prison Oversight Act actually a reality.
Together, I truly believe, I know that we cannot only
improve the BOP but improve the lives of those who serve time
in the facilities so they can choose to turn their lives around
and contribute to their communities, which are all our
communities.
I'd like to--I have a unanimous consent request I'd like to
enter into the record.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Ms. McBath. Thank you.
It's a unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter
dated May 5, 2025, led by The Sentencing Project and signed by
12 other justice--
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Ms. McBath. Thank you. Thank you so much for your time and
your interest today. I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. I will now call on the Ranking Member of the
Committee of the whole, from the great State of Maryland, Mr.
Raskin.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you very kindly, Chair Van Drew. Welcome
to our witnesses. Thanks to the Ranking Members, Ms. McBath and
Ms. Crockett, as well.
I'm going to start with a couple of unanimous consent
requests. One is to enter into the record an Associated Press
article by Sarah Roebuck titled, ``BOP slashes retention
bonuses, impacting thousands of correctional officers.' ''
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Mr. Raskin. Good. I don't mind if this comes out of my
time, Mr. Chair. I just--because it leads into what I want to
talk about.
The article ``BOP slashes retention bonuses, impacting
thousands of correctional officers.'' Roughly 23,000 were
informed that their retention pay would be significantly
reduced or eliminated entirely, with some workers seeing a pay
decrease of up to 25 percent.
One other UC request to enter into the record, an article
by Drew Friedman titled, ``Days ahead of coming Bureau of
Prison pay cuts, some employees are already resigning,''
Federal News.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you kindly.
Well, look, within his first 100 days, President Trump has
made moves that I'm afraid will only exacerbate long-standing
problems that interfere with the Bureau of Prisons' ability to
safely incapacitate and rehabilitate its prisoners.
The President issued an Executive Order that rescinded the
Biden Administration's prohibition on the BOP's continued use
of private prisons, opening the door for a renewed reliance on
private facilities where the Federal Government has little
oversight and where inmates have been shown to be less safe and
less able to access necessary medical care.
President Trump also unlawfully rescinded the collective
bargaining rights of a huge number of Federal workers, more
than a million Federal workers and Federal unions, including
those representing the Bureau of Prison employees, essentially,
stifling the voices of frontline officers during a period when
their voices are very badly needed.
Once again, a Federal judge had to step in to block
President Trump's Executive Order from taking effect after
unions sued; one of now more than 130 court orders blocking the
administration's violations of the law and the Constitution.
The administration also rescinded retention-based
incentives for the BOP employees that amount to cuts,
essentially, of around 25 percent of their pay rates. These
cuts have triggered mass resignations among the BOP employees
whose ranks were already stretched way too thin.
How can we expect to bolster the culture and the
effectiveness of the BOP workforce if we slash their pay? Do
any of us know of any institutions where that might work?
In the face of this mass resignation of correctional
officers, the BOP will have to resort to even more, quote,
``augmentation,'' which is the term describing use of employees
other than correctional officers, people like nurses or
teachers or cooks, to guard inmates, a stopgap measure which,
obviously, undermines safety for everyone.
Facilities that are short-staffed rely also on facility-
wide lock-downs more often and for longer periods of time. At
the same time, because of this lack of resources, inmates do
not have access to the treatment, medical care, and
rehabilitative programming that Congress called for in the
bipartisan First Step Act, which we're all so proud of.
Despite President Trump signing the First Step Act aimed at
reducing the Federal prison population and aimed at reducing
recidivism, the Bureau of Prisons also reduced the amount of
time that inmates can spend in residential reentry centers from
18-19 months to a maximum of just 60 days, two months, citing
budget constraints.
These residential reentry centers, or halfway houses, as
they're colloquially known, perform a critical role in helping
released inmates' transition back into communities across the
country, providing housing, employment, substance and mental
health treatment, professional counseling, and medical care.
Drastically cutting the amount of time that people can actually
use these services will certainly lead to a reduction in their
efficacy and an increase in recidivism.
While the BOP has been forced to make devastating cuts that
will affect not only employees and inmates but the safety of
our communities, last week, the Judiciary Committee passed an
$81 billion reconciliation bill to supercharge ICE, money that
our colleagues voted to make available for arresting,
detaining, and deporting, not just immigrants, but some U.S.
citizens too.
Just two weeks ago, the Department of Justice terminated at
least 365 public safety grants totaling in the hundreds of
millions of dollars, cutting funds for law enforcement at the
local level, opioid addiction treatment programs, programs
promoting officer safety and wellness, programs for crime
prevention, programs that support the victims of rape and
sexual assault, and other violent crimes.
All of us, even apparently our Republican colleagues, were
apparently blindsided by these deep cuts to existing programs
that, as far as I can tell, came from a single DOGE employee.
During the Committee's consideration of reconciliation last
week, I tried to restore funding to these critical grant
programs through an amendment, which my colleagues failed to
discuss and all voted to oppose.
I'm aware that our panel of witnesses has often worked
together on criminal justice reform and to adjust the
challenges facing the BOP. I look forward to hearing from you
about these important issues.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you. Without objection, all other
opening statements will be included in the record.
We are now going to proceed with the introduction of
today's witnesses. Again, thank you all for being here. We do
appreciate you.
Mr. Andy Potter. Mr. Potter is the Founder and Executive
Director of One Voice United, an organization that advocates on
behalf of corrections officers. He served for nearly 30 years
as a correctional officer with the Michigan Department of
Corrections.
Mr. Patrick Purtill. Mr. Purtill is the Executive Vice
President and General Counsel of Unify.US, an organization that
advocates for individual freedom, limited government, free
enterprise, and American values. He is also the Charles Evans
Hughes lecturer in politics and Codirector of the Washington
Study Group at Colgate University.
Mr. Cody Wilde. Mr. Wilde is the Senior Vice President of
correctional programs at the Prison Fellowship, an organization
that works with prisoners, former prisoners, and their
families. Mr. Wilde oversees Prison Fellowship correctional
programming in approximately 1,200 prisons across all 50 States
in the Union.
Mr. Kandia Milton. Mr. Milton is the Government Affairs
Director at Dream.Org, an organization that advocates for
criminal justice reform. He previously served as Deputy Mayor
and Chief of Staff for the city of Detroit, Michigan.
We welcome our witnesses today. We thank them for appearing
today. We will begin by swearing you in.
Would you please rise and raise your right hand.
Do you solemnly swear that under the penalty of perjury
that the testimony you are about to give is true and correct to
the best of your knowledge, information, and belief, so help
you God.
OK. Thank you. Please be seated. Let the record reflect
that the witnesses have answered in the affirmative.
Please know that your written testimony will be entered
into the record in its entirety. Accordingly, we ask that you
summarize your testimony in five minutes.
We will begin with Mr. Potter.
STATEMENT OF ANDY POTTER
Mr. Potter. Mr. Chair, Ranking Members, and the
distinguished Members of the Committee, thank you for the
opportunity to be here today. My name is Andy Potter, and I
serve as the Founder and Executive Director of One Voice
United, a national organization committed to lifting up the
voices and expertise of corrections professionals and ensuring
that they are a part of the national conversations that are
shaping the future of corrections.
Before founding One Voice United, I spent nearly 30 years
working inside the correctional facilities as an officer and
later as a labor leader in Michigan. Those experiences,
combined with years of traveling the country and listening to
thousands of correctional officers and staff, have given me a
deep appreciation for the work that they do, and the clear view
of the systematic challenges that continue to impact
corrections at every level.
Today, corrections as a profession is at a crossroads. From
the county jails and State prisons to the Bureau of Prisons, we
are seeing an unprecedented convergence of issues that threaten
the overall mission and health of our corrections system across
the United States. The chronic understaffing has forced
employees to work exhausting amounts of overtime, often leading
to burnout, safety risk, and declining morale.
New recruits have become increasingly difficult to attract
and even harder to retain, with many agencies losing a
staggering number of good people within the first 18 months of
service. It's a problem that touches every corner of our
country and every layer of our system.
At the same time, the physical infrastructures inside many
facilities continues to deteriorate, and employees and those
incarcerated are asked to live and work in facilities that are
not equipped for the demands of today's correctional
environment. When conditions deteriorate such as they have, it
sends a harmful message about the value we place on their
safety and their well-being.
Compounding these issues is a deeper, more difficult
challenge, the erosion of job satisfaction, and connection to a
larger purpose. Increasingly, employees report that they feel
isolated and disconnected from the mission of rehabilitation
and more like expendable cogs in a machine. The result is a
workforce that is overburdened physically, stretched to its
breaking point mentally, and demoralized emotionally.
However, despite the seriousness of these challenges, I
believe this is also a moment of tremendous opportunity. We
have the chance right now through leadership, collaboration,
and honest engagement to chart a better path forward for the
corrections profession and the broader system that it serves.
A critical part of that effort must be investing in 21st
century training and comprehensive employee wellness programs
that are designed with the direct input of the employees
themselves. They must be integrated into the culture of every
department and facility, with consistent funding, evaluations,
and leadership commitment.
Equally important is restoring the meaning and pride in
corrections work. When employees are treated as stakeholders,
when their expertise is valued and their voices are heard in
the shaping of policies, it builds a sense of agency and
purpose that cannot be replaced otherwise. Without that buy-in,
even the best-intended reforms or culture change will struggle
to take hold.
We believe in the power of collaboration between employees
and those who might represent them, administrators,
legislators, advocates, and communities to drive lasting
change. No single entity can solve these changes alone.
In closing, if we're willing to truly engage with one
another and lift up the real-world experiences of those who
know this work best, then One Voice United stands ready to
assist however we can.
Thank you again for the opportunity to speak here today,
and I'll stand ready for any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Potter follows:]
GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Potter.
Mr. Purtill, you may begin.
STATEMENT OF PATRICK D. PURTILL
Mr. Purtill. Mr. Chair, Ranking Members, and the
distinguished Members of Congress, thank you for the
opportunity to speak with you today.
I want to begin by noting that President Trump made an
excellent choice when he selected William Marshall to serve as
the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, and I have high hopes
he'll succeed in that post. As we've heard, the most immediate
challenges he faces are staff retention and recruitment, the
degraded condition of BOP facilities and, I would add, the
increasing financial cost of incarceration generally.
Over the past 10 years, BOP staffing has dropped
significantly. Staffing shortages often require substantial use
of overtime, including mandatory overtime and the use of
augmentation. BOP faces a $3 billion price tag for deferred
maintenance, and those repairs needed across all its
facilities. Staffing shortages and poor facilities undermine
employee retention rates and create security and safety issues
for staff and inmates alike. These challenges are complicated
by the fact that the number of prisoners in BOP facilities and
the cost to incarcerate them has risen dramatically over the
years.
Understanding Congress' efforts to reduce unsustainable
levels of Federal spending, I'm going to limit my remarks to
recommendations that can be implemented under current law using
current funding levels.
First, remember that corrections officers are first
responders, and that we can make better use of them. The COs
are law enforcement professionals who perform many of the same
functions as police officers. Equally important, they're
critical to the rehabilitation process and have a direct impact
on recidivism.
In fact, no one has more insight into an inmate's
likelihood of successfully reintegrating into society than the
COs who interact with them on a daily basis. The COs'
experience and insights should help inform public policy, and
the BOP should incentivize and empower the COs to have a stake
in the prisoners' rehabilitation, as well as in the security of
the facilities.
