[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 22, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H4302-H4319]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FORMERLY INCARCERATED REENTER SOCIETY TRANSFORMED SAFELY TRANSITIONING
EVERY PERSON ACT
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 5682) to provide for programs to help reduce the risk that
prisoners will recidivate upon release from prison, and for other
purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H. R. 5682
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Formerly
Incarcerated Reenter Society Transformed Safely Transitioning
Every Person Act'' or the ``FIRST STEP Act''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
TITLE I--RECIDIVISM REDUCTION
Sec. 101. Risk and needs assessment system.
Sec. 102. Implementation of system and recommendations by Bureau of
Prisons.
Sec. 103. GAO Report.
Sec. 104. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 105. Rule of construction.
Sec. 106. Faith-based considerations.
TITLE II--BUREAU OF PRISONS SECURE FIREARMS STORAGE
Sec. 201. Short title.
Sec. 202. Secure firearms storage.
TITLE III--RESTRAINTS ON PREGNANT PRISONERS PROHIBITED
Sec. 301. Use of restraints on prisoners during the period of pregnancy
and postpartum recovery prohibited.
TITLE IV--MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Sec. 401. Placement of prisoners close to families.
Sec. 402. Home confinement for low risk prisoners.
Sec. 403. Federal prisoner reentry initiative reauthorization;
modification of imposed term of imprisonment.
Sec. 404. Identification for returning citizens.
Sec. 405. Expanding inmate employment through Federal prison
industries.
Sec. 406. De-escalation training.
Sec. 407. Evidence-based treatment for opioid and heroin abuse.
Sec. 408. Pilot programs.
Sec. 409. Ensuring supervision of released sexually dangerous persons.
Sec. 410. Data collection.
Sec. 411. Healthcare products.
Sec. 412. Prison rape elimination standards auditors.
Sec. 413. Adult and juvenile collaboration programs.
TITLE I--RECIDIVISM REDUCTION
SEC. 101. RISK AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT SYSTEM.
(a) In General.--Chapter 229 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after subchapter C the
following:
``SUBCHAPTER D--RISK AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT SYSTEM
``Sec.
``3631. Duties of the Attorney General.
``3632. Development of risk and needs assessment system.
``3633. Evidence-based recidivism reduction program and
recommendations.
``3634. Report.
``3635. Definitions.
``Sec. 3631. Duties of the Attorney General
``(a) In General.--The Attorney General shall carry out
this subchapter in consultation with--
``(1) the Director of the Bureau of Prisons;
``(2) the Director of the Administrative Office of the
United States Courts;
``(3) the Director of the Office of Probation and Pretrial
Services;
``(4) the Director of the National Institute of Justice;
and
``(5) the Director of the National Institute of
Corrections.
``(b) Duties.--The Attorney General shall--
``(1) conduct a review of the existing prisoner risk and
needs assessment systems in operation on the date of the
enactment of the FIRST STEP Act;
``(2) develop recommendations regarding evidence-based
recidivism reduction programs and productive activities in
accordance with section 3633;
[[Page H4303]]
``(3) conduct ongoing research and data analysis on--
``(A) evidence-based recidivism reduction programs relating
to the use of prisoner risk and needs assessment tools;
``(B) the most effective and efficient uses of such
programs;
``(C) which evidence-based recidivism reduction programs
are the most effective at reducing recidivism, and the type,
amount, and intensity of programming that most effectively
reduces the risk of recidivism; and
``(D) products purchased by Federal agencies that are
manufactured overseas and could be manufactured by prisoners
participating in a prison work program without reducing job
opportunities for other workers in the United States;
``(4) on an annual basis, review and validate the risk and
needs assessment system, which review shall include--
``(A) any subsequent changes to the risk and needs
assessment system made after the date of the enactment of
this subchapter;
``(B) the recommendations developed under paragraph (2),
using the research conducted under paragraph (3);
``(C) an evaluation to ensure that the risk and needs
assessment system bases the assessment of each prisoner's
risk of recidivism on indicators of progress, and of
regression that are dynamic and that can reasonably be
expected to change while in prison;
``(D) statistical validation of any tools that the risk and
needs assessment system uses; and
``(E) an evaluation of the rates of recidivism among
similarly classified prisoners to identify any unwarranted
disparities, including disparities among similarly classified
prisoners of different demographic groups, in such rates;
``(5) make any revisions or updates to the risk and needs
assessment system that the Attorney General determines
appropriate pursuant to the review under paragraph (4),
including updates to ensure that any disparities identified
in paragraph (4)(E) are reduced to the greatest extent
possible; and
``(6) report to Congress in accordance with section 3634.
``Sec. 3632. Development of risk and needs assessment system
``(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of the enactment of the FIRST STEP Act, the Attorney General
shall develop and release a risk and needs assessment system
(referred to in this subchapter as the `System'), which shall
be used to--
``(1) determine the recidivism risk of each prisoner as
part of the intake process, and classify each prisoner as
having minimum, low, medium, or high risk for recidivism;
``(2) assess and determine, to the extent practicable, the
risk of violent or serious misconduct of each prisoner;
``(3) determine the type, amount, and intensity of
evidence-based recidivism reduction programs that are
appropriate for each prisoner and assign each prisoner to
such programs accordingly, and based on the prisoner's
specific criminogenic needs, and in accordance with
subsection (b);
``(4) reassess the recidivism risk of each prisoner
periodically and reassign the prisoner to appropriate
evidence-based recidivism reduction programs or productive
activities based on the revised determination to ensure
that--
``(A) all prisoners at each risk level have a meaningful
opportunity to reduce their classification during the period
of incarceration;
``(B) to address the specific criminogenic needs of the
prisoner; and
``(C) all prisoners are able to successfully participate in
such programs;
``(5) determine when to provide incentives and rewards for
successful participation in evidence-based recidivism
reduction programs or productive activities in accordance
with subsection (e); and
``(6) determine when a prisoner is ready to transfer into
prerelease custody in accordance with section 3624(c).
In carrying out this subsection, the Attorney General may use
existing risk and needs assessment tools, as appropriate.
``(b) Assignment of Evidence-based Recidivism Reduction
Programs.--The System shall provide guidance on the type,
amount, and intensity of evidence-based recidivism reduction
programming and productive activities that shall be assigned
for each prisoner, including--
``(1) programs in which the Bureau of Prisons shall assign
the prisoner to participate, according to the prisoner's
specific criminogenic needs; and
``(2) information on the best ways that the Bureau of
Prisons can tailor the programs to the specific criminogenic
needs of each prisoner so as to most effectively lower each
prisoner's risk of recidivism.
``(c) Housing and Assignment Decisions.--The System shall
provide guidance on program grouping and housing assignment
determinations and, after accounting for the safety of each
prisoner and other individuals at the prison, provide that
prisoners with a similar risk level be grouped together in
housing and assignment decisions to the extent practicable.
``(d) Evidence-based Recidivism Reduction Program
Incentives and Productive Activities Rewards.--The System
shall provide incentives and rewards for prisoners to
participate in and complete evidence-based recidivism
reduction programs as follows:
``(1) Phone and visitation privileges.--A prisoner who is
successfully participating in an evidence-based recidivism
reduction program shall receive--
``(A) phone privileges, or, if available, video
conferencing privileges, for up to 30 minutes per day, and up
to 510 minutes per month; and
``(B) additional time for visitation at the prison, as
determined by the warden of the prison.
``(2) Transfer to institution closer to release
residence.--A prisoner who is successfully participating in
an evidence-based recidivism reduction program shall be
considered by the Bureau of Prisons for placement in a
facility closer to the prisoner's release residence upon
request from the prisoner and subject to--
``(A) bed availability at the transfer facility;
``(B) the prisoner's security designation; and
``(C) the recommendation from the warden of the prison at
which the prisoner is incarcerated at the time of making the
request.
``(3) Additional policies.--The Director of the Bureau of
Prisons shall develop additional policies to provide
appropriate incentives for successful participation and
completion of evidence-based recidivism reduction
programming. Such incentives shall include not less than two
of the following:
``(A) Increased commissary spending limits and product
offerings.
``(B) Extended opportunities to access the email system.
``(C) Consideration of transfer to preferred housing units
(including transfer to different prison facilities).
``(D) Other incentives solicited from prisoners and
determined appropriate by the Director.
``(4) Time credits.--
``(A) In general.--A prisoner, except for an ineligible
prisoner under subparagraph (D), who successfully completes
evidence-based recidivism reduction programming or productive
activities, shall earn time credits as follows:
``(i) A prisoner shall earn 10 days of time credits for
every 30 days of successful participation in evidence-based
recidivism reduction programming or productive activities.
``(ii) A prisoner determined by the Bureau of Prisons to be
at a minimum or low risk for recidivating, who, over two
consecutive assessments, has not increased their risk of
recidivism, shall earn an additional 5 days of time credits
for every 30 days of successful participation in evidence-
based recidivism reduction programming or productive
activities.
``(B) Availability.--A prisoner may not earn time credits
under this paragraph for an evidence-based recidivism
reduction program that the prisoner successfully completed--
``(i) prior to the date of the enactment of this Act;
``(ii) during official detention prior to the date that the
prisoner's sentence commences under section 3585(a); or
``(iii) if that prisoner is an inadmissible or deportable
alien under the immigration laws (as such term is defined in
section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1101)).
``(C) Application of time credits toward pre-release
custody.--Time credits earned under this paragraph by
prisoners who successfully participate in recidivism
reduction programs or productive activities and who have been
determined to be at minimum risk or low risk for recidivating
pursuant to their last two reassessments shall be applied
toward time in pre-release custody. The Director of the
Bureau of Prisons shall transfer prisoners described in this
subparagraph into prerelease custody, except that the
Director of the Bureau of Prisons may deny such a transfer if
the warden of the prison finds by clear and convincing
evidence that the prisoner should not be transferred into
prerelease custody based only on evidence of the prisoner's
actions after the conviction of such prisoner and not based
on evidence from the underlying conviction, and submits a
detailed written statement regarding such finding to the
Director of the Bureau of Prisons.
``(D) Ineligible prisoners.--A prisoner is ineligible to
receive time credits under this paragraph if the prisoner is
serving a sentence for a conviction under any of the
following provisions of law:
``(i) Section 113(a)(1), relating to assault with intent to
commit murder.
``(ii) Section 115, relating to influencing, impeding, or
retaliating against a Federal official by injuring a family
member, except for a threat made in violation of that
section.
``(iii) Any section of chapter 10, relating to biological
weapons.
``(iv) Any section of chapter 11B, relating to chemical
weapons.
``(v) Section 351, relating to Congressional, Cabinet, and
Supreme Court assassination, kidnapping, and assault.
``(vi) Section 793, relating to gathering, transmitting, or
losing defense information.
``(vii) Section 794, relating to gathering or delivering
defense information to aid a foreign government.
``(viii) Any section of chapter 39, relating to explosives
and other dangerous articles, except for section 836
(relating to the transportation of fireworks into a State
prohibiting sale or use).
``(ix) Section 842(p), relating to distribution of
information relating to explosive, destructive devices, and
weapons of mass destruction, but only if the conviction
involved a weapon of mass destruction (as defined in section
2332a(c)(2) of such title).
[[Page H4304]]
``(x) Subsection (f)(3), (h), or (i) of section 844,
relating to the use of fire or an explosive.
``(xi) Section 924(e), relating to unlawful possession of a
firearm by a person with 3 or more convictions for a violent
felony.
``(xii) Section 1030(a)(1), relating to fraud and related
activity in connection with computers.
``(xiii) Any section of chapter 51, relating to homicide,
except for section 1112 (relating to manslaughter), 1113
(relating to attempt to commit murder or manslaughter, but
only if the conviction was for an attempt to commit
manslaughter), 1115 (relating to misconduct or neglect of
ship officers), or 1122 (relating to protection against the
human immunodeficiency virus).
``(xiv) Any section of chapter 55, relating to kidnapping.
``(xv) Any offense under chapter 77, relating to peonage,
slavery, and trafficking in persons, except for sections 1592
through 1596.
``(xvi) Section 1751, relating to Presidential and
Presidential staff assassination, kidnapping, and assault.
``(xvii) Section 1841(a)(2)(C), relating to intentionally
killing or attempting to kill an unborn child.
``(xviii) Section 1992, relating to terrorist attacks and
other violence against railroad carriers and against mass
transportation systems on land, on water, or through the air.
``(xix) Section 2113(e), relating to bank robbery resulting
in death.
``(xx) Section 2118(c)(2), relating to robberies and
burglaries involving controlled substances resulting in
death.
``(xxi) Section 2119(3), relating to taking a motor vehicle
(commonly referred to as `carjacking') that results in death.
``(xxii) Any section of chapter 105, relating to sabotage,
except for section 2152.
``(xxiii) Any section of chapter 109A, relating to sexual
abuse, except that with regard to section 2244, only a
conviction under subsection (c) of that section (relating to
abusive sexual contact involving young children) shall make a
prisoner ineligible under this subparagraph.
``(xxiv) Section 2251, relating to the sexual exploitation
of children.
``(xxv) Section 2251A, relating to the selling or buying of
children.