Second, home confinement to free funds up at the BOP. The
BOP must reduce its per-inmate average cost of incarceration
while not undermining public safety. I stress that, while not
undermining public safety. Recent experience demonstrates that
this can be done within certain careful parameters.
The 2020 CARES Act allowed Federal prisons to serve a
portion of their sentence in home confinement. Former Attorney
General William Barr set the criteria for home confinement
eligibility. It required being in low or minimum security,
having a clean misconduct record, no history of violence, sex,
or terrorism offenses, a viable reentry plan, a minimum-or low-
risk score on the BOP's PATTERN risk assessment tool, and
having served a significant portion of their sentence.
These criteria allowed a substantial number of prisoners to
be moved to home confinement without undermining public safety.
In fact, after release from home confinement, those with a
CARES assignment had a 3.6 percent recidivism rate over one
year, whereas those without a CARES assignment had a 13 percent
recidivism rate.
According to the most recent data available, about 54
percent of the current Federal prison population are classified
as minimum or low risk for recidivism by BOP's PATTERN risk
assessment tool. I'm certain that not all these people meet the
CARES Act criteria for home confinement, but many could be
placed in home confinement without jeopardizing public safety
and thereby realizing a substantial cost savings to the BOP.
Third, close outdated and dilapidated BOP facilities. The
BOP needs to review its physical footprint, as we've heard.
Since modernizing, any Federal operation often runs up against
political pressures. Unify.US would recommend forming a
commission patterned after the DOD Base Realignment and Closure
Commission to review the BOP's facilities requirements and to
right-size the Bureau after accounting for its staffing and its
budgetary needs. This would free up revenues for maintenance
and modernization of the BOP's remaining facilities.
Beyond cost savings, there is some evidence that this could
also help reduce recidivism. Evidence from Colombian prison
construction suggests that prisoners that were quasirandomly
assigned to newer and, therefore, slightly better prisons were
up to 36 percent less likely to recidivate.
Fourth, continue implementation of the First Step Act.
During President Trump's first administration, he championed
supporting successful reentry and supporting law enforcement
with passage of the First Step Act. Through its oversight
function, Congress should continue to ensure that the BOP
expands recidivism reduction programming and that eligible
individuals receive appropriate FSA incentives. Also, the BOP
should especially focus on increasing access to evidence-based
recidivism reduction programs.
In closing, by improving facilities, by improving respect
for and the resources available to corrections officers, and by
safely transitioning inmates least likely to commit new crimes
back into society, BOP, Congress, and the Trump Administration
can go a long way toward solving our corrections crisis while
ensuring public safety.
Thank you very much. I look forward to answering your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Purtill follows:]
GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you, Mr. Purtill.
Mr. Wilde, you may begin.
STATEMENT OF CODY WILDE
Mr. Wilde. Good morning, Chair Biggs, Chair Van Drew,
Ranking Member McBath, Ranking Member Crockett, and the Members
of the Subcommittee. I'm Cody Wilde, Senior Vice President of
the correctional programs at Prison Fellowship, and I want to
thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today.
Prison Fellowship is the Nation's largest Christian
nonprofit, equipping the church to serve currently and formerly
incarcerated people, their families, and to advocate for
justice and human dignity. Established on the belief that all
people are created in God's image and that no life is beyond
his reach, Prison Fellowship takes a restorative approach to
those affected by incarceration.
We strive to make prisons safer and more rehabilitative,
advance criminal justice reform, and support incarcerated
people, their families, and their communities. Robust
programming, including faith-informed, volunteer-led
initiatives, is essential for creating a safer correctional
environment and preparing individuals for successful reentry.
Research shows that incarcerated people who participate in
educational or vocational programming are 43 percent less
likely to recidivate.
While many State correctional systems have embraced
partnerships with external organizations to provide these
opportunities, the Bureau of Prisons has historically been more
cautious. The First Step Act of 2018 encourages collaboration
with community-and faith-based groups to provide evidence-based
recidivism reduction programs and productive activities.
However, the current vetting progress for external programs
exceeds what the law requires, unintentionally excluding no-
cost mission aligned programs like the Prison Fellowship
Academy. The incoming BOP director has an opportunity to remove
unnecessary barriers and realize the full intent of the First
Step Act by welcoming qualified partners who can expand the in-
prison programming.
At the same time, any discussion about program access must
be grounded in the broader challenges facing corrections today,
such as significant staffing shortages that impact the ability
to implement and sustain rehabilitation effort. With prison
staffing at its lowest point in over two decades and continued
high incarceration rates, facilities face serious operational
and safety strains.
Officers often endure long shifts and high stress,
contributing to burnout and health risks. Addressing these
issues through fair compensation, mental health supports, and
strong recruitment practices is vital, as is leadership
development to foster healthier cultures inside of prison
walls.
In response to these pressures, programs like those offered
by Prison Fellowship can play a critical role in supporting
both staff and incarcerated individuals at no cost to the BOP.
Prison Fellowship's Warden Exchange equips correctional
executives with tools for building restorative prison cultures
and has trained over 680 leaders across 47 States, with an
additional 149 currently enrolled.
We also offer transformative programs like Prison
Fellowship Grow, a year-long, cohort-based course rooted in
Christian principles of human flourishing. While faith is not
required for participation, the program is designed for those
who are curious about or open to learning more about
Christianity.
The Prison Fellowship Academy is our most intensive in-
prison program, offering men and women a voluntary, holistic
journey of life transformation. Over the course of the year,
participants are mentored by staff and volunteers as they
develop and practice the biblically based values of good
citizenship, community, affirmation, productivity,
responsibility, restoration, and integrity. A recent study in
Texas found a 53.8 percent reduction in recidivism among
academy graduates.
Finally, Angel Tree supports family connections by
partnering with churches to serve children of incarcerated
parents year-round, helping restore relationships and providing
hope to the 1.5 million children with a parent currently in
prison.
In total, our programs reach over 600,000 individuals in
more than 1,200 facilities annually, supported by 7,600
volunteers, and serve more than 271,000 children each year.
At a time of limited budget and rising needs, it's
essential to adopt cost-effective, volunteer-driven programs
that reduce recidivism, support staff, and foster
rehabilitation, and we are ready to partner with the BOP to
expand access to these proven initiatives to help create a more
restorative and effective Federal system.
Thank you for your time and attention, and I look forward
to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wilde follows:]
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you Mr. Wilde. Mr. Milton, you may
begin.
STATEMENT OF KANDIA MILTON
Mr. Milton. Good morning, Chairs Biggs and Van Drew,
Ranking Members McBath and Crockett. Thank you for convening
this important joint hearing.
My name is Kandia Milton, and I serve as Government Affairs
Director for Dream.Org, an organization committed to advancing
meaningful and lasting bipartisan criminal justice reforms. At
the heart of all our work is a commitment to centering on the
voices of those directly impacted by the justice system.
I came to you this morning not only as a policy advocate,
but also as someone who has lived experience within the Federal
prison system. I previously served as Deputy Mayor and Chief of
Staff for the city of Detroit, and after accepting
responsibility for a serious bad decision I made in office, I
served time in a Federal correction facility.
While I had always understood on an intellectual level the
need for prison reform and the importance of supporting
successful reentry, it was my time behind the walls and the
stories of those I met inside that opened my heart and gave
purpose to the work I do every day.
It is deeply troubling that the many challenges we
discussed and faced during my incarceration, which ended in
2011 and these problems remain unresolved today. In fact, by
many accounts, the conditions have worsened. This is not only a
disservice to the correction officers and those who are
incarcerated but also to the communities to which they will one
day return. There are large problems, pressing problems at the
Bureau of Prisons.
First, there are the catastrophic infrastructure issues.
The BOP has 121 institutions that include 3,600 buildings.
According to the Inspector General, they are all in need of
serious attention. As of February 2024, the BOP estimated that
the major repairs needed across a facility would cost $3
billion. According to OIG audits, it has determined that all
121 of the BOP's institutions require maintenance.
Despite the need for investment and critical infrastructure
across the entire BOP, there continues to be talk of investing
more money in building new facilities, including an unnecessary
budgeted $505 million prison proposed to be constructed on top
of a former coal mine in Eastern Kentucky.
Second, the BOP is critically understaffed. The Associate
Deputy Director Kathleen Toomey, in her testimony before the
Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related
Agencies in February, concluded that the BOP is short over
4,000 officers, while other press reports suggest that the
Bureau is over 6,000 officers understaffed.
The problem of retaining officers has been further
complicated by a directive that ended retention bonuses. A BOP
spokesperson suggested this impacts up to 25 percent of some
employees' pay, and the Federal News Network reports that this
decision has already resulted in more correctional staff
leaving the positions, thus exacerbating staffing crisis.
Furthermore, understaff results in higher overtime costs and
the use of regular staff, including medical staff, and augment
correctional officer shortages.
Third, the problem of halfway houses. The Bureau has
available beds but has not filled them, and left thousands of
people who have earned credits under the First Step Act or
Second Chance Act to qualify for release, but still remain in
prison. This is also legally problematic in the case of the
First Step Act earned credits, multiple courts have concluded
that the plain meaning of the statute demands release, and
there are pending litigations on this topic as well.
As an organization that led the efforts to pass the First
Step Act, we emphatically support its full implementation,
which to date the BOP has failed to do. We agree with Attorney
General Pam Bondi who said, during her confirmation hearing,
We must fix the Bureau of Prison and followup with the promises
of the First Step Act by building more halfway houses.
Finally, the culture related to its operations. Most
recently, these problems resulted in the closure of FCI Dublin,
a prison so notorious that nearly 100 cases, including a class
action lawsuit, are in the process of litigation today. This
speaks to the need to fund the bipartisan Federal Bureau of
Prisons Oversight Act.
The problem--oh.
Mr. Van Drew. You're over the time.
Mr. Milton. Have I gone over time? Sorry, Mr. Chair. Sorry,
Members of the Committee.
I stand down and avail myself to answer any questions you
may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Milton follows:]
GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT
Mr. Van Drew. Mr. Milton, thank you for your time and being
here.
We're now going to proceed under the five-minute rule with
questions, and I'm going to recognize the gentleman from the
great State of Wisconsin, Mr. Tiffany.
Mr. Tiffany. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Wilde, what has the response been both federally and
States that you worked in with faith-based organizations like
yourself? Tell us the response that you get.
Mr. Wilde. One of the things that I know about corrections
is that people tend to be very pragmatic. Does this work? What
we've seen is a large expansion of our programs--our Warden
Exchange program. Like I said, we just had our largest cohort
ever. The 149 correctional leaders are going through it right
now. Our Prison Fellowship academies, our Grows, and our Angel
Tree program have continued to expand. As I mentioned, we're in
all 50 States. So, I'd say the response has been very good.
Mr. Tiffany. Where you find governments that are not as
welcoming, what do you hear from them?
Mr. Wilde. We operate in States as diverse as Washington
and Oregon to Texas, Florida, North Dakota, Nebraska,
California, and all of them.
As I said, they tend to be very pragmatic, ask the
question, Is it voluntary? The answer is, yes. Does it work? It
does. So, we're allowed to operate. Over time, we're able to
really affect the prison culture, which we hear both from the
staff as well as leadership.
Mr. Tiffany. Are there any changes needed by Congress to
help you further your mission?
Mr. Wilde. Thus far, we have not been able to operate our
in-prison programs, our Academies or our Grows within the
Bureau of Prisons. We think that both those programs, as well
as our Warden Exchange Program that helps assist correctional
leaders at no cost to the State, can be a tremendous asset and
a force multiplier to help solve some of these problems facing
the Bureau.
Mr. Tiffany. Mr. Purtill, we heard earlier from the Ranking
Member in regards to President Trump is failing. Do you agree
President Trump does not care about prisons? That's what we
heard, is that he does not care about prisons by one of the
Members up here.
Do you agree with that?
Mr. Purtill. I do not, respectfully, sir, do not agree with
that. We worked extremely closely with the first Trump
Administration on crafting the First Step Act, and I can tell
you that they were very involved, very concerned. It would not
have happened without Mr. Trump's personal leadership. It
simply doesn't comport with what I've experienced.
Mr. Tiffany. Do you think President Trump should continue
with the status quo? Because that's what I'm hearing is that he
doesn't care about prisons, we should leave things as is.
Do you think we should leave the status quo?
Mr. Purtill. No, sir. I think there is much here--as this
Committee well knows, there is much here that under the Bureau
of Prisons that needs to be addressed.
It can be addressed in terms of what Mr. Trump tried to do
in his first administration, and that I have every reason to
believe he's going to try to continue in his second.
Mr. Tiffany. Give me something that's primary in your mind
that could be a good change for Federal prisons.
Mr. Purtill. Well, to go back to what--to my testimony, I
do think that focusing Federal prisons--Federal prisons are in
a unique position in terms of corrections facilities across the
country. They are best equipped to deal with some of the
prisoners that are really most dangerous, most likely to commit
new crimes, to recidivate.
That's really--a friend of mine at The Heritage Foundation,
John Malcolm, likes to say, ``prison beds are some of the most
expensive hotel rooms in the country. I want to reserve them
for the people who are most dangerous to society.''
Doing all that we can to make sure that this is the
population within the Federal prisons, because they are most--
they're just better equipped to deal with it than any other
system in the country.
Mr. Tiffany. In my home State of Wisconsin back when I was
in the State legislature, we had a youth correctional facility
that the ACLU came in and sued to prevent them, the staff, they
restricted the staff from using certain measures that they had
used for a long, long time.
The day that the judge accepted the ACLU's brief and said,
``We're going to accept the policies that you're suggesting for
us,'' the young people in the correctional facility went on the
roof of the facility and taunted the guards, saying, ``You
can't touch us.''
Is it surprising to you that a couple years later that a
staff youth counselor was killed in that facility?
Mr. Purtill. In all honesty, sir, I couldn't address that.
I don't know anything about the facts of the--
Mr. Tiffany. Have you seen instances where an organization
like the ACLU has sued and prevented staff from being able to
do their jobs using the proper restraints? Have you seen that
nationally?
Mr. Purtill. There's a lot of questions in that issue. It's
BOP's job to ensure both the safety of the staff as well as the
inmates, and limiting them to be able to do that is always
dangerous.
Undermining the respect that law enforcement should be
given leads to the sense of the idea that people are taunting
guards and things like that, and that this also undermines
security.
I also think that we have to remember that when people are
within our custody, we have to do everything to make sure that
we're remembering to treat them as people and remembering that
they still have rights while they're in there. It's a very
difficult challenge that the BOP has to make sure that they're
balancing both of those sides.
Mr. Van Drew. Your time is expired.
Mr. Tiffany. I yield back, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you. Next, we will hear from the
gentleman from the great State of Georgia, Mr. Hank Johnson.
Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My daddy rose to the No. 3 spot in the Bureau of Prisons
back in the early 1960s. He was head of--his responsibility was
pardons, classifications, and paroles. He became a corrections
officer, one of the first Black corrections officers in the
country back in 1950, when he was--actually, 1949, when he was
recruited out of Morris Brown College in Atlanta to go to the
Atlanta Federal Penitentiary and become one of the first Blacks
to be a corrections officer.
He became the first parole officer out at Leavenworth,
Kansas, where he was transferred to back around 1952-1953. The
BOP, Bureau of Prisons, kind of runs in my blood. He used to
work at the Federal Home Loan Bank Building, what it is now,
but that used to be the Bureau of Prisons, just a stone's throw
away from here.
I'm alarmed that we will be having this hearing today and
we don't even have the current BOP Director to testify. If
Republicans actually cared about oversight, they would have the
Director here or reschedule for a date that he was available.
President Trump fired the former Bureau of Prisons Director
on inauguration day and a third of the BOP senior leadership
quit. In its misguided efforts to chase efficiency, the Trump
Administration ended a long-running incentive pay plan, cutting
officers' and other employees' pay by 25 percent, which will
only worsen the existing staff shortages. It's not just human
infrastructure that's in disrepair. It's also the physical
infrastructure, which has been a problem for years.
Mr. Purtill, you are aware that in May 2023, the Office of
the Inspector General published an audit of the BOP's efforts
to maintain and construct institutions, and that audit
described hazardous and crumbling infrastructure, including
infrastructure problems that have led to the closure of the BOP
facilities, correct?
Mr. Purtill. Correct.
Mr. Johnson. You are also aware that the BOP leadership has
expressed concern about underfunding for maintenance and repair
efforts and a resulting backlog of projects, right?
Mr. Purtill. I know that they have a significant backlog in
deferred maintenance.
Mr. Johnson. Mr. Milton, how does the failure to maintain
the BOP facilities affect the health and safety of the BOP
staff and inmates?
Mr. Milton. Thank you for the question. If I may take some
liberties and also express gratitude for your grandfather's--
Mr. Johnson. My daddy.
Mr. Milton. I'm sorry, your father's legacy. Certainly, the
facilities have put the health--
Mr. Johnson. When you say grandaddy--that makes me feel
good.
Mr. Milton. I'm sorry.
Mr. Johnson. That must mean I'm looking young up here.
Mr. Milton. You look so young that it had to be your
grandfather.
Mr. Johnson. Well, I'll tell you, I do want an answer to
that question, but I'll contact you later. I want to proceed
on.
Mr. Milton. OK. Sorry, sir.
Mr. Johnson. I'm getting flustered now.
Instead of putting money into our existing prisons to fix
them, this week Trump ordered Federal agencies to rebuild and
open Alcatraz, which closed in 1963 and is now a tourist site.
Alcatraz was shut down because it was too expensive to run,
and all its supplies had to be brought by boat to the--I mean
just total--the place doesn't need to be reopened, but it's a
vanity project for the President.
He would waste money there, Mr. Purtill, and he also wasted
money that could have gone to enhance facilities at the
existing BOP facilities, but he poured money into a failed
effort to make Guantanamo Bay a place where it could accept a
bunch of--some being American citizens who were later deported
to El Salvador. We don't need a BOP that manages facilities
that are the same as what we have in El Salvador.
I'm out of time now so I will yield back, but we have
dysfunction in the BOP at this point.
Mr. Van Drew. The gentleman yields back. With that, I'll
ask the gentleman from the great State of Alabama, Mr. Moore.
Mr. Moore. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The Trump Administration reversed several of the Biden-
Harris, BOP-related policies through Executive Orders. Most
notably, President Trump signed an Executive Order 14168,
requiring that all Federal inmates be housed according to their
biological sex, and ending any provision of taxpayer-funded
gender-affirming care for any Federal inmates.
Mr. Purtill, how did the previous administration of the
Bureau of Prisons justify allocating limited taxpayer resources
toward gender transition?
Mr. Purtill. In all honesty, sir, I couldn't answer that. I
don't know what their justification was.
Mr. Moore. What would be a better use of those funds?
Mr. Purtill. What I will say is that I strongly support the
current Executive Order that housing should be based on
biological sex. There's a lot of agreement across multiple
corrections systems, not just at the Federal system that this
is the way to go.
I believe that's the way California currently operates. If
you can get agreement between an Executive Order from the Trump
Administration and Governor Newsom's Administration, there's
probably--we can safely say there's some bipartisan consensus
on that issue.
I do think that for facilities, both security and for the
safety, especially for the inmates, that this is the correct
policy.
Mr. Moore. Yes, I would agree 100 percent.
One thing you mentioned in your testimony--and we looked at
this in the State of Alabama--is the in-home confinement as
opposed to having them locked up in a prison, a Federal prison
in this case.
Can you elaborate a little bit on the cost-effectiveness of
that? That was something Bill Barr and the CARES Act, they kind
of came out with. It seems like to me that makes a lot of sense
for the taxpayers and for the inmates.
Mr. Purtill. Yes, I agree, the cost of savings there is
enormous. It's just over $44,000 a year to house an inmate in a
Federal correction institution today. I don't have numbers
handy, but I'll get them to you on exactly what the
differential there would be on home confinement, but it is
substantial.
As long as you approach that topic from a public safety
standpoint, that you're very careful about who moves to home
confinement, that the bar requirements were very well thought
through.
That they also ensured that we maintained--the
rehabilitative piece of corrections is extremely important. The
punitive piece is also important, and requiring a significant
portion of their sentence to have been served was what Mr. Barr
was trying to get at with that piece.
That's a very viable option, given that 54 percent of the
current Federal prison population is deemed low risk to
recidivate by BOP's own pattern tool.
Mr. Moore. Yes, I agree 100 percent. Like I said, if
they're nonviolent, maybe there's an opportunity to revisit
their case and say, Hey, you can be confined at home.
In the State when we were doing the study, it seemed like
we could house them for a month for the cost of one day in a
prison. So, we were looking at it as we were overcrowded as
well.
So, a really quick we question. Mr. Potter, I want to ask
you this: The 119th Congress has already acted with the
introduction of H.R. 1046. It's actually the Marc Fischer
Memorial Act.
Are you familiar with that?
Mr. Potter. I am not familiar.
Mr. Moore. OK. What happened, we actually had a Bureau of
Prison employee that was just going through the mail, and it
had so much fentanyl on it that it killed him.
We're looking at ways that we can actually have this mail
screened offsite. That probably is something we're trying to
get. We have 56 cosponsors right now. We're working on moving
that through. Hopefully we can make some--any of you familiar
with that at all? OK. It's something they asked me to talk
about, and I wanted to make it aware to the panel that we're
talking about that.
Mr. Wilde, what is the No. 1 thing that you see when
you're--what really changes when you start meeting with folks
who are incarcerated and through your process? What do you
think is the most impactful thing that we can do to help folks
not recidivate?
Mr. Wilde. The Prison Fellowship utilizes what we call an
ecosystem model. It's recognizing that within a correctional
environment there are multiple stakeholders. Through
programming like the Prison Fellowship Academy and the Warden
Exchange, correctional leaders as well as the incarcerated
population can actually go on parallel journeys and not look at
one another as the problem, but both become participants and
partners in how we create a more rehabilitative and
constructive culture to both live and work in. We utilize all
kinds of programs that bring multiple stakeholders together.
Mr. Moore. Do you see your recidivism rates drop
dramatically?
Mr. Wilde. Our recidivism rates within the State of Texas
are over--it's a reduction in over 50 percent from a control
group within that State.
Mr. Moore. One of the things we've done in Alabama is
actually skills training in prison so that as those individuals
are incarcerated, they actually develop the skill, whether it
be a mechanic certification, HVAC, honestly, all kinds of
industry they can go into. We've seen that have a tremendous
impact as well as faith.
With that, Mr. Chair, I yield back. I'm out of time.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you.
Ms. Crockett. Mr. Chair, I do have an unanimous consent:
``Under Trump, U.S. Prisons offered gender-affirming care.''