``(xxvi) Any of paragraphs (1) through (3) of section
2252(a), relating to certain activities relating to material
involving the sexual exploitation of minors.
``(xxvii) A second or subsequent conviction under any of
paragraphs (1) through (6) of section 2252A(a), relating to
certain activities relating to material constituting or
containing child pornography.
``(xxviii) Section 2260, relating to the production of
sexually explicit depictions of a minor for importation into
the United States.
``(xxix) Section 2283, relating to the transportation of
explosive, biological, chemical, or radioactive or nuclear
materials.
``(xxx) Section 2284, relating to the transportation of
terrorists.
``(xxxi) Section 2291, relating to the destruction of a
vessel or maritime facility, but only if the conduct which
led to the conviction involved a substantial risk of death or
serious bodily injury.
``(xxxii) Any section of chapter 113B, relating to
terrorism.
``(xxxiii) Section 2340A, relating to torture.
``(xxxiv) Section 2381, relating to treason.
``(xxxv) Section 2442, relating to the recruitment or use
of child soldiers.
``(xxxvi) Section 57(b) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954
(42 U.S.C. 2077(b)), relating to the engagement or
participation in the development or production of special
nuclear material.
``(xxxvii) Section 92 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42
U.S.C. 2122), relating to prohibitions governing atomic
weapons.
``(xxxviii) Section 101 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954
(42 U.S.C. 2131), relating to the atomic energy license
requirement.
``(xxxix) Section 224 or 225 of the Atomic Energy Act of
1954 (42 U.S.C. 2274, 2275), relating to the communication or
receipt of restricted data.
``(xl) Section 236 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42
U.S.C. 2284), relating to the sabotage of nuclear facilities
or fuel.
``(xli) Section 60123(b) of title 49, United States Code,
relating to damaging or destroying a pipeline facility, but
only if the conduct which led to the conviction involved a
substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
``(xlii) Section 401(a) of the Controlled Substances Act
(21 U.S.C. 841), relating to manufacturing or distributing a
controlled substance, but only in the case of a conviction
for an offense described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of
subsection (b)(1) of that section for which death or serious
bodily injury resulted from the use of such substance.
``(xliii) Section 276(a) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1326), relating to the reentry of a removed
alien, but only if the alien is described in paragraph (1) or
(2) of subsection (b) of that section.
``(xliv) Any section of the Export Administration Act of
1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2401 et seq.)
``(xlv) Section 206 of the International Emergency Economic
Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1705).
``(xlvi) Section 601 of the National Security Act of 1947
(50 U.S.C. 3121), relating to the protection of identities of
certain United States undercover intelligence officers,
agents, informants, and sources.
``(xlvii) An offense described in section 3559(c)(2)(F),
for which the offender was sentenced to a term of
imprisonment of more than one year, if the offender has a
previous conviction, for which the offender served a term of
imprisonment of more than one year, for a Federal or State
offense, by whatever designation and wherever committed,
consisting of murder (as described in section 1111),
voluntary manslaughter (as described in section 1112),
assault with intent to commit murder (as described in section
113(a)), aggravated sexual abuse and sexual abuse (as
described in sections 2241 and 2242), abusive sexual contact
(as described in sections 2244(a)(1) and (a)(2)), kidnapping
(as described in chapter 55), carjacking (as described in
section 2119), arson (as described in section 844(f)(3), (h),
or (i)), or terrorism (as described in chapter 113B).
``(xlviii) Section 2118(c)(2) of title 18, United States
Code, relating to robberies and burglaries involving
controlled substances resulting in death.
``(5) Risk reassessments and level adjustment.--A prisoner
who successfully participates in evidence-based recidivism
reduction programming or productive activities shall receive
periodic risk reassessments not less often than annually, and
a prisoner determined to be at a medium or high risk of
recidivating and who has less than 5 years until his or her
projected release date shall receive more frequent risk
reassessments. If the reassessment shows that the prisoner's
risk of recidivating or specific needs have changed, the
Bureau of Prisons shall update the determination of the
prisoner's risk of recidivating or information regarding the
prisoner's specific needs and reassign the prisoner to
appropriate evidence-based recidivism reduction programming
or productive activities based on such changes.
``(6) Relation to other incentive programs.--The incentives
described in this subsection shall be in addition to any
other rewards or incentives for which a prisoner may be
eligible.
``(e) Penalties.--The Director of the Bureau of Prisons
shall develop guidelines for the reduction of rewards and
incentives earned under subsection (e) for prisoners who
violate prison rules or evidence-based recidivism reduction
program or productive activity rules, which shall provide--
``(1) general levels of violations and resulting
reductions;
``(2) that any reduction that includes the loss of time
credits shall require written notice to the prisoner, shall
be limited to time credits that a prisoner earned as of the
date of the prisoner's rule violation, and shall not include
any future time credits that the prisoner may earn; and
``(3) for a procedure to restore time credits that a
prisoner lost as a result of a rule violation based on the
prisoner's individual progress after the date of the rule
violation.
``(f) Bureau of Prisons Training.--The Attorney General
shall develop and implement training programs for Bureau of
Prisons officers and employees responsible for administering
the System, which shall include--
``(1) initial training to educate officers and employees on
how to use the System in an appropriate and consistent
manner, as well as the reasons for using the System;
``(2) continuing education;
``(3) periodic training updates; and
``(4) a requirement that such officers and employees
demonstrate competence in administering the System, including
interrater reliability, on a biannual basis.
``(g) Quality Assurance.--In order to ensure that the
Bureau of Prisons is using the System in an appropriate and
consistent manner, the Attorney General shall monitor and
assess the use of the System, which shall include conducting
annual audits of the Bureau of Prisons regarding the use of
the System.
``Sec. 3633. Evidence-based recidivism reduction program and
recommendations
``Prior to releasing the System, the Attorney General
shall--
``(1) review the effectiveness of evidence-based recidivism
reduction programs that exist as of the date of the enactment
of this subchapter in prisons operated by the Bureau of
Prisons;
``(2) review available information regarding the
effectiveness of evidence-based recidivism reduction programs
and productive activities that exist in State-operated
prisons throughout the United States;
``(3) identify the most effective evidence-based recidivism
reduction programs;
``(4) review the policies for entering into evidence-based
recidivism reduction partnerships described in section
3621(h)(5); and
``(5) direct the Bureau of Prisons regarding--
``(A) evidence-based recidivism reduction programs;
``(B) the ability for faith-based organizations to function
as a provider of educational evidence-based programs outside
of the religious classes and services provided through the
Chaplaincy; and
``(C) the addition of any new effective evidence-based
recidivism reduction programs that the Attorney General
finds.
``Sec. 3634. Report
``Beginning on the date that is two years after the date of
the enactment of this subchapter, and annually thereafter for
a period of 5 years, the Attorney General shall submit a
report to the Committees on the Judiciary of the Senate and
the House of Representatives and the Subcommittees on
Commerce,
[[Page H4305]]
Justice, Science, and Related Agencies of the Committees on
Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives
that contains the following:
``(1) A summary of the activities and accomplishments of
the Attorney General in carrying out this Act.
``(2) A summary and assessment of the types and
effectiveness of the evidence-based recidivism reduction
programs and productive activities in prisons operated by the
Bureau of Prisons, including--
``(A) evidence about which programs have been shown to
reduce recidivism;
``(B) the capacity of each program and activity at each
prison, including the number of prisoners along with the
recidivism risk of each prisoner enrolled in each program;
and
``(C) identification of any gaps or shortages in capacity
of such programs and activities.
``(3) Rates of recidivism among individuals who have been
released from Federal prison, based on the following
criteria:
``(A) The primary offense of conviction.
``(B) The length of the sentence imposed and served.
``(C) The Bureau of Prisons facility or facilities in which
the prisoner's sentence was served.
``(D) The evidence-based recidivism reduction programming
that the prisoner successfully completed, if any.
``(E) The prisoner's assessed and reassessed risk of
recidivism.
``(F) The productive activities that the prisoner
successfully completed, if any.
``(4) The status of prison work programs at facilities
operated by the Bureau of Prisons, including--
``(A) a strategy to expand the availability of such
programs without reducing job opportunities for workers in
the United States who are not in the custody of the Bureau of
Prisons, including the feasibility of prisoners manufacturing
products purchased by Federal agencies that are manufactured
overseas;
``(B) an assessment of the feasibility of expanding such
programs, consistent with the strategy required under
subparagraph (A), with the goal that 5 years after the date
of enactment of this Act, not less than 75 percent of
eligible minimum and low risk offenders have the opportunity
to participate in a prison work program for not less than 20
hours per week; and
``(C) a detailed discussion of legal authorities that would
be useful or necessary to achieve the goals described in
subparagraphs (A) and (B).
``(5) An assessment of the Bureau of Prisons' compliance
with section 3621(h).
``(6) An assessment of progress made toward carrying out
the purposes of this subchapter, including any savings
associated with--
``(A) the transfer of prisoners into prerelease custody
under section 3624(g) including savings resulting from the
avoidance or deferral of future construction, acquisition,
and operations costs; and
``(B) any decrease in recidivism that may be attributed to
the System or the increase in evidence-based recidivism
reduction programs required under chapter.
``(7) Recommendations for how to reinvest any savings into
other Federal, State, and local law enforcement activities
and evidence-based recidivism reduction programs in the
Bureau of Prisons.
``Sec. 3635. Definitions
``In this subchapter the following definitions apply:
``(1) Evidence-based recidivism reduction program.--The
term `evidence-based recidivism reduction program' means
either a group or individual activity that--
``(A) has been shown by empirical evidence to reduce
recidivism or is based on research indicating that it is
likely to be effective in reducing recidivism;
``(B) is designed to help prisoners succeed in their
communities upon release from prison; and
``(C) may include--
``(i) social learning and communication, interpersonal,
anti-bullying, rejection response, and other life skills;
``(ii) family relationship building, structured parent-
child interaction, and parenting skills;
``(iii) classes on morals or ethics;
``(iv) academic classes;
``(v) cognitive behavioral treatment;
``(vi) mentoring;
``(vii) substance abuse treatment;
``(viii) vocational training;
``(ix) faith-based classes or services;
``(x) civic engagement and reintegrative community
services;
``(xi) a prison job, including through a prison work
program;
``(xii) victim impact classes or other restorative justice
programs; and
``(xiii) trauma counseling and trauma-informed support
programs.
``(2) Prisoner.--The term `prisoner' means a person who has
been sentenced to a term of imprisonment pursuant to a
conviction for a Federal criminal offense, or a person in the
custody of the Bureau of Prisons.
``(3) Risk and needs assessment tool.--The term `risk and
needs assessment tool' means an objective and statistically
validated method through which information is collected and
evaluated to determine--
``(A) the risk that a prisoner will recidivate upon release
from prison; and
``(B) the recidivism reduction programs that will best
minimize the risk that the prisoner will recidivate upon
release from prison.
``(4) Productive activity.--The term `productive activity'
means either a group or individual activity that is designed
to allow prisoners determined as having a minimum or low risk
of recidivating to remain productive and thereby maintain a
minimum or low risk of recidivating, and may include the
delivery of the programs described in paragraph (1) to other
prisoners.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of subchapters for
chapter 229 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``D. Risk and Needs Assessment System.......................3631''.....
SEC. 102. IMPLEMENTATION OF SYSTEM AND RECOMMENDATIONS BY
BUREAU OF PRISONS.
(a) Implementation of System Generally.--Section 3621 of
title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end
the following:
``(h) Implementation of Risk and Needs Assessment
System.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the
Attorney General completes and releases the risk and needs
assessment system (referred to in this subsection as the
`System') developed under subchapter D, the Director of the
Bureau of Prisons shall, in accordance with that subchapter--
``(A) implement and complete the initial intake risk and
needs assessment for each prisoner (including for each
prisoner who was a prisoner prior to the effective date of
this subsection), regardless of the prisoner's length of
imposed term of imprisonment, and begin to assign prisoners
to appropriate evidence-based recidivism reduction programs
based on that determination;
``(B) begin to expand the effective evidence-based
recidivism reduction programs and productive activities it
offers and add any new evidence-based recidivism reduction
programs and productive activities necessary to effectively
implement the System; and
``(C) begin to implement the other risk and needs
assessment tools necessary to effectively implement the
System over time, while prisoners are participating in and
completing the effective evidence-based recidivism reduction
programs and productive activities.
``(2) Phase-in.--In order to carry out paragraph (1), so
that every prisoner has the opportunity to participate in and
complete the type, amount, and intensity of evidence-based
recidivism reduction programs or productive activities they
need, and be reassessed for recidivism risk as necessary to
effectively implement the System, the Bureau of Prisons
shall--
``(A) provide such evidence-based recidivism reduction
programs and productive activities for all prisoners before
the date that is 2 years after the date on which the Bureau
of Prisons completes a risk and needs assessment for each
prisoner under paragraph (1)(A); and
``(B) develop and validate the risk and needs assessment
tool to be used in the reassessments of risk of recidivism,
while prisoners are participating in and completing evidence-
based recidivism reduction programs and productive
activities.
``(3) Priority during phase-in.--During the 2-year period
described in paragraph (2)(A), the priority for such programs
and activities shall be accorded based on a prisoner's
proximity to release date.