This is a The New York Times article from October 16, 2024.
Thank you.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Mr. Van Drew. Next, if I've got this right, Ranking Member,
we have Mr. Raskin from the great State of Maryland.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you, Chair Van Drew. Mr. Potter, is there
evidence that private prisons are run better than Bureau of
Prison facilities?
Mr. Potter. There isn't any evidence that I've ever seen.
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Milton, the President wants us to hand out
hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses and incentive pay to
ICE agents. The number we saw the other day, we discussed it
here in Committee, was $858 million to ICE agents, which,
according to Mr. Moskowitz's calculations, came to something
like $45,000 per employee of ICE.
Yet, at the same time we are reading articles about how
retention incentives are being cut right now for the Bureau of
Prisons staff up to 25 percent, effectively reducing their
salaries when you look at it from an annual perspective.
What kind of effect is this having on Bureau of Prisons'
corrections officers?
Mr. Milton. Thank you for the question, Ranking Member
Raskin. What we've come to realize when we talk about officers,
correction officers tend to be among the lowest paid.
When those bonuses were removed, it certainly did--should I
say the incentives were removed, it disincentivized a number of
correction officers. Certainly, it has an impact on morale.
We believe that investing in correction officers will also
increase morale and have a better impact on those who are
incarcerated as well.
Mr. Raskin. The President has told us recently that the
border has never been safer. Can you think of any reason why we
should be spending hundreds of millions of dollars on bonus pay
for ICE employees while we're reducing retention bonuses and
incentive pay for Bureau of Prison employees?
Mr. Milton. No, sir.
Mr. Raskin. What's that going to do to retention, moving
forward?
Mr. Milton. I'm sorry?
Mr. Raskin. What's it going to do to our ability to retain
the best Bureau of Prison employees?
Mr. Milton. Certainly, it makes it a challenge. Removing
those bonuses can speak to a lack of willingness to invest in,
in this case, people.
One of the things that's missing in the conversation is
that whether we're talking about people who are incarcerated
or, in this case, correctional staff, these are people. At the
center of all the solutions, we should be placing people at the
forefront.
As much as we're talking about the facilities, in this
case, bonus pay, it's really about the morale of people and how
it's impacting those who are directly impacted.
Mr. Raskin. All right. It's going to be profoundly
demoralizing to the staff there now. We've heard also about an
increase in lockdowns taking place because you've got the
people who are the most effective and necessary employees
resigning because their pay is being cut.
These lockdowns can last weeks, even months I've heard in
some cases. What impact does the lockdown have on prison
safety, on access to programming, and on the mental health of
incarcerated people?
Mr. Milton. Yes. Well, when lockdowns happen, there is a
decrease in access to medical care. There's a decrease in
access to families. You can't reach out to families. Families
don't know what's going on during those lockdowns.
It creates a panic and tension within the facilities. Then
certainly, implementing the lockdowns certainly places pressure
on staff as well. It creates a system where folks are now ill
at ease during that process.
Mr. Raskin. There's this rhetorical lip service to the
people who have the toughest jobs actually in the prisons
managing very difficult conditions. Yet, the President issued
an Executive Order wiping out collective bargaining purportedly
for more than a million Federal workers, including all these
Bureau of Prison employees.
What effect will that have on the staffing crisis, and what
does it do to the morale of people who work as correctional
officers?
Mr. Milton. Certainly, collective bargaining establishes a
formal process for advocacy for people, for the workers. By
removing that formal process, where folks can sit at a table
across from each other and find common ground on issues that
are impacting the quality of life, it certainly removes that
opportunity to do that in a formal way.
Mr. Raskin. Thank you.
I yield back, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you. The gentleman from the great State
of Arizona, Andy Biggs.
Mr. Biggs. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Thank you to our panel again.
So, Mr. Purtill, you wrote, ``COs should be included more
in the corrections process, and their experience and insight
should inform public policy.''
Mr. Potter, do you agree with that?
Mr. Potter. Absolutely.
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Purtill, you also wrote, ``No one has more
insight into an inmate's likelihood of successfully
reintegrating into society than the COs who interact with him
daily.''
Do you also agree with that, Mr. Potter?
Mr. Potter. Absolutely.
Mr. Biggs. Can you give me an example on where--an idea
that you think, as you represent COs, both on the policy and,
in particular, if you have a policy on how to address inclusion
of COs into the procedure of determining reintegration into
society?
Mr. Potter. Yes. I believe any time there's a consideration
for early release, I think you should include those men and
women that know firsthand how that person has conducted
themselves throughout their time.
I can tell you from my own personal experience, I've worked
with many people that I totally believe should have gone home,
they were ready to go home, but I was not allowed to weigh in
on that decisionmaking.
I do believe that when you talk to those that are closest
and that spend the most time with these individuals, sometimes
16 hours a shift, sometimes longer, they know more about that
individual than anybody else in the system.
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Purtill, how would you integrate a CO into
that process?
Mr. Purtill. I do think coming up with a mechanism to have
their voices input into that. That they can both be on an
individual level within the institution on what that individual
person is--what their likelihood is to recidivate and what
security level they need to be housed at and all those things.
That can be taken, become part of the case file for the
individual incarcerated.
I also think that there are voices at a more broader policy
level could also--
Mr. Biggs. Let's get on the adjudication of whether someone
should be released early in reentry first before we get to
broader policy.
Mr. Purtill. Sure.
Mr. Biggs. What I would suggest is that there's an action
item for maybe all four of you is to come up with a process and
a procedure to include, be more inclusive of COs. If I could,
I'd ask you to get on that, and get us something back. Maybe
Mr. Potter and Mr. Purtill, in particular, can sit down and do
something, because one of the ways that this happens is if
Congress is aware of it and can actually build on that. I would
challenge you to do that.
Mr. Wilde, what do you think are the factors that are most
likely predicted whether an inmate will return to prison?
Mr. Wilde. We often say that nothing magic happens on
release. What you were doing the day before is a good indicator
of what you'll do afterwards.
We've been purposeful in trying to implement communities of
practice where people practice values of what we call good
citizenship. They're seeking out prosocial community, that
they're taking responsibility, they're transitioning from being
consumers to producers. No longer does the world happen to an
individual but they happen to the world.
That those are some of the greatest factors. We are
situated to come alongside and provide those skills as well as
support for people's change journeys.
Mr. Biggs. You've indicated that you've had challenges
perhaps working with the BOP and getting into the system and
using your program. Again, I would urge, Mr. Purtill, that if
we don't come out of here with at least a few action items
today, we will not have achieved as much as we need to.
I would encourage us to find a way to work with both the
COs and the faith-based to see how we can integrate them more
fully into helping.
Mr. Milton, do you think that might be helpful?
Mr. Milton. It sounds like a good solution.
Mr. Biggs. Man, I've never heard anybody say that about any
of my ideas before. Glad to hear that, Mr. Milton.
I appreciate your efforts, and I hope that we can actually
begin to take some steps to get some action items done and
completed to facilitate certainly the reduction of recidivism,
because I think that would make all us happier.
So, with that, I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. I thank the gentleman.
I will now ask the gentleman from the great State of
Tennessee, Mr. Cohen.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's an honor to be here
on the dais with a high IQ Ranking Member.
None of you are from the Bureau of Prisons, as I've read
over here, and that's a little disappointing there's nobody
here from the Bureau of Prisons.
Let me ask, does anybody have any idea how many trans
people were in the prison system, the Federal prison system,
normally the population, percentage-wise? Nobody has any idea?
Anybody have any idea about what problems existed with the
trans people in the prisons? If they were not done according to
their biological sex, but whatever way they did it, were there
problems and what occurred? Is it not an issue?
Trans people in the prison system is not a big issue to any
of your opinions, is that right? Nod or something.
Mr. Goldman. Will the gentleman yield for the answers if
you don't have them?
Mr. Cohen. Yes, I will yield.
Mr. Goldman. There are 156,000 inmates in the Bureau of
Prisons. NPR has calculated there are 23 that would be impacted
by this Executive Order. That is .01 percent of the inmates,
and yet, this is what our Republican colleagues want to talk
about.
Mr. Cohen. That is a great deal greater number than are in
the NCAA. I think there are only eight in the NCAA. It's a much
more pressing issue than the NCAA.
Anyway, that was just--does anybody in this group--and I
know you are trying to do good work and all that, and I think
that's important--feel that the First Step program is working
or have any opinion about the First Step program? Mr. Purtill,
do you have an opinion about the efficacy?
Mr. Purtill. I have a very strong opinion about the First
Step Act. It's working. There is much more that still needs to
be done on the implementation side, but that it was well-
founded in how it was structured, and the Bureau of Prisons is
moving forward with trying to do that.
Increasing the recidivism reduction programming, especially
the evidence-based programming, within the facilities is
critically important. Most of these folks are coming back home
into our community, and we want to make sure that we've done
everything that we can both to rehabilitate them, which is part
of the mandate of any corrections system.
Mr. Cohen. I was pleased, as a Member of this Committee,
during Trump one that I supported that, one of the few times
I've supported Mr. Trump. In Trump two, he seems to have
forgotten about it a bit, because Ms. Peters, who he fired on
day one as head of the Bureau of Prisons, was very much
involved in implementing the First Step program. Since then,
they're on the third interim director, I think. It's a very
difficult job and an important job.
Mr. Wilde, you're at Prison Fellowship. How many times in
your Prison Fellowship have you had people who become religious
and either convert their religion or accept religion or
something else?
Mr. Wilde. In all our programs, they are open to people of
any faith. There is no religious preference. That's never a
criterion to get in, to graduate, or to participate. We say
that our programs are a place for anybody to belong, regardless
of what they believe.
If a person does come to faith in Jesus, it's because they
are compelled by something beautiful that they saw and how
people love them with where they're at.
Mr. Cohen. Does that happen very often?
Mr. Wilde. I would say so, but there are also people who go
through our programs who are Muslim who graduate as a Muslim,
who are better citizens.
Mr. Cohen. I saw a movie last week. It's an old movie from
Mr. Goldman's hometown. The movie was called, ``Cafe Society.''
In ``Cafe Society,'' there's--it's a Woody Allen movie. There
was a Jewish gangster, and he offed a few people.
He was in prison, and he was talking to his sister on the
phone and told her how he was converting and becoming
Christian. Catholic, he was becoming. He said that he was going
to be executed in three days and he thought it gave him
something to look forward to. He didn't want to think of that
being the end. She commented, ``Jews don't necessarily do that,
but if they did have that idea that you went somewhere after
you were killed they'd get more customers.''
There is something to it and there's something to look
forward to if you do accept Jesus or accept some different
perspective, especially if you're in prison.
Do any of you all have any opinion about prison guards and
the difficulty? How many times are prison guards attacked by
prisoners? Is that a very common occurrence? Mr. Potter?
Mr. Potter. Yes. I can tell you that I have been attacked,
but mostly, when something else is going on, and we try to calm
the situation or break the situation up. It's an unintended
consequence, but it's a consequence, and it happens.
I've had a number of things happen throughout my career. I
had two neck surgeries, cervical neck surgeries, and had a
shoulder surgery. It does happen as part of what we do.
Mr. Cohen. I'm over time, so I can't ask you about
Alcatraz, which could be Mar-a-Lago West. Thank you.
Mr. Van Drew. I thank the gentleman.