``(4) Preliminary expansion of evidence-based recidivism
reduction programs and authority to use incentives.--
Beginning on the date of the enactment of the FIRST STEP Act,
the Bureau of Prisons may begin to expand any evidence-based
recidivism reduction programs and productive activities that
exist at a prison as of such date, and may offer to prisoners
who successfully participate in such programs and activities
the incentives and rewards described in subchapter D.
``(5) Recidivism reduction partnerships.--In order to
expand evidence-based recidivism reduction programs and
productive activities, the Attorney General shall develop
policies for the warden of each prison of the Bureau of
Prisons to enter into partnerships, subject to the
availability of appropriations, with any of the following:
``(A) Nonprofit and other private organizations, including
faith-based, art, and community-based organizations that will
deliver recidivism reduction programming on a paid or
volunteer basis.
``(B) Institutions of higher education (as defined in
section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1001) that will deliver instruction on a paid or volunteer
basis.
``(C) Private entities that will--
``(i) deliver vocational training and certifications;
``(ii) provide equipment to facilitate vocational training
or employment opportunities for prisoners;
``(iii) employ prisoners; or
``(iv) assist prisoners in prerelease custody or supervised
release in finding employment.
``(D) Industry-sponsored organizations that will deliver
workforce development and training, on a paid or volunteer
basis.
``(6) Requirement to provide programs to all prisoners;
priority.--The Director of the Bureau of Prisons shall
provide all prisoners with the opportunity to actively
participate in evidence-based recidivism reduction programs
or productive activities, according to their specific
criminogenic needs,
[[Page H4306]]
throughout their entire term of incarceration. Priority for
participation in recidivism reduction programs shall be given
to medium risk and high risk prisoners, with access to
productive activities given to minimum risk and low risk
prisoners.
``(7) Definitions.--The terms in this subsection have the
meaning given those terms in section 3635.''.
(b) Prerelease Custody.--
(1) In general.--Section 3624 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended--
(A) in subsection (b)(1)--
(i) by striking ``, beyond the time served, of up to 54
days at the end of each year of the prisoner's term of
imprisonment, beginning at the end of the first year of the
term,'' and inserting ``of up to 54 days for each year of the
prisoner's sentence imposed by the court,'';
(ii) by striking ``credit for the last year or portion of a
year of the term of imprisonment shall be prorated and
credited within the last six weeks of the sentence'' and
inserting ``credit for the last year of a term of
imprisonment shall be credited on the first day of the last
year of the term of imprisonment''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(g) Prerelease Custody for Risk and Needs Assessment
System Participants.--
``(1) Eligible prisoners.--This subsection applies in the
case of a prisoner (as such term is defined in section 3635)
who--
``(A) has earned time credits under the risk and needs
assessment system developed under subchapter D (referred to
in this subsection as the `System') in an amount that is
equal to the remainder of the prisoner's imposed term of
imprisonment;
``(B) has shown through the periodic risk reassessments a
demonstrated recidivism risk reduction or has maintained a
minimum or low recidivism risk, during the prisoner's term of
imprisonment;
``(C) has been classified by the warden of the prison as
otherwise qualified to be transferred into prerelease
custody; and
``(D)(i) has been determined under the System to be a
minimum or low risk to recidivate; or
``(ii) has had a petition to be transferred to prerelease
custody approved by the warden of the prison, after the
warden's determination that--
``(I) the prisoner would not be a danger to society if
transferred to prerelease custody;
``(II) the prisoner has made a good faith effort to lower
their recidivism risk through participation in recidivism
reduction programs or productive activities;
``(III) the prisoner is unlikely to recidivate; and
``(IV) the transfer of the prisoner to prerelease custody
is otherwise appropriate.
``(2) Types of prerelease custody.--A prisoner shall be
placed in prerelease custody as follows:
``(A) Home confinement.--
``(i) In general.--A prisoner placed in prerelease custody
pursuant to this subsection who is placed in home confinement
shall--
``(I) be subject to 24-hour electronic monitoring that
enables the prompt identification of the prisoner, location,
and time, in the case of any violation of subclause (II);
``(II) remain in the prisoner's residence, except that the
prisoner may leave the prisoner's home in order to, subject
to the approval of the Director of the Bureau of Prisons--
``(aa) perform a job or job-related activities, including
an apprenticeship, or participate in job-seeking activities;
``(bb) participate in evidence-based recidivism reduction
programming or productive activities assigned by the System,
or similar activities;
``(cc) perform community service;
``(dd) participate in crime victim restoration activities;
``(ee) receive medical treatment; or
``(ff) attend religious activities; and
``(III) comply with such other conditions as the Director
determines appropriate.
``(ii) Alternate means of monitoring.--If the electronic
monitoring of a prisoner described in clause (i)(I) is
infeasible for technical or religious reasons, the Director
of the Bureau of Prisons may use alternative means of
monitoring a prisoner placed in home confinement that the
Director determines are as effective or more effective than
the electronic monitoring described in clause (i)(I).
``(iii) Modifications.--The Director of the Bureau of
Prisons may modify the conditions described in clause (i) if
the Director determines that a compelling reason exists to do
so, and that the prisoner has demonstrated exemplary
compliance with such conditions.
``(iv) Duration.--Except as provided in paragraph (4), a
prisoner who is placed in home confinement shall remain in
home confinement until the prisoner has served not less than
85 percent of the prisoner's imposed term of imprisonment.
``(B) Residential reentry center.--A prisoner placed in
prerelease custody pursuant to this subsection who is placed
at a residential reentry center shall be subject to such
conditions as the Director of the Bureau of Prisons
determines appropriate.
``(3) Determination of conditions.--In determining
appropriate conditions for prisoners placed in prerelease
custody pursuant to this subsection, the Director of the
Bureau of Prisons shall, to the extent practicable, provide
that increasingly less restrictive conditions shall be
imposed on prisoners who demonstrate continued compliance
with the conditions of such prerelease custody, so as to most
effectively prepare such prisoners for reentry.
``(4) Violations of conditions.--If a prisoner violates a
condition of the prisoner's prerelease custody, the Director
of the Bureau of Prisons may impose such additional
conditions on the prisoner's prerelease custody as the
Director of the Bureau of Prisons determines appropriate, or
revoke the prisoner's prerelease custody and require the
prisoner to serve the remainder of the term of imprisonment
to which the prisoner was sentenced, or any portion thereof,
in prison.
``(5) Issuance of guidelines.--The Attorney General, in
consultation with the Assistant Director for the Office of
Probation and Pretrial Services, shall issue guidelines, for
use by the Bureau of Prisons in determining--
``(A) the appropriate type of prerelease custody and level
of supervision for a prisoner placed on prerelease custody
pursuant to this subsection; and
``(B) consequences for a violation of a condition of such
prerelease custody by such a prisoner, including a return to
prison and a reassessment of evidence-based recidivism risk
level under the System.
``(6) Agreements with united states probation and pretrial
services.--The Director of the Bureau of Prisons shall, to
the greatest extent practicable, enter into agreements with
United States Probation and Pretrial Services to supervise
prisoners placed in home confinement or community supervision
under this subsection. Such agreements shall--
``(A) authorize United States Probation and Pretrial
Services to exercise the authority granted to the Director
pursuant to paragraphs (3) and (4); and
``(B) take into account the resource requirements of United
States Probation and Pretrial Services as a result of the
transfer of Bureau of Prisons prisoners to prerelease
custody.
``(7) Assistance.--United States Probation and Pretrial
Services shall, to the greatest extent practicable, offer
assistance to any prisoner not under its supervision during
prerelease custody under this subsection.
``(8) Mentoring services.--Any prerelease custody into
which a prisoner is placed under this subsection may not
include a condition prohibiting the prisoner from receiving
mentoring services from a person who provided such services
to the prisoner while the prisoner was incarcerated, except
that the warden of the facility at which the prisoner was
incarcerated may waive the requirement under this paragraph
if the warden finds that the provision of such services would
pose a significant security risk to the prisoner, persons who
provide such services, or any other person. The warden shall
provide written notice of any such waiver to the person
providing mentoring services and to the prisoner.
``(9) Time limits inapplicable.--The time limits under
subsections (b) and (c) shall not apply to prerelease custody
under this subsection.''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection
shall take effect beginning on the date that the Attorney
General completes and releases the risk and needs assessment
system under subchapter D of chapter 229 of title 18, United
States Code.
(3) Applicability.--The amendments made by this subsection
shall apply with respect to offenses committed before, on, or
after the date of the enactment of this Act, except that such
amendments shall not apply with respect to offenses committed
before November 1, 1987.
SEC. 103. GAO REPORT.
Not later than 2 years after the Director of the Bureau of
Prisons implements the risk and needs assessment system under
section 3621 of title 18, United States Code, and every 2
years thereafter, the Comptroller General of the United
States shall conduct an audit of the use of the risk and
needs assessment system at Bureau of Prisons facilities. The
audit shall include analysis of the following:
(1) Whether inmates are being assessed under the risk and
needs assessment system with the frequency required under
such section 3621.
(2) Whether the Bureau of Prisons is able to offer
recidivism reduction programs and productive activities (as
such terms are defined in section 3635 of title 18, United
States Code).
(3) Whether the Bureau of Prisons is offering the type,
amount, and intensity of recidivism reduction programs and
productive activities for prisoners to earn the maximum
amount of time credits for which they are eligible.
(4) Whether the Attorney General is carrying out the duties
under section 3631(b) of title 18, United States Code.
(5) Whether officers and employees of the Bureau of Prisons
are receiving the training described in section 3236(f) of
title 18, United States Code.
(6) Whether the Bureau of Prisons offers work assignments
to all prisoners who might benefit from such an assignment.
(7) Whether the Bureau of Prisons transfers prisoners to
prerelease custody as soon as they are eligible for such a
transfer under section 3624(g) of title 18, United States
Code.
(8) The rates of recidivism among similarly classified
prisoners to identify any unwarranted disparities, including
disparities
[[Page H4307]]
among similarly classified prisoners of different demographic
groups, in such rates.
SEC. 104. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this title $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years
2019 through 2023. Of the amount appropriated under this
subsection, 80 percent shall be reserved for use by the
Director of the Bureau of Prisons to implement the system
under section 102 and the amendments made by that section.
(b) Savings.--It is the sense of Congress that any savings
associated with reductions in recidivism that result from
this title should be reinvested--
(1) into evidence-based recidivism reduction programs
offered by the Bureau of Prisons; and
(2) into ensuring eligible prisoners have access to such
programs and productive activities offered by the Bureau of
Prisons.
SEC. 105. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act,
may be construed to provide authority to place a prisoner in
prerelease custody who is serving a term of imprisonment
pursuant to a conviction for an offense under the laws of one
of the 50 States, or of a territory or possession of the
United States.
SEC. 106. FAITH-BASED CONSIDERATIONS.
In considering any program, treatment, regimen, group,
company, charity, person or entity of any kind under any
provision of this Act or the amendments made by this Act, the
fact that it may be or is faith-based may not be a basis for
any discrimination against it in any manner or for any
purpose.
TITLE II--BUREAU OF PRISONS SECURE FIREARMS STORAGE
SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Lieutenant Osvaldo
Albarati Correctional Officer Self-Protection Act of 2018''.
SEC. 202. SECURE FIREARMS STORAGE.
(a) In General.--Chapter 303 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 4050. Secure firearms storage
``(a) Definitions.--In this section--
``(1) the term `employee' means a qualified law enforcement
officer employed by the Bureau of Prisons; and
``(2) the terms `firearm' and `qualified law enforcement
officer' have the meanings given those terms under section
926B.
``(b) Secure Firearms Storage.--The Director of the Bureau
of Prisons shall ensure that each chief executive officer of
a Federal penal or correctional institution--
``(1)(A) provides a secure storage area located outside of
the secure perimeter of the institution for employees to
store firearms; or
``(B) allows employees to store firearms in a vehicle
lockbox approved by the Director of the Bureau of Prisons;
and
``(2) notwithstanding any other provision of law, allows
employees to carry concealed firearms on the premises outside
of the secure perimeter of the institution.''.
(b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of
sections for chapter 303 of title 18, United States Code, as
amended by this Act, is further amended by adding at the end
the following:
``4050. Secure firearms storage.''.
TITLE III--RESTRAINTS ON PREGNANT PRISONERS PROHIBITED
SEC. 301. USE OF RESTRAINTS ON PRISONERS DURING THE PERIOD OF
PREGNANCY AND POSTPARTUM RECOVERY PROHIBITED.
(a) In General.--Chapter 317 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 4321 the
following:
``Sec. 4322. Use of restraints on prisoners during the period
of pregnancy, labor, and postpartum recovery prohibited
``(a) Prohibition.--Except as provided in subsection (b),
beginning on the date on which pregnancy is confirmed by a
healthcare professional, and ending at the conclusion of
postpartum recovery, a prisoner in the custody of the Bureau
of Prisons, or in the custody of the United States Marshals
Service pursuant to section 4086, shall not be placed in
restraints.