I now recognize the gentlelady from the great State of
Florida, Ms. Lee.
Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all our witnesses for being here with us
today. I believe that criminal justice reform is one of the
critical issues for this Committee to work on and appreciate
you all being here.
Most recently, I was honored to introduce the Fresh Start
Act, which is a bipartisan bill that supports helping
individuals reintegrate back into society and gaining access to
employment, housing, and educational opportunities, and want to
thank my colleague, Representative Kamlager-Dove, for co-
leading this effort with me.
In addition to advancing reform, it's critical that
Congress continues to conduct meaningful oversight from the
Bureau of Prisons to ensure our correctional facilities are
secure, cost-effective, and safe for our correctional officers.
I'd like to begin, Mr. Purtill, by going back to something
that you just commented about, which was you referred to
evidence-based recidivism reduction. I would love to hear your
thoughts on some of the tools and strategies that are evidence-
based that help us reduce rates of recidivism.
Mr. Purtill. Sure. We do know a fair amount about when
people are more likely to recidivate. We know that employment
is one of the most important factors that someone can ever have
in determining whether or not they are going to recidivate once
they're released from prison.
That the evidence-based--there are criminologists who are
in a better position to speak to exactly what goes into
evidence-based programming than I am. I know that the Bureau
has a process by which they examine programs before they
determine that they're evidence-based.
In terms of oversight, really encouraging the Bureau of
Prisons to get more of those programs online, get them
approved, get them into the facilities, get them behind the
walls, and get them working, I think is critically important.
I know that some things--and I'm very sympathetic to the
idea that we need these programs to be evidence-based, because
sometimes some of the activities that get labeled as recidivism
reduction are probably not all that effective. It's important
to have that distinction drawn.
Ms. Lee. Thank you.
Mr. Wilde, from the inmate rehabilitation standpoint, have
staffing shortages affected the availability of programming and
those types of opportunities for those who are incarcerated?
Mr. Wilde. Yes. In several locations where staffing is low,
you have to be able to escort volunteers. You have to ensure
that as people are coming in to offer those programs, that they
are kept safe and secure as well. Yes, staffing shortages do
impact programs.
Ms. Lee. Mr. Potter, shifting gears a little bit, last
Congress I introduced the Lieutenant Osvaldo Albarati Stopping
Prison Contraband Act that would have increased penalties for
smuggling cell phones into prisons and will provide oversight
of the Department of Justice to ensure these policies, when in
place, are being upheld.
Can you speak about the issue of increased contraband being
smuggled into prisons and specifically the dangers associated
with cell phones.
Mr. Potter. Yes. There's been all kinds of contraband that
have been smuggled into prisons one way or the other, whether
it's over the fence or through the gate.
Cell phones, in particular, are, in my mind, pretty
dangerous because there's a way of communicating from across
the compound. There's a way of communicating with folks outside
to do all kinds of nefarious things.
It's not just communication to see how you're doing. Most
times those cell phones lead to--also, it's a level of
contraband that's bought and sold that also leads to higher
tensions and things like that.
Ms. Lee. In particular, when we are analyzing officer
safety and how to ensure that we are doing everything possible
to ensure the security and safety of correctional officers, are
cell phones one of the tools that can be utilized to actually
develop plans or threats against correctional officers and
others who are working in prison security?
Mr. Potter. I believe so, yes.
Ms. Lee. Now, what are some of the things that you think we
could do to help deter or reduce the amount of contraband
entering into our prison systems?
Mr. Potter. Well, there's a lot of innovation that's taken
place over the past several years, and there's a lot of
facilities and a lot of States that are taking those steps like
cell phone detection and drone detection and things like that.
When people come in, if you can detect what kind of
contraband they're bringing in, or if there's contraband coming
from over the fence or however, if you can identify what that
is or stop it or disable it, those are all mechanisms that are
extremely useful.
Ms. Lee. Thank you. Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. I thank the gentlelady.
Next, I recognize the gentleman from New York, Mr. Goldman.
Mr. Goldman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I would ordinarily appreciate this hearing very much,
because the Bureau of Prisons is a critical component of the
Department of Justice that is woefully underfunded and
struggling to implement their mission.
We must be living in Fantasyland. We're trying to have a
normal hearing doing oversight of the Bureau of Prisons when
the President and Elon Musk are taking a hatchet to the Bureau,
canceling the collective bargaining agreement for all the
correctional officers, eliminating retention bonuses for the
correctional officers while making sure that every masked
undercover Gestapo agent with ICE gets a $40,000 bonus.
In fact, the bill you passed last week, the Republicans
passed last week, would give $12 billion in pay increases and
bonuses to ICE and CBP, and nothing to the Bureau of Prisons.
Yet, my colleagues sit over there acting as if they're really
interested in correcting the Bureau of Prisons and all the
problems that we have there.
Then, put some money where it is, because we all know
that's how you correct the problem. That's how you implement
the First Step Act. That's how you implement and fund the
Federal Prison Oversight Act, a bipartisan bill that we passed
last Congress that has not been funded and can't do anything.
You're passing a partisan reconciliation bill. You have the
purse strings. Yet, we're supposed to sit here thinking that
you're really serious about making sure that we're helping the
corrections officer. It's just bogus.
Let's take the Metropolitan Detention Center in my district
in Brooklyn. Since 2020, there have been 17 inmates that have
been killed. The staffing shortages are devastating and have
been devastating. There have been numerous, numerous lockdowns
simply because there are not enough staff. Inmates are kept in
isolation for multiple days at a time because of staffing
shortages.
There was a crackdown by the FBI and the Department of
Justice in March. Twenty-five inmates were arrested for all
sorts of various smuggling efforts, violence, violent assaults
with scalpels and, as my colleague from Florida said,
``smuggled in cell phones.'' There's not enough staff to
actually monitor what is going on.
What did they do at MDC? Well, under President Biden, they
implemented a retention bonus of 35 percent. That enabled them
to hire 87 additional people for that one location, the most in
years and years. It decreased lockdowns. Since August 2024,
there have been three days of lockdowns due to staff shortages.
You would think that's a productive way of boosting
employment, boosting staffing, which I think every single one
of our witnesses has said is an essential part of addressing
the problems in the Bureau of Prisons.
What does President Trump do? Gets rid of the retention
bonuses, gone, gets rid of the collective bargaining agreement.
How on earth do you think you are going to increase
staffing by taking away all the correction officers' benefits,
by taking away their retention bonus, which proved to be
successful and is necessary. Yet, we're here talking about
implementing recidivism programs. It's a joke.
So, Mr. Biggs, you asked for some action items. I'll give
you some action items.
Mr. Biggs. Can I ask you a question, Mr. Goldman?
Mr. Goldman. After I give you the action items, I'm happy
to have a colloquy.
(1) Restore the retention bonuses so that we can hire more
corrections officers to implement all of the laws that we want
to implement in a bipartisan way, and so we can keep the
inmates safe;
(2) restore the collective bargaining agreement rather than
unilaterally canceling a negotiated collective bargaining
agreement that gives the corrections officers very important
protections; and
(3) fund the First Step Act, let's fund the Federal Prison
Oversight Act, which has not been funded.
There are three action items that you can take back to Mr.
Trump to try to actually address the issues at the Bureau of
Prisons. I am happy to yield to you.
Mr. Biggs. Can you tell me--you mentioned that the Brooklyn
facility had 17 homicides among inmates from 2020-2024. What
administration controlled the BOP that entire time? Did you do
anything? You didn't do jack crap.
I yield back.
Mr. Goldman. You have no idea what I did.
Mr. Van Drew. Your time is expired. All right. Next, we
have the Chair of the whole Committee, Mr. Jordan.
Chair Jordan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Purtill, any idea
how many inmates in Federal prison are not U.S. citizens?
Mr. Purtill. I actually do not know that, sir. I'm sorry.
Chair Jordan. Mr. Potter, would you hazard a guess or know?
Mr. Potter. I do not know.
Chair Jordan. Mr. Wilde?
Mr. Wilde. I do not know.
Chair Jordan. Mr. Milton?
Mr. Milton. No, sir.
Chair Jordan. I think you all testified there are staff
shortages. The gentleman from New York just talked about staff
shortages.
Maybe if there weren't 24,000 Federal inmates who are not
U.S. citizens, maybe we wouldn't have a staff shortage. Maybe
if the administration before this one hadn't just released into
the country people who came here illegally and actually
detained them, they wouldn't have committed some of these
crimes and wouldn't be in Federal prison.
Do you think maybe that would help with the situation on
staffing that you all brought up that the gentleman from New
York just raised? Mr. Purtill, I'll start with you.
Mr. Purtill. I do, sir. I'm assuming that most of those are
under an immigration detainer for when they do come out.
Chair Jordan. I don't know about most of them, but that's a
question I'd have, too. Do you understand that? Are they under
a detainer, when they're released that at least ICE will have
the ability to go--they're not just going to be released into
the country? Do you know?
Mr. Purtill. That's my assumption, but I do not know those
numbers.
Chair Jordan. Mr. Potter, do you know if that's actually
the case with these 24,584 Bureau of Prison inmates are not
U.S. citizens? Do you know what percentage represents of the
Federal inmate population?
Mr. Potter. No, I do not.
Chair Jordan. Sixteen percent. Maybe we wouldn't have a
staff shortage if this had been dealt with in the previous
administration. This is something President Trump is trying to
deal with going forward. Sixteen percent.
Do you know if there are detainers for these individuals
who would be subject to that going on currently, Mr. Potter?
Mr. Potter. No, I don't know.
Chair Jordan. Mr. Wilde?
Mr. Wilde. I don't know.
Chair Jordan. Mr. Milton, any idea?
Mr. Milton. No, sir.
Chair Jordan. Well, what we do know is what happened a few
years back. I think this goes clear back to the Obama
Administration. I sent a detainer to the Board of Prisons--or
the Bureau of Prison, excuse me, regarding the individual who
wound up killing Kate Steinle. Sure, many of you remember this
situation.
The BOP didn't honor that, instead released this individual
to San Francisco, to law enforcement there, who then--to the
jurisdiction there, who then released this guy to the streets
who wound up killing Kate Steinle.
This is something that we should look at here, this huge
part of the population in our Federal prison who are not
citizens. Again, I appreciate we've known about Prison
Fellowship forever and the good work you do. We appreciate the
work you're doing with inmates.
This is one thing, one area where we could make some
changes. Again, the Trump Administration is seeking to do that,
and certainly not following--well, we're not having near the
amount of migrants come to the border now that were coming in
the previous administration, but certainly not releasing people
into the country like was done before, which then gave the
opportunity for this situation to happen with some of these
individuals.
Any comments on that? Mr. Potter.
Mr. Potter. They may help the situation, but I think
restoring collective bargaining unit rights is an important
issue. Treating people like professionals is also important.
Do I think it will solve the staffing problem? I don't
think it will solve the staffing problem. I think there's a
systematic issue here. When it comes to how you value the
people that work there and how they feel valued is what's going
to keep them there.
Chair Jordan. Fair enough. Any other thoughts from the rest
of the panel? If not, I'll yield my time back.
I'll yield my remaining time to the Chair. Thank you, Mr.
Chair. Thanks for this hearing and thank all of you for the
work you do.
Mr. Van Drew. I will--you'll yield the time to me. I will
yield to Mr. Biggs.
Mr. Biggs. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
I do want to point out, in relationship to the gentleman
from New York's comments, I take what he says with gravity and
seriousness, but I know one thing: When his side of the aisle
controlled the House, the Senate, when they controlled the
Presidency, when they controlled the Bureau of Prisons, we had
massive amounts of problems with the Dublin Corrections
Facility.
We investigated and kept going at it, and eventually that
had to be closed. They didn't do anything to fix that. That's
my point. I think that there's something we could--you can piss
each other off all you want, but if you're going to get
something done, you got to find a place that you can work
together and get it done.
Some of the rhetoric I've heard today indicates my
colleagues just don't want to do that, and that's a shame.
Yield.
Mr. Van Drew. The gentleman yields.
Ms. Crockett. Mr. Chair, I've got an unanimous consent.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Ms. Crockett. Thank you so much. This is the GAO report
that says that there was a 33 percent decrease in noncitizens
incarcerated in BOP from 2017-2022.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Ms. Crockett. Thank you.
Mr. Van Drew. I now recognize Mr. Moskowitz from the great
State of Florida.
Mr. Moskowitz. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Before I begin, I have
a unanimous consent request.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Mr. Moskowitz. I ask unanimous consent to enter into the
record an article by Emma Buker titled ``DOGE, Musk oversight
of Federal workforce causing frustration for FCI Thomson
staff.''
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Mr. Moskowitz. I have another unanimous consent request.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Mr. Moskowitz. You want me to read it or--
Mr. Van Drew. Not really, but go ahead.
Mr. Moskowitz. Can I text it to you later? All right. So,
unanimous consent request, obviously. I'll give them to you,
Mr. Chair. I'll skip that.
All right. Let's begin on my time. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I
appreciate this hearing. It's always a pleasure to go after
Chair Jordan.
I've been listening to my colleagues talking about
investment and personnel shortages. Of course, we're talking
about that in a time where DOGE has its fingerprints over all
the agencies, including your own.
At a time when we're talking about personnel shortages,
we're actually firing people. We're convincing them to leave.
We're retiring them, right? Don't get me wrong. Like, you guys
need more resources, right? You need more people. You got
crumbling infrastructure, right? We need to be tough on crime,
tough on criminals. I got all that.
There definitely needs to be serious reforms, right? This
is a serious conversation. Earlier I was listening to the
Ranking Member and she brought up something about Trump talking
about Alcatraz.
Of course, look, this is just another distraction to divert
attention away from the tariffs or rising prices or the
struggle on Main Street. Since we're having a hearing on
prisons, it's lucky timing for me.
Three times more expensive than any prison to operate in
1959, Alcatraz was, OK? It needs about $250 million to shore up
the infrastructure and utilities. All food and water have to be
barged in. Sewage has to be barged out. The facility is almost
100 years old.
I don't get it. In the days of DOGE where we're cutting
budgets, we got to find savings, now we're going to what? We're
going to cut Medicaid and SNAP so that we can pour money into
Alcatraz?
First, have you been to Alcatraz recently? It literally
is--it's a rust box walking around. You need a tetanus shot
just to go into the building. Do we still give tetanus shots or
has RFK gotten rid of those? I can't keep up.
So, listen, where did the President get this idea all of a
sudden, right? Where did he get the idea? Perhaps, he was
watching ``Escape from Alcatraz,'' right? I brought boards,
because some people are visual learners. Perhaps he was
watching ``Escape from Alcatraz,'' by Clint Eastwood.
Actually, the funny part about that, it was actually on
television in South Florida. It was on PBS South Florida over
the weekend when Trump was at Mar-a-Lago. In fact, he made his
announcement just hours after it aired. You know PBS, the
programming that he's trying to get rid of, so just in case
you're keeping up, right? It's two dolls for girls and zero
Elmos, OK?
Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe it wasn't that. Maybe he was
watching ``The Rock,'' with Sean Connery. You know this one.
This is where Sean Connery goes back to Alcatraz, because he
originally escaped Alcatraz and he needed an expert on chemical
weapons.
Maybe the President was just Netflixing and chilling, like
watching ``The Rock,'' which is not to be confused with ``The
Rock,'' right? That's a different person.
Then the President is really excited about these sharks,
right? He's talking about all the sharks and the person
escaped. He lost his clothing. So, sharks, they don't have
laser beams on, they don't have laser beams, but maybe the
sharks are going to be there.
This is just all ridiculous. All of a sudden after that, we
heard like, Oh, we're going to tariff the movies. Well, hold on
a second. Why would we tariff the movies? This is where the
President is getting his ideas from. We can't tariff the policy
idea making of the Presidency.
I know what my colleagues are going to say. They're going
to say, Jared, just let the President cook. This is 4D chess
he's playing.
I'm going to say, but maybe he's just watching late night
movies. Perhaps he's just watching late nights movies. In fact,
we're told he got this movie tariff idea from no other than Jon
Voight, the guy who was in that great movie ``Anaconda.'' I
don't know if you've seen that.
This is the ridiculousness that's going on. I want to end
with this: Mr. Purtill, you run a faith-based organization,
right? No? Oh, it's Mr. Wilde. You run a faith-based
organization. Sorry.
Do you think it's a good idea to reopen Alcatraz? Do you
think the faith-based community has been pounding the table to
reopen Alcatraz?
Mr. Wilde. Prison Fellowship's stance is that prisons
should be safe, effective, efficient, and uphold human dignity.
Mr. Moskowitz. OK, let me make it easier for you. All four
of you, which one of you think we should reopen Alcatraz? Just
raise your hand.
OK. For my colleagues who sometimes are a little slow, no
one raised their hand, OK, nobody, not a single witness. None
of your witnesses here think we should reopen Alcatraz.
We have real problems in the prison system. It does need
reform. It does need money. We can work on that together. The
President puts out Alcatraz as a distraction. Thank you.
Mr. Van Drew. The gentleman yields. I am going to yield to
myself. I had prepared remarks but before we get into them, so
much has been said on the other side, I just want to address
some of that.
First, I want to say, Mr. Moskowitz, you really do have
talent. You really do have potential as a full-time standup
comic for real. You're good. You're good. It's fun. It really
is enjoyable.
Mr. Moskowitz. The President provided the material.
Mr. Van Drew. No, I think you have got some of your own
material too, and you embellish a little bit but it's still
fun.
Second, on a serious note, earlier in the meeting we were
discussing, the Ranking Member for the Committee of the whole,
something about deporting babies and U.S. citizens and ICE and
detaining criminals.
Let's be clear. First, that's not your issue. It's not why
you're here. I'm sorry we had to digress on that. This is not a
reconciliation meeting. I really do want to talk about the
Bureau of Prisons and how we can make it better.
I really started the meeting out by saying I was extending
my hand to see. We're going to disagree on some stuff, but
let's see if we can work together to make it better because
what those folks are going through isn't good. We can do
better.
Quite frankly, it's been going on for years on both sides
of the aisle. Let's not anybody be holier than thou on this,
OK? We're not deporting babies, by the way. I have to bring it
up, because it's said.
We're not deporting--and I know somebody is going to
disagree with me on the other side, probably the Ranking
Member, and that's fine--U.S. citizens. There were a lot of
folks that shouldn't have been in the United States of America
that were committing crimes and doing bad things that nobody
appreciated, obviously, that committed murders, disfigured
people, raped people, and hurt people. Some of them were on the
terror watch list. We're not speaking about immigrants. We love
immigrants, but we don't like those people.
Yes, the border is much, much better now than it was. Yes,
sometimes we might need some help from the Bureau of Prisons.
Ultimately, it makes it a lot better for them too, not have
having lots of bad folks come into the United States.
I just want to, again, focus on associating myself with the
remarks of Mr. Biggs. We really want to try to do something
together here. It's my goal. I know it's hard, and I know it's
highly partisan, but I think there are some areas--we're not
going to agree on everything. We know it.
We have divergent ideas for the future of the United
States, but there may be a few points where we can come
together to try to make it better, and that's what I hope for
and that's what I hope we would do.
Finally, Mr. Goldman made a remark, too, about--I think I
heard it right and if I didn't I apologize but I believe I did,
about jack-booted Gestapo agents as far as ICE.
The men and women who work for ICE are oh so similar to
people that work for Corrections. They're just doing their job.
They want a safe America. It's a hard job. It's a brutal job.
It's not easy. They've been understaffed, abused, and
mistreated for years.
I don't like it in Corrections. I don't like it in ICE. We
shouldn't do it to anybody. So no, they're not Gestapo agents,
and that's abusive and inappropriate to refer to them so much,
and I do call out Mr. Goldman for doing that. I wish he was
here.
Finally, really quickly, because I used up a lot of my
time, but if you'd give me a brief answer.
Mr. Wilde, what structural or policy reforms would give you
and your teams the stability and the access to really serve
incarcerated individuals?
The work you do, I like. It was referenced before by Mr.
Cohen, when you believe in something and you believe you can
get better. I've been around Corrections a lot, and some of the
most successful work that I have seen done is faith-based,
whatever the faith is. Just the faith that there's something
greater and bigger and better for all of us, quite frankly. We
all need that, including those of us who sit up here.
Tell me, how can we make it better?
Mr. Wilde. First, we would ask for the full implementation
of the tenets of the First Step Act.
Prison Fellowship is situated to be able to provide these
services to those who live in prison, those who work in prison,
family members, and to create better neighbors inside and
outside.
We believe that we have something really important and
valuable to be able to offer to this conversation, and we're
ready to do that. With the First Step Act, we would encourage
the inclusion of other faith-based organizations.
Mr. Van Drew. I hope that this Committee in some way can
help. That's something I believe, I'm hopeful that across party
lines that we can agree on, that there's a place for God to
help people rehabilitate, regardless of what, ``D'' or ``R,''
is next to our name.
Mr. Van Drew. Mr. Potter, would you agree--and I think this
is what I got from your testimony, and then I'll be done, but I
want to just summarize it. You can say yes or no--that we don't
actually listen to the correctional officers enough? We always
do this. In everything that government does, we don't listen to
the people who are most directly affected. Do you believe
within the current budget we actually could make it a lot
better?
Finally, recidivism--that's a hard word for me--do you
agree that the quality of facility actually affects that? I
know it's three questions. Real briefly.
Mr. Potter. Yes. I do believe--
Mr. Van Drew. Sorry. I'm looking at you. Yes, go ahead.
You're correct. You're correct.
Mr. Potter. OK. Yes. I do believe that listening to the men
and women that do the work is extremely important and the
second largest stakeholder in the system, so any reform that's
going to happen is going to affect them as well.
Mr. Van Drew. Thank you, Mr. Potter. I yield back. With
that, I will recognize the gentlelady from the great State of
Georgia, Ms. McBath.
Ms. McBath. Thank you, Chair.
First, I do want to say, in listening to all of you today,
there are resounding themes that we hear from each and every
one of you about what we should be doing and the problems that
we're facing within the BOP. I do appreciate that Mr. Biggs,
our colleague, is looking for action items, but actually the
action items are already right before us. Let's make sure that
we are fully funding the BOP and the First Step Act and also
the Federal Prison Oversight Act.
I'd like to ask each of you gentlemen, just yes or no,
would you agree that these programs are a step in the right
direction? Mr. Milton?
Mr. Milton. I agree wholeheartedly.
Ms. McBath. Mr. Wilde?
Mr. Wilde. Absolutely.
Ms. McBath. Mr. Purtill?
Mr. Purtill. I do. I think implementing the First Step Act
is critically important.