``(b) Exceptions.--
``(1) In general.--The prohibition under subsection (a)
shall not apply if--
``(A) an appropriate corrections official, or a United
States marshal, as applicable, makes a determination that the
prisoner--
``(i) is an immediate and credible flight risk that cannot
reasonably be prevented by other means; or
``(ii) poses an immediate and serious threat of harm to
herself or others that cannot reasonably be prevented by
other means; or
``(B) a healthcare professional responsible for the health
and safety of the prisoner determines that the use of
restraints is appropriate for the medical safety of the
prisoner.
``(2) Least restrictive restraints.--In the case that
restraints are used pursuant to an exception under paragraph
(1), only the least restrictive restraints necessary to
prevent the harm or risk of escape described in paragraph (1)
may be used.
``(3) Application.--
``(A) In general.--The exceptions under paragraph (1) may
not be applied--
``(i) to place restraints around the ankles, legs, or waist
of a prisoner;
``(ii) to restrain a prisoner's hands behind her back;
``(iii) to restrain a prisoner using four-point restraints;
or
``(iv) to attach a prisoner to another prisoner.
``(B) Medical request.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), upon
the request of a healthcare professional who is responsible
for the health and safety of a prisoner, a corrections
official or United States marshal, as applicable, shall
refrain from using restraints on the prisoner or remove
restraints used on the prisoner.
``(c) Reports.--
``(1) Report to the director and healthcare professional.--
If a corrections official or United States marshal uses
restraints on a prisoner under subsection (b)(1), that
official or marshal shall submit, not later than 30 days
after placing the prisoner in restraints, to the Director of
the Bureau of Prisons or the Director of the United States
Marshals Service, as applicable, and to the healthcare
professional responsible for the health and safety of the
prisoner, a written report which describes the facts and
circumstances surrounding the use of restraints, and
includes--
``(A) the reasoning upon which the determination to use
restraints was made;
``(B) the details of the use of restraints, including the
type of restraints used and length of time during which
restraints were used; and
``(C) any resulting physical effects on the prisoner
observed by or known to the corrections official or United
States marshal, as applicable.
``(2) Supplemental report to the director.--Upon receipt of
a report under subsection (c)(1), the healthcare professional
responsible for the health and safety of the prisoner may
submit to the Director such information as the healthcare
professional determines is relevant to the use of restraints
on the prisoner.
``(3) Report to judiciary committees.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the Director
of the Bureau of Prisons and the Director of the United
States Marshals Service shall each submit to the Judiciary
Committee of the Senate and of the House of Representatives a
report that certifies compliance with this section and
includes the information required to be reported under
paragraph (1).
``(B) Personally identifiable information.--The report
under this paragraph shall not contain any personally
identifiable information of any prisoner.
``(d) Notice.--Not later than 48 hours after the
confirmation of a prisoner's pregnancy by a healthcare
professional, that prisoner shall be notified by an
appropriate healthcare professional, corrections official, or
United States marshal, as applicable, of the restrictions on
the use of restraints under this section.
``(e) Violation Reporting Process.--The Director of the
Bureau of Prisons, in consultation with the Director of the
United States Marshals Service, shall establish a process
through which a prisoner may report a violation of this
section.
``(f) Training.--
``(1) In general.--The Director of the Bureau of Prisons
and the Director of the United States Marshals Service shall
each develop training guidelines regarding the use of
restraints on female prisoners during the period of
pregnancy, labor, and postpartum recovery, and shall
incorporate such guidelines into appropriate training
programs. Such training guidelines shall include--
``(A) how to identify certain symptoms of pregnancy that
require immediate referral to a healthcare professional;
``(B) circumstances under which the exceptions under
subsection (b) would apply;
``(C) in the case that an exception under subsection (b)
applies, how to apply restraints in a way that does not harm
the prisoner, the fetus, or the neonate;
``(D) the information required to be reported under
subsection (c); and
``(E) the right of a healthcare professional to request
that restraints not be used, and the requirement under
subsection (b)(3)(B) to comply with such a request.
``(2) Development of guidelines.--In developing the
guidelines required by paragraph (1), the Directors shall
each consult with healthcare professionals with expertise in
caring for women during the period of pregnancy and
postpartum recovery.
``(g) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
``(1) The term `postpartum recovery' means the twelve-week
period, or longer as determined by the healthcare
professional responsible for the health and safety of the
prisoner, following delivery, and shall include the entire
period that the prisoner is in the hospital or infirmary.
``(2) The term `restraints' means any physical or
mechanical device used to control the movement of a
prisoner's body, limbs, or both.
``(3) The term `prisoner' means a person who has been
sentenced to a term of imprisonment pursuant to a conviction
for a Federal criminal offense, or a person in the custody of
the Bureau of Prisons, including a person in a Bureau of
Prisons contracted facility.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 317 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding after the item relating to section 4321 the
following:
``4322. Use of restraints on prisoners during the period of pregnancy,
labor, and postpartum recovery prohibited.''.
[[Page H4308]]
TITLE IV--MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL JUSTICE
SEC. 401. PLACEMENT OF PRISONERS CLOSE TO FAMILIES.
Subsection (b) of section 3621 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``shall designate the place of the
prisoner's imprisonment.'' and inserting ``shall designate
the place of the prisoner's imprisonment, and shall, subject
to bed availability, the prisoner's security designation, the
prisoner's programmatic needs, the prisoner's mental and
medical health needs, any request made by the prisoner
related to faith-based needs, recommendations of the
sentencing court, and other security concerns of the Bureau
of Prisons, place the prisoner in a facility as close as
practicable to the prisoner's primary residence, and to the
extent practicable, in a facility within 500 driving miles of
that residence. The Bureau shall, subject to consideration of
the factors described in the preceding sentence and the
prisoner's preference for staying at his or her current
facility or being transferred, transfer prisoners to
facilities that are closer to the prisoner's primary
residence even if the prisoner is already in a facility
within 500 driving miles of that residence.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following: ``Notwithstanding
any other provision of law, a designation of a place of
imprisonment under this subsection is not reviewable by any
court.''.
SEC. 402. HOME CONFINEMENT FOR LOW RISK PRISONERS.
Section 3624(c)(2) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following: ``The Bureau of
Prisons shall, to the extent practicable, place prisoners
with lower risk levels and lower needs on home confinement
for the maximum amount of time permitted under this
paragraph.''.
SEC. 403. FEDERAL PRISONER REENTRY INITIATIVE
REAUTHORIZATION; MODIFICATION OF IMPOSED TERM
OF IMPRISONMENT.
(a) Federal Prisoner Reentry Initiative Reauthorization.--
Section 231(g) of the Second Chance Act of 2007 (34 U.S.C.
60541(g)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``and eligible terminally ill offenders''
after ``elderly offenders'' each place the term appears; and
(B) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``a Bureau of Prisons
facility'' and inserting ``Bureau of Prisons facilities'';
(C) in subparagraph (B)--
(i) by striking ``the Bureau of Prisons facility'' and
inserting ``Bureau of Prisons facilities''; and
(ii) by inserting ``, upon written request from either the
Bureau of Prisons or an eligible elderly offender or eligible
terminally ill offender'' after ``to home detention''; and
(D) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``the Bureau of
Prisons facility'' and inserting ``Bureau of Prisons
facilities'';
(2) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``or eligible terminally
ill offender'' after ``elderly offender'';
(3) in paragraph (3)--
(A) by striking ``at least one Bureau of Prisons facility''
and inserting ``Bureau of Prisons facilities''; and
(B) by striking ``and shall be carried out during fiscal
years 2009 and 2010'' and inserting ``and shall be carried
out during fiscal years 2019 through 2022'';
(4) in paragraph (4)--
(A) by inserting ``or eligible terminally ill offender''
after ``each eligible elderly offender''; and
(B) by inserting ``and eligible terminally ill offenders''
after ``eligible elderly offenders''; and
(5) in paragraph (5)--
(A) in subparagraph (A)--
(i) in clause (i), striking ``65 years of age'' and
inserting ``60 years of age''; and
(ii) in clause (ii)--
(I) by striking ``the greater of 10 years or''; and
(II) by striking ``75 percent'' and inserting ``\2/3\'';
and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) Eligible terminally ill offender.--The term `eligible
terminally ill offender' means an offender in the custody of
the Bureau of Prisons who--
``(i) is serving a term of imprisonment based on conviction
for an offense or offenses that do not include any crime of
violence (as defined in section 16(a) of title 18, United
States Code), sex offense (as defined in section 111(5) of
the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (34 U.S.C.
20911(5))), offense described in section 2332b(g)(5)(B) of
title 18, United States Code, or offense under chapter 37 of
title 18, United States Code;
``(ii) satisfies the criteria specified in clauses (iii)
through (vii) of subparagraph (A); and
``(iii) has been determined by a medical doctor approved by
the Bureau of Prisons to be--
``(I) in need of care at a nursing home, intermediate care
facility, or assisted living facility, as those terms are
defined in section 232 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C.
1715w); or
``(II) diagnosed with a terminal illness.''.
(b) Increasing the Use and Transparency of Compassionate
Release.--Section 3582 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in subsection (c)(1)(A), in the matter preceding clause
(i), by inserting after ``Bureau of Prisons,'' the following:
``or upon motion of the defendant after the defendant has
fully exhausted all administrative rights to appeal a failure
of the Bureau of Prisons to bring a motion on the defendant's
behalf or the lapse of 30 days from the receipt of such a
request by the warden of the defendant's facility, whichever
is earlier,'';
(2) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and
(3) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
``(d) Notification Requirements.--
``(1) Terminal illness defined.--In this subsection, the
term `terminal illness' means a disease or condition with an
end-of-life trajectory.
``(2) Notification.--The Bureau of Prisons shall, subject
to any applicable confidentiality requirements--
``(A) in the case of a defendant diagnosed with a terminal
illness--
``(i) not later than 72 hours after the diagnosis notify
the defendant's attorney, partner, and family members of the
defendant's condition and inform the defendant's attorney,
partner, and family members that they may prepare and submit
on the defendant's behalf a request for a sentence reduction
pursuant to subsection (c)(1)(A);
``(ii) not later than 7 days after the date of the
diagnosis, provide the defendant's partner and family members
(including extended family) with an opportunity to visit the
defendant in person;
``(iii) upon request from the defendant or his attorney,
partner, or a family member, ensure that Bureau of Prisons
employees assist the defendant in the preparation, drafting,
and submission of a request for a sentence reduction pursuant
to subsection (c)(1)(A); and
``(iv) not later than 14 days of receipt of a request for a
sentence reduction submitted on the defendant's behalf by the
defendant or the defendant's attorney, partner, or family
member, process the request;
``(B) in the case of a defendant who is physically or
mentally unable to submit a request for a sentence reduction
pursuant to subsection (c)(1)(A)--
``(i) inform the defendant's attorney, partner, and family
members that they may prepare and submit on the defendant's
behalf a request for a sentence reduction pursuant to
subsection (c)(1)(A);
``(ii) accept and process a request for sentence reduction
that has been prepared and submitted on the defendant's
behalf by the defendant's attorney, partner, or family member
under clause (i); and
``(iii) upon request from the defendant or his attorney,
partner, or family member, ensure that Bureau of Prisons
employees assist the defendant in the preparation, drafting,
and submission of a request for a sentence reduction pursuant
to subsection (c)(1)(A); and
``(C) ensure that all Bureau of Prisons facilities
regularly and visibly post, including in prisoner handbooks,
staff training materials, and facility law libraries and
medical and hospice facilities, and make available to
prisoners upon demand, notice of--
``(i) a defendant's ability to request a sentence reduction
pursuant to subsection (c)(1)(A);
``(ii) the procedures and timelines for initiating and
resolving requests described in clause (i); and
``(iii) the right to appeal a denial of a request described
in clause (i) after all administrative rights to appeal
within the Bureau of Prisons have been exhausted.
``(3) Annual report.--Not later than 1 year after the date
of enactment of this subsection, and once every year
thereafter, the Director of the Bureau of Prisons shall
submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and
the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives a report on requests for sentence reductions
pursuant to subsection (c)(1)(A), which shall include a
description of, for the previous year--
``(A) the number of prisoners granted and denied sentence
reductions, categorized by the criteria relied on as the
grounds for a reduction in sentence;
``(B) the number of requests initiated by or on behalf of
prisoners, categorized by the criteria relied on as the
grounds for a reduction in sentence;
``(C) the number of requests which Bureau of Prisons
employees assisted prisoners in drafting, preparing, or
submitting, categorized by the criteria relied on as the
grounds for a reduction in sentence, and the final decision
made in each request;
``(D) the number of requests which attorneys, partners, or
family members submitted on a defendant's behalf, categorized
by the criteria relied on as the grounds for a reduction in
sentence, and the final decision made in each request;
``(E) the number of requests approved by the Director of
the Bureau of Prisons, categorized by the criteria relied on
as the grounds for a reduction in sentence;
``(F) the number of requests denied by the Director of the
Bureau of Prisons and the reasons given for each denial,
categorized by the criteria relied on as the grounds for a
reduction in sentence;
``(G) for each request, the time elapsed between the date
the request was received by the warden and the final
decision, categorized by the criteria relied on as the
grounds for a reduction in sentence;
``(H) for each request, the number of prisoners who died
while their request was pending and, for each, the amount of
time that had elapsed between the date the request was
received by the Bureau of Prisons, categorized by the
criteria relied on as the grounds for a reduction in
sentence;
[[Page H4309]]
``(I) the number of Bureau of Prisons notifications to
attorneys, partners, and family members of their right to
visit a terminally ill defendant as required under paragraph
(2)(A)(ii) and, for each, whether a visit occurred and how
much time elapsed between the notification and the visit;
``(J) the number of visits to terminally ill prisoners that
were denied by the Bureau of Prisons due to security or other
concerns, and the reasons given for each denial; and
``(K) the number of motions filed by defendants with the
court after all administrative rights to appeal a denial of a
sentence reduction had been exhausted, the outcome of each
motion, and the time that had elapsed between the date the
request was first received by the Bureau of Prisons and the
date the defendant filed the motion with the court.''.