Ms. McBath. Thank you. Mr. Potter?
Mr. Potter. I absolutely agree.
Ms. McBath. Thank you. Because we agree as well. My
questions briefly are going to be for Mr. Milton and also for
Mr. Potter today.
Mr. Milton, we know the Federal oversight--Prison Oversight
Act, we know it needs to be instituted, we know it needs to be
funded. Nothing can be done until those things are done. Can
you tell us, do you believe that it would have prevented
another occurrence such as the widespread abuse that we saw
that occurred at FCI Dublin if it was instituted?
Mr. Milton. I believe it could have, Ranking Member,
avoided that, particularly as we talk about the transparency
that's built into the Oversight Act, the independence is built
into the Act, could have sent early warning signs to this
honorable body to do something about it.
Ms. McBath. Uh-huh. Thank you.
Mr. Potter, you talked about the human toll that you spoke
of in terms of covering the BOP staff. Can you kind of talk
about the solutions that we might be able to encapsulate to
find these solutions? What can we do basically to improve the
mental health and the wellness of our corrections officers and
staff that are in the BOP?
Mr. Potter. In any good wellness program, the employees
have to be able to help create what that looks like for them.
In every instance and every different State, one wellness
program might look different than the other. It shouldn't be
something that's just implemented by the administration and
then they're dragged into it and convinced that it's a good
wellness program. They have to be hands on, they have to help
develop that wellness program from the ground up.
There also needs to be a cultural survey. I totally believe
that the Bureau of Prisons needs a complete cultural survey to
be able to identify where those needs are going to be, and that
should be done by a third party, someone who's trusted. I do
believe in oversight as well.
Ms. McBath. Thank you.
Mr. Purtill, what you said in your opening remarks, I
really want to thank you, because a lot of the funding that we
secured--bipartisan funding that we secured under the Biden
Administration under the CARES Act is what has been able to
facilitate a lot of what we were trying to do to restore faith
in our Board of Prison system. I want to thank you for
acknowledging that funding through the CARES Act is what--we
were on the right track at that time.
Mr. Potter, one last question for you. Would these
solutions for correctional officers make our prisons safer and
better places for inmates as well?
Mr. Potter. Yes, I believe it would.
Ms. McBath. Could you kind of expand on that for us,
please?
Mr. Potter. Remind me of exactly the question that you're
asking.
Mrs. McBath. OK. The solutions that you spoke about in
terms of really helping to support in covering the Board of
Prisons' staff, to improve the mental health problems that we
have with our staff in the Board of Prisons and the correction
officers, would these solutions for correctional officers make
our prisons safer and better places for inmates as well?
Mr. Potter. Yes, thank you. I do believe it would, because
when someone comes to work and they're healthier, they're going
to conduct their jobs in a much different way. When people come
in and they're exhausted and they're not healthy, well, they're
not going to be able to do the things we're asking them to do
when it comes to helping those incarcerated find success as
they leave. I do think it has a direct impact on how somebody
comes to work and how they're treated and their mental health
State.
Ms. McBath. In closing, we're hearing from every witness
here, whether invited by the Republicans or the Democrats, all
of you are calling on us to get the BOP the funding that it
needs, fully implement the First Step Act, and fund the Federal
Prison Oversight Act. I thank you for that.
I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. The gentlelady yields. I recognize the
gentleman from the great State of Missouri, Mr. Onder.
Ms. Crockett. Mr. Chair, before we do that, I've got a UC,
unanimous consent request. ``What happens with U.S. citizen
children caught up in Trump's deportation.'' That's a CNN
article. I've got another one. It says, ``Newborn U.S. citizen
and Guatemalan mom detained.'' That's an NBC article. My last
one is, ``Judge says 2-year-old U.S. citizen appears to have
been deported with no meaningful process.'' Politico article.
Thank you so much.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chair, I have a UC as well.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Mr. Biggs. ``Federal women's prison in California plagued
by rampant sexual abuse to close.'' Thanks.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection. Mr. Onder, you got your
chance.
Mr. Onder. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Well, Mr. Chair--
Mr. Van Drew. Dr. Onder, I guess I should say.
Mr. Onder. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, you had Mr. Goldman's quotes slightly off. You
quoted him as saying ``jackbooted Gestapo agents.'' No, he
called our hardworking men and women of ICE masked Gestapo
agents. With that kind of attitude toward Federal law
enforcement, no wonder in 2023 the Bureau of Prisons had a 21
percent unfilled position rate.
In 2022, the California Department of Corrections report
found that 34 percent of transgender offenders who requested
transfer to women's prisons were registered sex offenders. In
the U.K., that was more than 70 percent. California was
allowing men who were convicted of raping women to suddenly
identify as transgender and then be moved to women's prisons,
where many times they continued their abuse.
Female inmates like Dana Gray, who woke up in the middle of
the night to a 6,1" male roommate pushing his intact genitalia
in her face. Alissa Kamholz as a child was routinely raped by
her stepfather and his Hells Angels buddies. She eventually was
convicted and sentenced to prison under the Three Strikes Act,
and she referred to prison--Federal prison as her safe space
where men couldn't hurt her anymore. Then--I'm sorry,
California prison. That was until one of the men who was among
the abusers was placed in her room at Central California
Women's Facility. The same prison had placed condoms in every
day room.
The issue of men and women's prisons, the United States is
behind the times. In the U.K. in 2023, there was a reversal of
course and the U.K. banned so-called transgender women who have
male genitalia from being placed in women's prisons. During the
debate in the U.K., a prison manager was on record saying that
the majority of transgender women, so-called, began identifying
as trans-
gender after they interacted with the criminal justice system.
You would think that the 2003 law, the Prison Rape
Elimination Act would protect female inmates from male abusers.
The Obama Administration perversely used this very law as
authority when he introduced a policy through the Transgender
Offender Manual that required an inmate's transgender status to
be considered when deciding whether to place them in a women's
prison.
The Biden-Harris Administration further abused the intent
of PREA by his new version of the Transgender Offender Manual
that allowed inmates to receive hormone therapy sex transition
surgeries and other medical treatment related to their gender
identity. At a time when we have a $36 trillion debt and a
deficit over $1.5 trillion a year, the Biden-Harris
Administration is paying for sex change operations in our
Federal prisons.
I would ask each of you, in your opinion, first Mr. Potter,
does allowing men identifying as women to serve in women's
prisons make prison rape more or less likely?
Mr. Potter. I would only be able to guess on that and say
more likely, I would assume.
Mr. Onder. Yes. Thank you. Do you believe women in Federal
prisons deserve to be protected from prison rape under PREA?
Mr. Potter. Absolutely.
Mr. Onder. Same question for you, Mr. Purtill. In your
opinion, does allowing men who identify as women to serve in
women's prisons make prison rape more or less likely?
Mr. Purtill. Well, as I said earlier, I think it makes--it
places women in a much more vulnerable position, whether it's
physical violence, sexual violence--
Mr. Onder. In your opinion--
Mr. Purtill. As you heard today, there are so many issues
facing the Bureau of Prisons, this population is infinitesimal.
Mr. Onder. Right. It's a small population. At the same
time, one offender, one convicted rapist being released into a
women's prison among inmates who are smaller, more vulnerable,
less muscle mass and so on could do a lot of damage even though
it's a relatively small problem?
Mr. Purtill. Yes. No, I agree. I didn't mean to minimize
it.
Mr. Onder. Yes, no, I know you're not. Again, our
Democratic colleagues do minimize the problem, oh, it's only X
number of people. They're about--well over 2,000 inmates who
identify as transgender in the Federal prison system. Not all
of them are men in women's prisons by any means, but the
potential is there.
I believe it's not--our Democratic colleagues say somehow--
they're implying somehow we Republicans are obsessed with this
issue. They began it under Obama, they continued it under
Biden. We're returning to sanity under President Trump.
Thank you very much for your testimony. I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. The gentleman yields back. I recognize the
Ranking Member of the Committee, Ms. Crockett, from Texas.
Ms. Crockett. Mr. Chair, before I begin, I've got two UCs:
``Video shows masked ICE agents detain two outside Douglas
County Courthouse,'' and ``ICE Agents in Ski Masks Snatch
Migrant Out of Lawyer's Car.''
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Ms. Crockett. Thank you so much.
Mr. Biggs. Mr. Chair, I have a UC.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Mr. Biggs. The Department of Justice statement by Colette
S. Peters, Director of Federal Bureau of Prisons, to this
Committee July 23, 2024.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Mr. Van Drew. I now recognize Ms. Crockett.
Ms. Crockett. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. OK. I don't
really know where to begin. We've got a lot of ground to cover
in about five minutes, so let's go. I've got three statements
that I want to know if you agree or disagree with, and I want
to just go down the row, yes or no. Does cutting pay typically
assist in recruiting a workforce, yes or no?
Mr. Milton. No.
Mr. Wilde. No.
Mr. Purtill. Generally, no.
Mr. Potter. No.
Ms. Crockett. Thank you. It sounds like a low IQ
implementation to me. Let's go to the next one. Does poor
working conditions assist with recruitment, yes or no?
Mr. Milton. No.
Mr. Wilde. No.
Mr. Purtill. No.
Mr. Potter. No.
Ms. Crockett. Sounds like another low IQ implementation to
me. Finally, I'm going to start with Mr. Potter because I don't
know how this is going to go. Does union busting help with
recruitment?
Mr. Potter. No.
Mr. Purtill. I know nothing about unions whatsoever. I'm
sorry.
Ms. Crockett. OK.
Mr. Wilde. I don't know anything about unions either.
Ms. Crockett. OK.
Mr. Milton. No.
Ms. Crockett. OK. So, again, another low IQ implementation.
I just want to be clear that the American people should
know that these are all Trump 2.0 policies. When we say that
he's failed, let me tell you, we've got receipts and those are
some of the receipts.
When we start talking about this pay, I think that we've
talked about the fact that there was up to a 25 percent cut in
recruitment bonuses--or retention bonuses, but I want to make
sure that people understand the numbers. I want you all to know
what the numbers are.
It looks like on average in 2023, the average CO for the
BOP made $57,000. Now, we're talking about potentially up to a
25 percent cut in that. Now, let's transpose that what they
don't want to talk about is what we did last week, which was
reconciliation, where in their bill they decided that they
wanted to add this big number as an increase for bonuses for
ICE agents. What that translates to was bonuses of
approximately $44,000 for each ICE agent.
We're talking about ICE agents getting an additional
$44,000 per person while, on average, when we talk about our
COs at the BOP only making 57,000 and talking about cutting up
to 25 percent of that and that is why we're outraged. That is
why we say that this is a joke, because you can't sit here and
continuously underfund an agency and then expect it to
overperform.
Let's talk about the underfunding. We have talked about
immigration for a reason, not because we think that it makes
sense to just talk about immigration all day every day. It
seems like our colleagues on the other side of the aisle want
to do it. It is relevant to this conversation. You know why?
Because, according to this particular document from The
Guardian, it says, as it relates to a partnership between BOP
and ICE, two agencies that have generally operated separately,
means people accused of civil immigration violations are being
imprisoned in harsh environments of the Federal penitentiaries
run by prison guards.
Right now, I believe that the most recent number that I had
was that they had approximately 700 people that were being held
for ICE within the Bureau of Prisons. Guess what? Do you think
they gave the BOP any extra dollars to be able to take care of
those folks? They didn't. I'll help you.
It says Congress provided no increase to the BOP's salaries
and expenses account in Fiscal Year 2024, despite the staffing
crisis that has been linked to prisoner deaths and a cascade of
operational problems at the agency.
We talked about rape, so let me get to rape. It seems like
it's a bit of hypocrisy, but that's not anything new to say
that you want to protect victims of rape and sexual assault and
then allow Trump to gut funding for the Prison Rape Elimination
Act Resource Center, a center that trains prison sexual assault
auditors, tracks the results of the Prison Rape Elimination Act
investigations, and provides resources to imprisoned sexual
abuse survivors.
My question is--and I ask everyone if you can answer--can
we all agree that rape and assault of prisoners is vile and
completely unacceptable?
Mr. Milton. I agree.
Mr. Wilde. I agree.
Mr. Purtill. Of course.
Mr. Potter. Absolutely.
Ms. Crockett. Thank you so much. The last thing that I'll
say is that, according to the BOP, there have been a total of
two individuals that have received gender-affirming surgery
while in the BOP custody. There has been a total of four that
were referred and were determined to be medically ineligible.
We're going to have all this talk and all these fights
about trans folk, and we're talking about literally two
surgeries. I'll yield.
Mr. Van Drew. The gentlelady yields. I will recognize the
gentleman from the great State of North Carolina, Congressman
Knott.
Mr. Knott. Thank you, Mr. Chair. In response to what we
just heard, I think that the discussion on immigration is
relevant for a number of reasons, many of which were not
mentioned by Ms. Crockett. It's by some estimates concluded
that the previous administration spent hundreds of billions of
dollars on illegal immigration. The discussion that we are
having today centers on $10-, $20-, maybe even $30 billion.
The previous administration spent money on educating,
transporting, medicating, housing illegal immigrants at the
taxpayers' expense, and as we now know, the Bureau of Prisons
expense. It's a disgrace. You all are due more funding, sure.
Illegal immigrants are due far less funding.
One of the points that I'm hearing over and over and over
today is the point about the need to rehabilitate. While that
is certainly one consideration that we should all be focused
on, perhaps the main point of consideration that the Bureau of
Prisons is there to protect the American citizens from
dangerous criminals. Yes, rehabilitation of the criminal is
key, but protection of the public is first and foremost.
To that end, one of the unfortunate realities that we have
in this country is that we have a tremendous crime problem.
Just as one example, in the year 1990, just 4,500 people died
because of drug overdoses. Depending on which statistics you
look at, averaging it out, sometimes it's up to 125,000-130,000
people have died from drug overdoses from the years 2020-2024.
Whether it's gangs, cartels, or other organized criminal
organizations, they have, in large part, arrived here and
embedded themselves in the country because of the open border
welcomed approach to illegal immigrants that the Democratic
Party has championed.
As a Federal prosecutor, I saw that the crime not only was
exacerbated outside of jails; I saw the crime reach far inside
of jails as well. I know that you all need no education when
discussing the dangers that criminal gangs and organizations
pose inside and outside of jails.
My question is, Mr. Purtill, to you first. How can we
assist the BOP in combatting the ongoing criminal activity
inside the Bureau of Prisons, specifically as it relates to an
ongoing connection to outside organizations? When I was
sentencing people, there was often no interruption in criminal
activity, whether it's cell phones, bribing prison officers,
whatever it may be.
What can we do to assist you or the BOP in stopping
criminal activity once someone is sentenced?
Mr. Purtill. Well, I think that Mr. Potter might be better
equipped to answer that question.
Mr. Knott. He's getting it next.
Mr. Purtill. Good. I will definitely take a crack at it.
Don't mean to dodge.
I do think that controlling--the key thing there is
controlling the communications process. That is how ongoing
criminal enterprises are still able to operate, even though
we've got people incarcerated in our facilities. I do think
that the porousness of some of our facilities to communications
devices is coming in, as well as contraband, many other forms
of contraband coming in, but those--the other forms of
contraband don't really get to the issue that you're talking
about in the same way as the continuing activity.
It's really the communications piece, and I think that's a
combination of better security within the facilities. It's
probably technological fixes as well in terms of what you can
do in terms of signal damping and things like that.
Mr. Knott. Sure. Mr. Potter, same question.
Mr. Potter. Yes. I would agree with everything that's been
said. There's a lot of mechanisms you can use to prevent
something from coming in and detected once it's in. The
staffing level makes a huge difference the way you monitor, the
way you track, the way you--
Mr. Knott. Does the danger that facility officers face
deter people from staying a long time? Does that make sense?
Does the threat inside the facility weaken the environment that
people are working in?
Mr. Potter. Yes. If it's more dangerous inside, of course,
it makes it much more--and the risk versus reward.
Mr. Knott. Yes.
Mr. Potter. You have to reward people in the right way if
you want them to come into that.
Mr. Knott. Sure. If I could just get very quick answers.
What's the total amount of dollars that you think is needed to
fix the Bureau of Prisons? Not just the facilities, but total
repair.
Mr. Potter. I would not have a guess. Billions.
Mr. Knott. $10 billion, $15 billion?
Mr. Potter. I wouldn't have a guess.
Mr. Knott. How about you?
Mr. Purtill. It would be a genuine guess.
Mr. Knott. Just give me a guess.
Mr. Purtill. We know we've got $3 billion in deferred
facilities costs, so that's baked into the cake. We know that
we've got 4,000-6,000 full-time employment positions that
aren't filled.
Mr. Knott. $10 billion?
Mr. Purtill. In all honesty, I would have to--I couldn't
even hazard a guess, but I do think that there's--even
realigning what we currently do in spending, I think there's a
lot of good things that can be accomplished.
Mr. Knott. Sure. Mr. Wilde, I don't mean to jump over you,
but I'm assuming you don't have an answer for that.
Mr. Milton, if I can get one answer, what's the number that
you would put?
Mr. Milton. I fall into the same category. I don't know
that I'm in position to give a number, but I do know that it
takes significant investment.
Mr. Knott. Mr. Speaker, I yield back.
Mr. Van Drew. The gentleman yields. I recognize, last but
not least, by any means, the gentleman from the great State of
Texas, Mr. Gill.
Mr. Gill. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to the witnesses
for being here and testifying and taking the time.
Mr. Purtill, thank you as well. I want to start with you.
Given the decline in personnel across BOP facilities, and we've
got nearly 4,000 vacancies, do you believe it was a wise
decision for the previous administration to put any resources
at all toward gender-
affirming care for BOP inmates?
Mr. Purtill. As I said earlier, I think that it's such a
small percentage of the population, it's not the core issues
that BOP is facing.
Mr. Gill. Right. I certainly believe it's not a core issue
we should be spending money toward.
Is it also the case that the BOP facilities are
experiencing widespread deterioration and are in need of
maintenance?
Mr. Purtill. Yes. According to the attorney general's
inspector--the department's Inspector General, literally every
single facility faces deferred expenses--deferred maintenance
expenses.
Mr. Gill. Do you think that there's additional stress that
comes with perhaps some of the logistical challenges and safety
concerns of housing transgender and inmates with the opposite
sex, and perhaps maybe that contributed to some of the low
retention rates and hiring rates experienced at the BOP?
Mr. Purtill. In all honesty, I couldn't say. Once again, I
think that there's so many issues that go into the staffing
issue. Did it play a part? Very well could have. There are so
many factors there.
Mr. Gill. What about some of the antilaw enforcement
rhetoric that we hear on the other side of the aisle, including
from the former Vice President who once praised the defund the
police movement, do you think that has contributed at all to
some of the staffing challenges at BOP?
Mr. Purtill. Well, the fact that law enforcement,
prosecutors, and corrections officers, that there's been an
unfortunate trend, we've seen it in law school recruiting for
prosecutors, that there's been an unfortunate trend to kind of
demonize the entire field. Regardless of wherever that has come
from, that has been harmful. It's unfair to the people who go
into that line of work.
Mr. Gill. What role do you think DOGE can play in
identifying waste and fraud at the BOP?
Mr. Purtill. That is beyond my ken. I'm so sorry.
Mr. Gill. Any guesses?
Mr. Purtill. Well, as I tell my kids, as with any very,
very large institution there's going to be waste and fraud,
even when vast majority of people are working in good faith. It
never hurts. It's always good to pop the hood and check the oil
and take a look at what's going on.
That the DOGE process could--it may turn out to be very,
very beneficial. A lot of it is going to be able to inform you
in your oversight activities to make decisions going forward.
Mr. Gill. Got it. Thank you very much.
Mr. Chair, with that, I'll yield the remainder of my time
back to you.
Mr. Van Drew. I thank you. With that little bit of time,
first, I really do appreciate you all being here. It's a long,
long day. I didn't even give you a chance for a break and I
probably should have. I was remiss, but it was--because now
we're done.
Second, I'll say as I did before, I hope that we can move
forward in some areas, in some ways, find common ground.
Third, and the one thing I will mention with the little bit
of time left, I've actually interviewed some corrections
officers at multiple locations who have come to me in my
office. I wouldn't call them whistleblowers because they didn't
trigger the Whistleblower Act, but told me stories saying that
there's like one or two people in the whole country with
transgender issues. They're still doing intake. It cost a lot
of money on those that want to change their sex, that want to
be transgender. This is from corrections officers who directly
work there, who have good reputations whom I know were
explaining what's going on.
First, that costs money. Second, the other issue and the
reason that it costs money is because, as you know, I
mentioned--in fact, my facility back home has to cater to some
of that because when they mix with the rest of the population,
unfortunately, there are issues for them, for their own
security and safety. It makes things more complicated. It makes
issues--more violence is prone to happen. It also costs more
because of the specialization they need, both medical, if they
go through it all the way, as well as correctional; in other
words, they need more protection, and they need to have special
status and special help.
So, yes, it does cost money. No, it's not just like one
person in all 50 States. It's not. In fact, if you talk to most
of them, almost any facility will tell you some of the issues
they're having with that.
The real issue is--I don't know how else to say--I'm not
saying they should be, but they still have their desires very
often, and it really is tough on the women. If we care about
women, then we should care about this issue and some of the
terrible things that are happening.
With that, it concludes today--
Ms. Crockett. Mr. Chair, I have two UCs. I'm sorry. The
first one, I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record an
article, ``Transgender inmates are more likely to be victims of
sexual assault.'' This was by CBS News.
Mr. Van Drew. That's true.
Ms. Crockett. To the extent of 35 percent of the victims of
rape are transgender inmates.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Ms. Crockett. Then the final one is courtesy of Mr. Wilde.
This is from prisonfellowship.org. Prison Fellowship, the
Nation's largest Christian nonprofit serving prisoners, former
prisoners, and their families is applauding a major funding
increase for PREA, which as of now, this administration has
actually defunded all the PREA resource centers.
Mr. Van Drew. Without objection.
Their care costs a lot, protecting them costs a lot because
they are apt to have this problem, and in some cases preventing
a certain percentage of them from doing harm costs a lot.
With that, it concludes today's hearing. We thank our
witnesses for appearing before the Committee today.
Without objection, all Members will have five legislative
days to submit additional written questions for the record, and
witnesses, or additional materials can be recorded as well.
Without objection, this hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:43 p.m., the Subcommittees adjourned.]
All materials submitted for the record by the Members of
the Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance
and the Subcommittee on Oversight can be found at: https://
docs.house .gov/Committee/Calendar/ByEvent.aspx?EventID=118184.