SEC. 404. IDENTIFICATION FOR RETURNING CITIZENS.
(a) Identification and Release Assistance for Federal
Prisoners.--Section 231(b) of the Second Chance Act of 2007
(34 U.S.C. 60541(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``(including'' and inserting ``prior to
release from a term of imprisonment in a Federal prison or if
the individual was not sentenced to a term of imprisonment in
a Federal prison, prior to release from a sentence to a term
in community confinement, including''; and
(B) by striking ``or birth certificate) prior to release''
and inserting ``and a birth certificate''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(4) Definition.--In this subsection, the term `community
confinement' means residence in a community treatment center,
halfway house, restitution center, mental health facility,
alcohol or drug rehabilitation center, or other community
facility.''.
(b) Duties of the Bureau of Prisons.--Section 4042(a) of
title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (D) and (E) as paragraphs
(6) and (7), respectively;
(2) in paragraph (6) (as so redesignated)--
(A) in clause (i)--
(i) by striking ``Social Security Cards,''; and
(ii) by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) by redesignating clause (ii) as clause (iii);
(C) by inserting after clause (i) the following:
``(ii) obtain identification, including a social security
card, driver's license or other official photo
identification, and a birth certificate; and'';
(D) in clause (iii) (as so redesignated), by inserting
after ``prior to release'' the following: ``from a sentence
to a term of imprisonment in a Federal prison or if the
individual was not sentenced to a term of imprisonment in a
Federal prison, prior to release from a sentence to a term of
community confinement''; and
(E) by redesignating clauses (i), (ii), and (iii) (as so
amended) as subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), respectively;
and
(3) in paragraph (7) (as so redesignated), by redesignating
clauses (i) through (vii) as subparagraphs (A) through (G),
respectively.
SEC. 405. EXPANDING INMATE EMPLOYMENT THROUGH FEDERAL PRISON
INDUSTRIES.
(a) New Market Authorizations.--Chapter 307 of title 18,
United States Code, is amended by inserting after section
4129 the following:
``Sec. 4130. Additional markets
``(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, Federal Prison Industries may sell products to--
``(1) public entities for use in penal or correctional
institutions;
``(2) public entities for use in disaster relief or
emergency response;
``(3) the government of the District of Columbia; and
``(4) any organization described in section 501(c)(3),
(c)(4), or (d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 that is
exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of such Code.
``(b) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `public entity' means a State, a subdivision
of a State, an Indian tribe, and an agency or governmental
corporation or business of any of the foregoing.
``(2) The term `State' means a State, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American
Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the United States
Virgin Islands.''.
(b) Technical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter
307 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting
after the item relating to section 4129 the following:
``4130. Additional markets.''.
(c) Deferred Compensation.--Section 4126(c)(4) of title 18,
United States Code, is amended by inserting after
``operations,'' the following: ``not less than 15 percent of
such compensation for any inmate shall be reserved in the
fund or a separate account and made available to assist the
inmate with costs associated with release from prison,''.
SEC. 406. DE-ESCALATION TRAINING.
Beginning not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Director of the Bureau of Prisons
shall incorporate into training programs provided to officers
and employees of the Bureau of Prisons (including officers
and employees of an organization with which the Bureau of
Prisons has a contract to provide services relating to
imprisonment) specialized and comprehensive training in
procedures to--
(1) de-escalate encounters between a law enforcement
officer or an officer or employee of the Bureau of Prisons,
and a civilian or a prisoner (as such term is defined in
section 106 of this Act); and
(2) identify and appropriately respond to incidents that
involve the unique needs of individuals who have a mental
illness or cognitive deficit.
SEC. 407. EVIDENCE-BASED TREATMENT FOR OPIOID AND HEROIN
ABUSE.
(a) Report on Evidence-based Treatment for Opioid and
Heroin Abuse.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Director of the Bureau of Prisons
shall submit to the Committees on the Judiciary and the
Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and of the House
of Representatives a report assessing the availability of and
the capacity of the Bureau of Prisons to treat heroin and
opioid abuse through evidence-based programs, including
medication-assisted treatment where appropriate. In preparing
the report, the Director shall consider medication-assisted
treatment as a strategy to assist in treatment where
appropriate and not as a replacement for holistic and other
drug-free approaches. The report shall include a description
of plans to expand access to evidence-based treatment for
heroin and opioid abuse for prisoners, including access to
medication-assisted treatment in appropriate cases. Following
submission, the Director shall take steps to implement these
plans.
(b) Report on the Availability of Medication-Assisted
Treatment for Opioid and Heroin Abuse, and Implementation
Thereof.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Director of the Administrative
Office of the United States Courts shall submit to the
Committees on the Judiciary and the Committees on
Appropriations of the Senate and of the House of
Representatives a report assessing the availability of and
capacity for the provision of medication-assisted treatment
for opioid and heroin abuse by treatment-service providers
serving prisoners who are serving a term of supervised
release, and including a description of plans to expand
access to medication-assisted treatment for heroin and opioid
abuse whenever appropriate among prisoners under supervised
release. Following submission, the Director will take steps
to implement these plans.
SEC. 408. PILOT PROGRAMS.
(a) In General.--The Bureau of Prisons shall establish each
of the following pilot programs for 5 years, in at least 20
facilities:
(1) Mentorship for youth.--A program to pair youth with
volunteers from faith-based or community organizations, which
may include formerly incarcerated offenders, that have
relevant experience or expertise in mentoring, and a
willingness to serve as a mentor in such a capacity.
(2) Service to abandoned, rescued, or otherwise vulnerable
animals.--A program to equip prisoners with the skills to
provide training and therapy to animals seized by Federal law
enforcement under asset forfeiture authority and to
organizations that provide shelter and similar services to
abandoned, rescued, or otherwise vulnerable animals.
(b) Reporting Requirement.--Not later than one year after
the conclusion of the pilot programs, the Attorney General
shall report to Congress on the results of the pilot programs
under this section. Such report shall include cost savings,
numbers of participants, and information about recidivism
rates among participants.
(c) Definition.--In this title, the term ``youth'' means a
prisoner (as such term is defined in section 106) who was 21
years of age or younger at the time of the commission or
alleged commission of the criminal offense for which the
individual is being prosecuted or serving a term of
imprisonment, as the case may be.
SEC. 409. ENSURING SUPERVISION OF RELEASED SEXUALLY DANGEROUS
PERSONS.
(a) Probation Officers.--Section 3603 of title 18, United
States Code, is amended in paragraph (8)(A) by striking ``or
4246'' and inserting ``, 4246, or 4248''.
(b) Pretrial Services Officers.--Section 3154 of title 18,
United States Code, is amended in paragraph (12)(A) by
striking ``or 4246'' and inserting ``, 4246, or 4248''.
SEC. 410. DATA COLLECTION.
(a) National Prisoner Statistics Program.--Beginning not
later than one year after the date of the enactment of this
Act, and annually thereafter, pursuant to the authority under
section 302 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act
of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3732), the Director of the Bureau of
Justice Statistics, with information that shall be provided
by the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, shall include in
the National Prisoner Statistics Program the following:
(1) The number of prisoners (as such term is defined in
section 106 of this Act) who are veterans of the Armed Forces
of the United States.
(2) The number of prisoners who have been placed in
solitary confinement at any time during the previous year.
(3) The number of female prisoners known by the Bureau of
Prisons to be pregnant, as well as the outcomes of such
pregnancies, including information on pregnancies that result
in live-birth, still-birth, miscarriage, abortion, ectopic
pregnancy, maternal death, neonatal death, and preterm birth.
(4) The numbers of prisoners who volunteered to participate
in a substance abuse
[[Page H4310]]
treatment program, and the number of prisoners who have
participated in such a program.
(5) The number of prisoners provided medication-assisted
treatment with medication approved by the Food and Drug
Administration while in custody in order to treat substance
use disorder.
(6) The number of prisoners who were receiving medication-
assisted treatment with medication approved by the Food and
Drug Administration prior to the commencement of their term
of imprisonment.
(7) The number of prisoners who are the parent or guardian
of a minor child.
(8) The numbers of prisoners who are single, married, or
otherwise in a committed relationship.
(9) The number of prisoners who have not achieved a GED,
high school diploma, or equivalent prior to entering prison.
(10) The number of prisoners who, during the previous year,
received their GED or other equivalent certificate while
incarcerated.
(11) The numbers of prisoners for whom English is a second
language.
(12) The number of incidents, during the previous year, in
which restraints were used on a female prisoner during
pregnancy, labor, or postpartum recovery, as well as
information relating to the type of restraints used, and the
circumstances under which each incident occurred.
(13) The vacancy rate for medical and healthcare staff
positions, and average length of such a vacancy.
(14) The number of facilities that operated, at any time
during the previous year, without at least one clinical
nurse, certified paramedic, or licensed physician on-site.
(15) The number of facilities that during the previous year
were accredited by the American Correctional Association.
(16) The number and type of recidivism reduction
partnerships described in section 3621(h)(5) of title 18,
United States Code, entered into by each facility.
(17) The number of facilities with remote learning
capabilities.
(18) The number of facilities that offer prisoners video
conferencing.
(19) Any changes in costs related to legal phone calls and
visits following implementation of section 403 of this Act.
(20) The number of aliens in prison during the previous
year.
(21) For each Bureau of Prisons facility, the total number
of violations that resulted in reductions in rewards,
incentives, or time credits, the number of such violations
for each category of violation, and the demographic breakdown
of the prisoners who have received such reductions.
(22) The number of assaults on Bureau of Prisons staff by
prisoners and the number of criminal prosecutions of
prisoners for assaulting Bureau of Prisons staff.
(23) The capacity of each recidivism reduction program and
productive activity to accommodate eligible inmates at each
Bureau of Prisons facility.
(24) The number of volunteers who were certified to
volunteer in a Bureau of Prisons facility, broken down by
level (level I and level II), and by each Bureau of Prisons
facility.
(25) The number of prisoners enrolled in recidivism
reduction programs and productive activities at each Bureau
of Prisons facility, broken down by risk level and by
program, and the number of those enrolled prisoners who
successfully completed each program.
(26) The breakdown of prisoners classified at each risk
level by demographic characteristics, including age, sex,
race, and the length of the sentence imposed.
(b) Report to Judiciary Committees.--Beginning not later
than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act,
and annually thereafter for a period of 7 years, the Director
of the Bureau of Justice Statistics shall submit a report
containing the information described in paragraphs (1)
through (26) of subsection (a) to the Committees on the
Judiciary of the House of Representatives and of the Senate.
SEC. 411. HEALTHCARE PRODUCTS.
(a) Availability.--The Director of the Bureau of Prisons
shall make the healthcare products described in subsection
(c) available to prisoners for free, in a quantity that is
appropriate to the healthcare needs of each prisoner.
(b) Quality Products.--The Director shall ensure that the
healthcare products provided under this section conform with
applicable industry standards.
(c) Products.--The healthcare products described in this
subsection are tampons and sanitary napkins.
SEC. 412. PRISON RAPE ELIMINATION STANDARDS AUDITORS.
Section 8(e)(8) of the Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003
(34 U.S.C. 30307(e)(8)) is amended to read as follows:
``(8) Standards for auditors.--
``(A) In general.--
``(i) Background checks for auditors.--An individual
seeking certification by the Department of Justice to serve
as an auditor of prison compliance with the national
standards described in subsection (a) shall, upon request,
submit fingerprints in the manner determined by the Attorney
General for criminal history record checks of the applicable
State and Federal Bureau of Investigation repositories.
``(ii) Certification agreements.--Each auditor certified
under this paragraph shall sign a certification agreement
that includes the provisions of, or provisions that are
substantially similar to, the Bureau of Justice Assistance's
Auditor Certification Agreement in use in April 2018.
``(iii) Auditor evaluation.--The PREA Management Office of
the Bureau of Justice Assistance shall evaluate all auditors
based on the criteria contained in the certification
agreement. In the case that an auditor fails to comply with a
certification agreement or to conduct audits in accordance
with the PREA Auditor Handbook, audit methodology, and
instrument approved by the PREA Management Office, the Office
may take remedial or disciplinary action, as appropriate,
including decertifying the auditor in accordance with
subparagraph (B).
``(B) Auditor decertification.--
``(i) In general.--The PREA Management Office may suspend
an auditor's certification during an evaluation of an
auditor's performance under subparagraph (A)(iii). The PREA
Management Office shall promptly publish the names of
auditors who have been decertified, and the reason for
decertification. Auditors who have been decertified or are on
suspension may not participate in audits described in
subsection (a), including as an agent of a certified auditor.
``(ii) Notification.--In the case that an auditor is
decertified, the PREA Management Office shall inform each
facility or agency at which the auditor performed an audit
during the relevant three-year audit cycle, and may recommend
that the agency repeat any affected audits, if appropriate.
``(C) Audit assignments.--The PREA Management Office shall
establish a system, to be administered by the Office, for
assigning certified auditors to Federal, State, and local
facilities.
``(D) Disclosure of documentation.--The Director of the
Bureau of Prisons shall comply with each request for
documentation necessary to conduct an audit under subsection
(a), which is made by a certified auditor in accordance with
the provisions of the certification agreement described in
subparagraph (A)(ii). The Director of the Bureau of Prisons
may require an auditor to sign a confidentiality agreement or
other agreement designed to address the auditor's use of
personally identifiable information, except that such an
agreement may not limit an auditor's ability to provide all
such documentation to the Department of Justice, as required
under section 115.401(j) of title 28, Code of Federal
Regulations.''.
SEC. 413. ADULT AND JUVENILE COLLABORATION PROGRAMS.
Section 2991 of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and
Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10651) is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (b)(4)(D);
(2) in subsection (e), by striking ``may use up to 3
percent'' and inserting ``shall use not less than 6
percent''; and
(3) by amending subsection (g) to read as follows:
``(g) Collaboration Set Aside.--The Attorney General shall
use not less than 8 percent of funds appropriated to provide
technical assistance to State and local governments receiving
grants under this part to foster collaboration between such
governments in furtherance of the purposes set forth in
section 3 of the Mentally Ill Offender Treatment and Crime
Reduction Act of 2004 (34 U.S.C. 10651 note).''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
General Leave
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous materials on H.R. 5682, currently under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5682, the FIRST STEP
Act. The bipartisan bill before us is a meaningful, historic criminal
justice reform measure.
The FIRST STEP Act places a new focus on rehabilitation. While we
recognize criminal behavior needs to be punished and criminals need to
be incarcerated, we must also acknowledge that our prison population
needs to be rehabilitated to the greatest extent practicable. The bill
establishes a risk and needs assessment as the basis of both an
effective recidivism reduction program and an efficient and effective
Federal prison system.
The FIRST STEP Act will incentivize prisoners to participate in
evidence-based recidivism reduction programs, productive activities,
and jobs that will actually reduce their risk of recidivism.
We know that over 90 percent of all prisoners within the Bureau of
Prisons
[[Page H4311]]
will be released someday. That is an indisputable fact. We also know
that without programming and intervention, which can train prisoners to
be better citizens, not better criminals, prisoners are more likely to
recidivate.
Mr. Speaker, rather than allowing the cycle of crime to continue,
this legislation takes a practical, intelligent approach to
rehabilitation. By using a focused approach for each prisoner, we can
lower the risk of recidivism. That is what H.R. 5682 does.
Fewer recidivists means fewer prisoners in the future. It means
greater savings to the American taxpayer. More importantly, it means
safer communities, fewer crimes, and, of course, fewer victims. It also
means greater opportunities for people once they leave prison.
This bill is important because when prisoners who have received
intervention and rehabilitation are released, they are less likely to
commit crimes. When that happens, our streets are safer and innocent
civilians are less likely to be victimized. Rehabilitated prisoners are
more likely to leave the life of crime behind, become productive
members of society, and contribute to their communities. If that isn't
meaningful, Mr. Speaker, I don't know what is.
I know there are some in this body who are opposing this legislation
because it does not include sentencing reform. I support sentencing
reform and have worked with my colleagues to find common ground on that
issue. However, we should not let this opportunity pass by. The vast
majority of Members of this House agree that this legislation is
needed. Let us not linger any longer. Let us move this important and
meaningful bill today.
Just look at the bipartisan support from outside interest groups that
the FIRST STEP Act has received. Numerous organizations--almost too
many to list in the allotted time we have--on both the left and the
right have enthusiastically endorsed this bill.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chief sponsors of H.R.
5682, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Collins) and the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Jeffries). They worked tirelessly to get this bill to the
floor, and both should be applauded for their bipartisan approach to
this issue.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the FIRST STEP Act, and
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 4 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to H.R. 5682, the FIRST
STEP Act. On principle, I cannot support legislation which fails to
address the larger issue of sentencing reform, and, though this bill
makes some modest improvements in areas related to our prisons,
actually it does more harm by cementing into our system new areas of
racial biases and disadvantage that make worse a criminal justice
system desperately in need of reform.
Despite the bill's good intentions, the new incentive system for pre-
release custody credits could exacerbate racial biases and, unlike
previous criminal justice efforts, is not balanced with the necessary
reforms to our Federal sentencing system. As Monday's New York Times
editorial observed: ``A partial bill could end up being worse than
nothing.''
The bill excludes large categories of inmates, based on convictions
for various offenses and on immigration status, from being eligible for
the pre-release custody incentives established by the bill.
Second, certain prisoners who are eligible to participate in the
incentive system and who successfully participate in recidivism
reduction programs would face being denied early entry to pre-release
custody if such inmates are judged to have a higher than low recidivism
risk under the new system. It would be unfair to deny these prisoners
what they have earned, and it is counterproductive for all of us to, in
effect, create a disincentive for prisoners who most need recidivism
reduction programming from engaging in it.
Third, the combination of these factors, implemented through a
problematic risk assessment tool, could operate to exacerbate racial
and socioeconomic disparities already present in the criminal justice
system. As the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the
ACLU, the NAACP, the National Immigration Law Center, and dozens of
other advocacy groups warn, ``the exclusions could . . . have a
disparate impact on racial minorities.''
I want to acknowledge the tremendous work of my colleagues on the
Judiciary Committee--Representatives Jeffries, Richmond, and Bass
particularly--for their efforts to improve the legislation. I
wholeheartedly support certain provisions in the current version of the
bill, such as expanding time credits for good behavior, banning the
shackling of women prisoners, and enhanced compassionate relief. But,
unfortunately, these good provisions do not outweigh the potentially
harmful provisions contained elsewhere in the bill.
Perhaps more importantly, it is clear that prison reform alone will
not ameliorate the crisis of mass incarceration unless we address the
principal cause of the problem--unjust sentencing laws. As former
Attorney General Eric Holder writes in today's Washington Post: ``To
reform America's prisons, we must change the laws that send people to
them in the first place. Anything less represents a failure of
leadership.''
It is unfortunate that after waiting nearly 1\1/2\ years to take up
the issue of criminal justice reform, the majority was unwilling to
subject H.R. 5682 to a single legislative hearing or even bother to
obtain a CBO score so we could understand its impact.
I also do not believe we can simply accept as a reason not to change
our sentencing laws opposition to sentencing reform by a Trump
administration that changes its legislative positions on a near daily
basis and that has already done so much to weaken and undermine the
criminal justice system. Nor do I believe more balanced reform is not
viable when Senator Chuck Grassley, the chairman of the Senate
Judiciary Committee, told us: ``For any criminal justice system
proposal to win approval in the Senate, it must include . . .
sentencing reforms.''
Although I oppose this legislation, I remain fully committed to
achieving balanced reform as part of an effort to make our criminal
justice system more just and our constituents more safe. But I do not
believe that passing this bill today would contribute to that goal. I
therefore urge an opposition vote.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr.
Ellison).
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman for
yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this FIRST STEP
Act. I spent 17 years of my life representing people accused of crimes.
{time} 1315
Some of them are people whom I will never forget. One is a woman
named Daniella. She had some prior misdemeanor offenses and was charged
with possession of crack cocaine. She was looking at a sentence of
about 60 months, based on the amount. She had a small child. There were
no weapons involved.
The prosecutors told her: If you tell on your boyfriend, we will take
you to State court. If you don't, we are taking you to Federal court.
They took her to Federal court. And try as I did, she ended up
getting 60 months of prison. She got taken away from her child. I
remember the screams of that little boy as they walked his mother into
custody.
I cannot imagine asking her to stay in prison one day longer than she
needed to. I cannot imagine not giving every opportunity to improve her
life and her skills.
Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote, and I do so with a lot of
enthusiasm today.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Rhode
Island (Mr. Cicilline).
Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I rise in strong support of the FIRST STEP Act. I supported this
bipartisan bill in committee because it will help more ex-offenders
reenter the workforce. It will reduce recidivism.
The FIRST STEP Act is just a first step in fixing our criminal
justice system. We all realize there is a lot more to do and a lot more
we must do, but this is an important start.
I would remind everyone that the bill allows prisoners to earn an
additional 7
[[Page H4312]]
days off their sentence each year they demonstrate good behavior. It
funds important job training, drug treatment, and education services.
It prohibits the shackling of pregnant women and improves compassionate
release.
These are all very good provisions. It will not only reduce
recidivism; it will enhance the safety of our communities by making
sure folks have the ability to enter drug treatment, enter job
training, and avail themselves of educational services. These are all
commonsense ideas. I hope that everyone will support this legislation.
I want to thank, particularly, my colleague Hakeem Jeffries for his
strong leadership in these difficult negotiations, and I urge my
colleagues to vote for the FIRST STEP and then commit themselves to
continuing to build on this, because there is much more work to do in
sentencing reform and criminal justice reform broadly.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis).
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I commend the Judiciary
Committee for its tremendous work in bringing this bill to the floor.
They have put forth tremendous effort and tried every way they could
think of to compromise.
But notwithstanding the effort, I find myself not in a position to
vote in favor of the bill. One of the reasons is that many of the
organizations and groups with whom I have worked over the years are in
opposition. They are people who are on the ground floor of criminal
justice reform. They recognize that, if we are going to provide an
opportunity to seriously reduce mass incarceration, we have to make
provisions for individuals to regain some sense of reality regarding
what got them into prison in the first place.
I appreciate all of the efforts. I think we have got too much
authority being given to the Attorney General. I wish we had been able
to get closer to what people I work with daily would be in agreement
with. Unfortunately, we did not.
Unfortunately, I do not support passage of the bill, but I support
continuing to work to find the real, hard-nosed solutions that we need.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to
the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Collins), the chief sponsor of the
legislation and a member of the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague,
Chairman Bob Goodlatte, who has been a great supporter of working
towards finding solutions. I think that is what we are here for today
is finding solutions.
I want to thank the chairman for working this, taking this, and
moving forward on a lot of different fronts. But as we look forward,
there are some things I want to clear up and some people I want to
thank.
With Hakeem Jeffries, I couldn't ask for a better partner to work
with through the intricacies of big solutions and big problems. These
are big problems. Mr. Jeffries and I have said: Let's take a look and
see what we can fix.
What is going to be said today is: I like this legislation, I like
parts of this legislation; I like the legislation, but it doesn't go
far enough; if it just did a little more--as if this place produced
perfect results every time and we just want to wait.
But I also would ask those who choose to vote ``no'' today, and my
question is this: Is it okay to make progress on many other things but
on this one say no? Say no to a family who has a family member in
prison who could get treatment and get help?
And when they come home--which over 90 percent of all prisoners in
this country do, they come home--is it okay to say no to those folks,
and say: No, we are not going to provide that for your family member;
we are not going to provide extra treatment so that they can get help
with addiction or work problems or anger management or skills deficits
or education deficits? No, it is not.
Is it okay today to vote ``no'' and say: I like a lot of this bill,
but I want to continue to shackle women as they have babies?
It is a pretty simple understanding. I get it. I want to see
sentencing reform, too. I am on record as saying I do. I am on record
as continuing past this to actually do that.
Mr. Jeffries and I have talked about this more than we ever imagined
we would. But Congressman Jeffries is a great partner in this effort.
This bill is real and meaningful reform. Senator Cornyn and Senator
Whitehouse across the way in the Senate have taken steps to actually
introduce the same bill and are working to do this. The President has
said this is something that can be signed. In fact, the President, Mr.
Speaker, last week, said that America is a nation that believes in
second chances.
The FIRST STEP Act gives those second chances. It gives us hope. It
gives us an ability to look at people. As I have said on this issue
many times, it is a money and moral issue.
In States like Georgia, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Texas, New York, and
California, these issues have been discussed and evidence-based
approaches have worked. We have seen it, Mr. Speaker, work in my home
State of Georgia. We have seen an evidence-based approach be the way
that you need to go. This bill provides the protection, and it also
provides the incentive for this to work.
Now, there have been many discussions on why we shouldn't do this,
and there have been many people in recent days coming forward. I think
it is pretty amazing to me--and I am going to have to be honest here--
for the former Attorney General to come out and say this is not enough
and say that the current Department of Justice could do some of this,
then I have one question for the former Attorney General: Where were
you when you held the office? Why didn't you do something then? If it
was within your grasp, why did you turn a deaf ear to the cries of
families who were in need? Why did you decide not to do something and
now weigh in on something that Congressman Jeffries and many others
have put their hearts and lives into and weigh in and say it is not
enough? Look to those families, Mr. Former Attorney General, and tell
them it is not enough.
It is easy to write an op-ed. It must be a lot harder to do it when
you have the job.
So, as we look forward here, this is a positive piece of legislation.
This is something that we can look forward to doing, when you have a
chance to give those prisoners the opportunity to cut the very things
down in their life that cause them to get there to start with.
When we begin to look at the reasons they are there--and there are
multiple--then we are taking a first step toward solutions, a first
step toward hope, a first step toward making a difference so that we
can then see, if we can take this first step, then maybe we can get
some of our colleagues to take that next step into sentencing reform
and other areas that we have already worked on, that the chairman has
worked on, and others across in the Senate have advocated for.
But if we choose not to do that today, you are saying no to the
future. Congressman Jeffries and I believe yes to the future. I know
that when we have worked on this, it is about what we can accomplish
and how we can accomplish it in a way that is meaningful to others.
When we look at this, I also find it rather interesting, Mr. Speaker,
the groups that have come together here. As we went around talking
about this, we went to so many different groups from the left and the
right that say this is a great first step: Justice Action Network,
American Conservative Union, FreedomWorks, FAMM, Prison Fellowship,
Faith and Freedom Coalition, #cut50, Heritage Action for America, and
many, many more both on the left and the right. The Koch Foundation and
others have said this is good. This is something we can move on. This
provides that hope that we are searching for.
To the bill's detractors, I respect your opinion. To the bill's
detractors, I would just say: Why not? If why not, why not here? And if
why not and why you don't want to here, when? Is it ever good enough?
Can we ever get to a point?
I think one of the things, Mr. Speaker, that we often deal with here
is the art of the possible. Today is about the art of the possible.
[[Page H4313]]
We have an administration that says: We will sign the bill.
Jared Kushner has been such an advocate for this and worked with the
administration to say: We will put forth the effort to make this work.
We have partners in the Senate who say: We want to work and do even
more.
I am glad of that. And I have a partner here and many who have come
alongside of us and have spoken to say: Let's do something today.
Today is about action. Today is about being a part of something
bigger than ourselves. This is a day when we can come to the floor of
this House and be proud of why we are here.
So many times we come down and we look at the bill and we see paper
and we see words on a paper. But I tell you what I see, Mr. Speaker: I
see the faces of the families behind these words. I see the faces of
the families behind these words that it is actually going to help.
So when you look at this vote and you look at this bill, I say: Look
beyond the pieces of paper, look beyond the ink, and look to the
families that will be helped.
When you cast that ``yes'' vote, you are saying: I want to do
something, and I am not afraid to wait on something I might want but
know that I can take a step further now.
It is very simple: vote ``yes'' to move it along or vote ``no'' and
say no to those in need.
I can agree and disagree about a lot of parts, but this is about the
people behind the bill.
Before I go, Mr. Speaker, though, in addition to the committee, the
chairman, and the committee staff who have been so great, a few weeks
ago, I had the chance to talk about a staff member of mine as a steel
magnolia. Today, Jon Ferro, from my staff, a New York native who works
for a Georgia Member, has earned from me the highest praise.
He is now, as you will see in all of the groups that have worked on
this, a Bulldog. He has worked this over and over. He has worked it to
find solutions. For that I am thankful, and for that I am proud.
Mr. Speaker, this is a good bill. You could come up with every reason
you want to vote ``no,'' and that is okay, I guess; but remember, there
are families watching today. There are incarcerated people watching
today. My question is: Will you vote for them or will you vote to hold
up something that may or may not happen?
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Bass), a member of the Judiciary Committee.
Ms. BASS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the FIRST STEP Act.
There are thousands of women who are incarcerated while pregnant. My
language in the FIRST STEP Act addresses the treatment of pregnant
inmates and the use of shackles.
The current system is based on a male model that fails to meet the
physical and mental health needs of women. This is occurring at a time
when women are the fastest growing population in our prisons and jails,
increasing in number by over 700 percent since the 1980s.
The treatment of incarcerated women is particularly glaring during
pregnancy, delivery, and postpartum. Pregnant women must be provided
appropriate prenatal care, which includes nutrition and housing.
We can also agree it defies common sense and logic to use shackles on
a woman who is delivering a baby. More than 22 States have restricted
the use on pregnant women, yet the practice continues. This is despite
no reported incidents of women attempting to escape when shackles are
not used during childbirth. If anyone knows of a woman who is able to
jump up while delivering and overcome an armed guard, I would certainly
like to meet her.
Women across the country have shared their horror stories about being
pregnant or delivering while shackled. The experiences are as grim as
you can imagine. One mother recounted being shackled after having an
emergency C-section. She was handcuffed and a chain was linked across
her belly.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Carter of Georgia). The time of the
gentlewoman has expired.
{time} 1330
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30
seconds.
Ms. BASS. She stated: ``With the weight on my stomach, it felt like
they were ripping open my C-section.''
We must institute Federal standards and educate correction officers,
medical personnel, and pregnant inmates regarding the standard of care
for pregnant women. Women must be a part of the debate on prison and
sentencing reform.
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to introducing additional legislation to
highlight this issue.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Richmond), a member of the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. RICHMOND. Mr. Speaker, let me thank Congressman Jeffries and
Congressman Collins for this FIRST STEP Act.
Does it go as far as I would want it to go? It doesn't. But is it a
substantial step in the right direction? The answer is yes.
When we start talking about prison reform, we start talking about
ways to help those who are incarcerated, one, when they get out; two,
to better themselves when they are already in.
And one of the things we do in this bill is to allow movement of
inmates closer to their families so that they can keep that family
connection, so that they can continue to be a part of the family, which
also reduces recidivism.
We also fix the ``good time'' problem that has happened. For every 7
days that you increase good time, you save $50 million a year. Not only
did we fix it this year, but we fixed the problem BOP interpreted in
the law, contrary to congressional intent, in the first place.
So this bill takes, I believe, a significant step in the right
direction, not to mention the $250 million toward restorative justice
and other ways. Hopefully, the savings from this bill will continue to
go toward criminal justice and we will continue to take second and
third steps.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Jeffries), a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Goodlatte as well as
several distinguished members of the Judiciary Committee--in
particular, Cedric Richmond and Karen Bass--for their leadership on
this issue and, of course, my good friend Doug Collins for being a
phenomenal champion of improving the lives of currently incarcerated
individuals, folks who have no time for political games.
These are individuals who are in the system right now without hope,
without opportunity, without a meaningful chance at transforming
themselves. And the FIRST STEP Act will provide that.
It will give them an opportunity to get educated now, give them an
opportunity to get vocational training now, a GED now, a college
education now, give them the opportunity to deal with their substance
abuse problem now, mental health counseling now. Why would we possibly
refuse that?
These individuals are amongst the least, the lost, and the left
behind. And we have an opportunity, in a bipartisan way, to make a
difference in their lives in so many areas. Any objective reading of
this bill is that it will improve their quality of life.
And what is so wonderful about this is that you have the right and
the left, conservatives and progressives, united in this effort.
Nothing meaningful is ever easy, but the mass incarceration epidemic
has been with us for almost 50 years. You will not just take one
legislative magic wand and wipe it away in one shot. It will require
sustained effort, sustained intensity, sustained commitment, and a
meaningful first step. That is what this bill represents.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this effort to
transform lives, save taxpayer dollars, and dramatically reduce
recidivism now.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
[[Page H4314]]
Washington (Ms. Jayapal), a distinguished member of the Judiciary
Committee.
Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, there is one thing everybody agrees on, and
that is that it is past time that we face the institutionalized racial
inequity that is built into every single step of our mass incarceration
system.
We know that mass incarceration disproportionately affects people of
color and that, today, women in prison are, sadly, the fastest growing
demographic, frequently caught up with the arrests of their partners
and struggling with mental health and addiction.
This bill does take important steps forward, and I want to say that
it is a very good faith effort on the part of the bill's two sponsors:
my friend Hakeem Jeffries and Representative Doug Collins.
Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, I still am not going to be able to
support the bill because I have serious concerns about how the bill
creates, develops, and implements a new risk assessment system on a
very quick timeline by someone who, frankly, has spent his career
opposing criminal justice reforms and, in fact, has fought attempts to
advance racial justice, and that is Attorney General Sessions.
This is especially concerning given that research shows us that risk
assessments produce racial disparities. And this bill does not address
sentencing reform, which is an issue that has bipartisan support and is
the crux of the problem today.
In addition, Mr. Speaker, I am very concerned about language in the
bill that excludes immigrants from being eligible for time credits. The
bill excludes longtime, legal permanent residents, green card holders,
who may have committed the exact same crimes as others and may be
eligible for relief under U.S. law. If we are making redemption
available, shouldn't it be available for everyone, regardless of
immigration status, for the same set of crimes?
Moreover, continued incarceration of these people simply based upon
citizenship status is a waste of taxpayer dollars and unnecessarily
keeps families separated.
The reality is that these are deeply important issues, and this bill
shows that we have the capacity to work in a bipartisan way. Even with
all of the good work and even for a first step, unfortunately, I
believe we have more work to do to get to the place where our morals
are being consistently applied.
I look forward to doing everything I can to work on this.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close whenever the
gentleman from New York is, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I have one further speaker, and then I will
be prepared to close.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms.
Jackson Lee), the distinguished ranking member of the Subcommittee on
Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I, too, want to offer my appreciation
for all of my colleagues--in particular, those who have offered this
legislation.
I recall, in the Congress preceding this, we offered a bipartisan
combination of comprehensive criminal justice reform, took bills that
included prison reform and sentencing reform, and were really on the
way to passing that combination of very important partnership.
Unfortunately, the politics of that time got in the way.
But my appreciation to Mr. Jeffries and Mr. Collins. It really is the
coming together of Members. Mr. Nadler worked very hard to inject very
important provisions, as well as many other Members. And they even did
so on the day of the markup. And all but one that Mr. Richmond, Ms.
Jackson Lee, Ms. Jayapal, and Mrs. Demings put in on retroactivity
failed in the committee.
So let me give an open letter to the mothers and fathers of
incarcerated persons who are in our constituency and, as well, to those
inmates who may, by chance, be looking at this debate. Having recently
visited one of the Federal centers, I know that inmates are astute and
concerned about their future.
So I think it is important to establish to those parents why
Democrats have consistently tried to sew together, tried to stitch
together the idea of sentencing reduction and prison reform.
Elements of this bill are striking and good. But to a mom, is it more
exciting for you to know that your son, who had an excessive sentencing
because of mandatory minimums, and you, who are incarcerated, have your
sentence reduced than maybe on the back end?
Now, it is important to note that all of those, if this bill is
passed, will participate in the rehabilitation programs, but it is also
important to note that the Bureau of Prisons has closed halfway houses.
That is a component of this bill. And they have reduced and cut the
numbers of individuals who are corrections officers to the extent that
corrections officers feel endangered and that augmentation has been
used.
Augmentation means that nurses and teachers and others who are inside
the prison are being used to augment the staff of correction officers
which have been fired--or terminated, rather--under this
administration.
In a letter from the BOP union president, they indicated that they
are severely understaffed and it would be difficult to implement this
bill without those aspects being remedied--meaning more staff, more
halfway houses, more money to implement this program.
So many of my friends have asked me: What is the harm? Let me give
you what is the harm.
First, it would divert limited resources for programming by requiring
a complex risk assessment process that would primarily benefit people
deemed at a low or minimum risk of recidivism.
That means, if you came in with a harsh drug sentence but through the
years, Mom or Dad, you saw your son or daughter fix their lives, you
would note that they, in fact, would not be eligible for this program.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30
seconds.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, without provisions in the bill to
reduce the excessive sentencing produced by mandatory minimums for drug
offenses, overcrowding will still persist and thereby divert resources
from programs to reduce recidivism.
Let me be very clear: The corrections officers indicate they don't
have the staff. Halfway houses have been closed.
In addition, it is documented that, if your son or daughter has an
offense that was considered excluded and they have repaired their life,
through the prison they have made changes, they will not be eligible--
not for the programs, but they will not be eligible for relief.
So it is a first step. But I would simply say: If it is the first
step, why not protection of immigrants? And, also, why not have a
sentencing reform hearing, which the Republicans have canceled because
of my position on this bill?
Let us work together for what is good, Mr. Speaker. Let us make a
difference in the lives of all of the inmates.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak on H.R. 5682, the ``FIRST STEP Act of
2018'' and thank my colleagues, Mr. Jeffries and Mr. Collins for
bringing this forward. This legislation purports to help reduce
recidivism for the millions of formerly incarcerated people that will
return to our communities. I respectfully reserve the right to voice my
concerns with this bill.
First, as the NY Times editorial noted, ``the biggest problem with
the FIRST STEP Act is . . . . what's left out, specifically, sentencing
reform.'' Eric Holder said in the Washington Post, ``by choosing a
tepid approach, the prison reform bill abandons years of work and risks
making it harder for Congress to advance more serious legislation in
the future. Meaningful sentencing reform will be less likely to occur
if the narrow prison bill is enacted.''
Even President Trump specifically stated during his remarks at the
White House Prison Reform Summit last Friday, ``we want the finest
prison reform bill that you could have anywhere.'' I agree with the
President on this, as I also want the finest prison reform bill. Hence,
I will continue to fight for the very best legislation that will
adequately address the nearly 650,900 formerly incarcerated people that
will return to our communities a year. That's not partisan or personal
politics, but rather, common sense, just and equitable politics.
Imagine you are a mother, child or loved one of an incarcerated
person that was robbed by a system that played Russian roulette with
his or her life because that system
[[Page H4315]]
decided they were criminals rather than victims of a public health
crisis during the crack epidemic. Now imagine that same system, rather
than remediating the tragedy it caused in broken homes and communities
through inept policies that had a racial and economic disparate impact,
now seeks to pat them on the back and further insult an entire race by
feeding them crumbs.
As a mother or loved one, you would demand that the system cure the
defect in those sentencing laws that would drastically reduce his or
her time in custody, and apply justice equitably. Let's not forget what
happened in the 1964 Crime bill. Congress has the power to do that. We
should hold ourselves accountable to deliver on the promise we made
when we acknowledged the draconian policies implemented during the
``War on Drugs'' crisis, in passing the Fair Sentencing Act. Let's
finish what we started then, by appealing to our better angels and not
crucify each other because we disagree.
As Families Against Mandatory Minimum indicated in their letter,
``sentencing reform should be included in any final justice reform
package.''
Second, even if the majority chose to ignore sentencing reform due to
pressure, we cannot sit idly by and allow a slim-fast version of prison
reform when dealing with the lives of millions of people.
I will not apologize for demanding more from my colleagues. I will
not apologize for fighting with every breath I have to secure justice
for those left behind. And I will not apologize for doing my job and
shedding light where we may fall short, even when we have in good
faith, tried our best. We will all go home tonight. What about those
that have longed for that same freedom after they've paid their debts
to society. We owe it to ourselves, to the thousands of broken
families, and to our society, to give each inmate that will return to
our community, their best chance at success, by providing them
incentives that will get them home to their families sooner also.
Even the bill's supporter at markup said in their letter, ``the bill
unwisely reserves its incentivized programming for those who already
pose little threat of re-offending'', for example, those that would
commit the sort of crimes alleged against Kushner and others within
Trump's orbit. The supporters go on to say, ``We fear that the bill's
failure to direct incentivized programming to the group that needs it
most will result in little or no reduction in recidivism, and, worse,
that that failure will be blamed on prisoners rather than the bill's
mistaken design.'' Most alarming here, is that great skepticism looms
even in those who want to support this endeavor, because the reality is
that the risk assessment tool is flawed.
This Kushner/Trump bill amounts to nothing more than a false sense of
hope for those who will never be released, due to either lack of
shelter given the significant reduction in housing, or lack of
eligibility per the warden.
The wide latitude and discretion given to Sessions, a person who
whole-heartedly opposes any form of effective criminal justice reform,
and proponent of over-criminalization, will inevitably prove
problematic for many who otherwise would benefit greatly from this
measure with some modicum of oversight. We should take our time to
include an independent committee that would serve as a bulwark in the
development, implementation and recommendation process of such a
program that will use novice and untested tools at the federal level.
Why must we rush this process? Why not take our time to produce the
finest prison reform bill anywhere as the President suggested? I
visited and spoke directly to guards and wardens in the BOP. They told
me they are severely understaffed and safety is paramount given the
shortage in staff. The Director of BOP quit, in the middle of Trump's
Prison Reform Summit. All of these facts tell us to wait so that we
could get it right. In NOBLE's opposition letter to this bill they
write: ``a key concern is the ability of the Federal BOP and U.S.
Attorney Offices to implement key elements of this legislation. In
particular, it will require that U.S. Attorney Offices and BOP address
their needs in staffing and funding. It is our opinion that the
proposed $50 million of funding per year for five years will not
support the bill's expanded programming.'' For these reasons I oppose
this bill, and I encourage my colleagues to do the same.
The Act does not include a single provision that will reduce the
prison time of persons who are serving unfair sentences for low-level
offenses. Even supporters of the bill like FAMM states, ``sentencing
reform should be included in any final justice reform package.''
The Act uses an untested and potentially racially and socially
discriminatory risk assessment to identify individuals who are eligible
to earn credits, which primarily depends on static factors that
correlate with socioeconomic class and race, such as criminal history,
to assess the risk. Therefore, it will likely fail to reduce crime or
mass incarceration.
The Act's exclusions would likely have a disparate impact on racial
minorities because the bill excludes individuals convicted of certain
categories of offenses from redeeming credits towards early release,
even if they successfully complete the program.
The Act leaves it to the discretion of prison wardens to determine
who can use their credits and when.
Early release would be into a halfway house system which is so
underfunded that there is no bed space. Therefore, it will be unlikely
that prisoners can truly be released given the reality of the current
halfway house system.
The Act gives a false sense of hope because it wraps the empty
promise of prison reform around exclusions and wide breadth of
discretion to a full-throated opponent to prison reform, policing
reform and sentencing reform, in Jeff Sessions.
BOP already has broad authority to implement the positive provisions
of the bill, but has opted not to and Sessions cannot be trusted to
implement these provisions.
The FIRST STEP Act includes a list of prisoners who are ineligible
for time credits if they participate in recidivism reduction programs
by virtue of their convictions for certain offenses. Prisoners who are
excluded from time credits are those convicted under Title 18, in the
following sections:
``(i) Section 113(a)(1), relating to assault with intent to commit
murder.
``(ii) Section 115, relating to influencing, impeding, or retaliating
against a Federal official by injuring a family member, except for a
threat made in violation of that section.
``(iii) Any section of chapter 10, relating to biological weapons.
``(iv) Any section of chapter 11B, relating to chemical weapons.
``(v) Section 351, relating to Congressional, Cabinet, and Supreme
Court assassination, kidnapping, and assault.
``(vi) Section 793, relating to gathering, transmitting, or losing
defense information.
``(vii) Section 794, relating to gathering or delivering defense
information to aid a foreign government.
``(viii) Any section of chapter 39, relating to explosives and other
dangerous articles, except for section 836 (relating to the
transportation of fireworks into a State prohibiting sale or use).
``(ix) Section 842(p), relating to distribution of information
relating to explosive, destructive devices, and weapons of mass
destruction, but only if the conviction involved a weapon of mass
destruction (as defined in section 2332a(c)(2) of such title).
``(x) Subsection (f)(3), (h), or (i) of section 844, relating to the
use of fire or an explosive.
``(xi) Section 924(e), relating to unlawful possession of a firearm
by a person with 3 or more convictions for a violent felony.
``(xii) Section 1030(a)(1), relating to fraud and related activity in
connection with computers.
``(xiii) Any section of chapter 51, relating to homicide, except for
section 1112 (relating to manslaughter), 1113 (relating to attempt to
commit murder or manslaughter, but only if the conviction was for an
attempt to commit manslaughter), 1115 (relating to misconduct or
neglect of ship officers), or 1122 (relating to protection against the
human immunodeficiency virus).
``(xiv) Any section of chapter 55, relating to kidnapping.
``(xv) Any offense under chapter 77, relating to peonage, slavery,
and trafficking in persons, except for sections 1592 through 1596.
``(xvi) Section 1751, relating to Presidential and Presidential staff
assassination, kidnapping, and assault.
``(xvii) Section 1841(a)(2)(C), relating to intentionally killing or
attempting to kill an unborn child.
``(xviii) Section 1992, relating to terrorist attacks and other
violence against railroad carriers and against mass transportation
systems on land, on water, or through the air.
``(xix) Section 2113(e), relating to bank robbery resulting in death.
``(xx) Section 2118(c)(2), relating to robberies and burglaries
involving controlled substances resulting in death.
``(xxi) Section 2119(3), relating to taking a motor vehicle (commonly
referred to as `carjacking') that results in death.
``(xxii) Any section of chapter 105, relating to sabotage, except for
section 2152.
``(xxiii) Any section of chapter 109A, relating to sexual abuse,
except that with regard to section 2244, only a conviction under
subsection (c) of that section (relating to abusive sexual contact
involving young children) shall make a prisoner ineligible under this
subparagraph.
``(xxiv) Section 2251, relating to the sexual exploitation of
children.
``(xxv) Section 2251A, relating to the selling or buying of children.
``(xxvi) Any of paragraphs (1) through (3) of section 2252(a),
relating to certain activities relating to material involving the
sexual exploitation of minors.
[[Page H4316]]
``(xxvii) A second or subsequent conviction under any of paragraphs
(1) through (6) of section 2252A(a), relating to certain activities
relating to material constituting or containing child pornography.
``(xxviii) Section 2260, relating to the production of sexually
explicit depictions of a minor for importation into the United States.
``(xxix) Section 2283, relating to the transportation of explosive,
biological, chemical, or radioactive or nuclear materials.
``(xxx) Section 2284, relating to the transportation of terrorists.
``(xxxi) Section 2291, relating to the destruction of a vessel or
maritime facility, but only if the conduct which led to the conviction
involved a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
``(xxxii) Any section of chapter 113B, relating to terrorism.
``(xxxiii) Section 2340A, relating to torture.
``(xxxiv) Section 2381, relating to treason.
``(xxxv) Section 2442, relating to the recruitment or use of child
soldiers.
The exclusions also apply to convictions under the following sections
of Title 42, Title 49, Title 21, Title 8 and Title 50:
``(xxxvi) Section 57(b) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2077(b)), relating to the engagement or participation in the
development or production of special nuclear material.
``(xxxvii) Section 92 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2122), relating to prohibitions governing atomic weapons.
``(xxxviii) Section 101 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2131), relating to the atomic, energy license requirement.
``(xxxix) Section 224 or 225 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42
U.S.C. 2274, 2275), relating to the communication or receipt of
restricted data.
``(xl) Section 236 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2284),
relating to the sabotage of nuclear facilities or fuel.
``(xli) Section 60123(b) of title 49, United States Code, relating to
damaging or destroying a pipeline facility, but only if the conduct
which led to the conviction involved a substantial risk of death or
serious bodily injury.
``(xlii) Section 401(a) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C.
841), relating to manufacturing or distributing a controlled substance,
but only in the case of a conviction for an offense described in
subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of subsection (b)(1) of that section for
which death or serious bodily injury resulted from the use of such
substance.
``(xliii) Section 276(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1326), relating to the reentry of a removed alien, but only if
the alien is described in paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (b) of
that section.
``(xliv) Any section of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50
U.S.C. App. 2401 et seq.)
``(xlv) Section 206 of the International Emergency Economic Powers
Act (50 U.S.C. 1705).
``(xlvi) Section 601 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C.
3121), relating to the protection of identities of certain United
States undercover intelligence officers, agents, informants, and
sources.
The exclusions also apply those prisoners convicted of a prior
Federal or State ``serious violent felony,'' described as follows (in
Title 18):
``(xlvii) An offense described in section 3559(c)(2)(F), for which
the offender was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of more than one
year, if the offender has a previous conviction, for which the offender
served a term of imprisonment of more than one year, for a Federal or
State offense, by whatever designation and wherever committed,
consisting of murder (as described in section 1111), voluntary
manslaughter (as described in section 1112), assault with intent to
commit murder (as described in section 113(a)), aggravated sexual abuse
and sexual abuse (as described in sections 2241 and 2242), abusive
sexual contact (as described in sections 2244(a)(1) and (a)(2)),
kidnapping (as described in chapter 55), carjacking (as described in
section 2119), arson (as described in section 844(f)(3), (h), or (i)),
or terrorism (as described in chapter 113B.
Finally, prisoners may not obtain credit for participation in
recidivism reduction programs if they: (1) completed recidivism
reduction programming before enactment of the Act; (2) completed
recidivism reduction programming during official detention before
moving to Bureau of Prisons; or (3) are inadmissible or deportable
under immigration law.
The Leadership Conference
on Civil and Human Rights,
Washington, DC, May 21, 2018.
Vote ``No'' on The FIRST STEP Act
Dear Representative: On behalf of The Leadership Conference
on Civil and Human Rights, and the 109 undersigned
organizations, we write to urge you to vote NO on The FIRST
STEP Act (H.R. 5682). While well intentioned, this bill takes
a misguided approach to reforming our federal justice system.
Without question, we appreciate the inclusion of some
promising provisions to address some of the problems in the
federal prison system, however, the Bureau of Prisons (BOP)
already has broad authority to make the majority of these
changes through administrative action. In sum, this bill
falls short on its promise to ``meaningfully'' tackle the
problems in the federal justice system--racial disparities,
draconian mandatory minimum sentences, persistent
overcrowding, lack of rehabilitation, and the exorbitant
costs of incarceration. Decisions we make now through this
bill could have deep implications for our ability to impact
the abiding and deepening harms that lead to mass
incarceration.
As such, we continue to have several, grave concerns with
The FIRST STEP Act, including:
The Dangerous ``Risk Assessment System'': The Act purports
to offer people in prison the chance to ``earn time credits''
towards early release to pre-release custody--but by building
and placing a ``risk and needs assessment'' algorithm in the
hands of the Attorney General--one not required to be
designed or tailored for the individuals it is meant to
judge--we risk embedding deep racial and class bias into
decisions that heavily impact the lives and futures of
federal prisoners and their families.
Researchers have shown that risk assessment tools applied
in sentencing decisions in Florida--meant to predict
recidivism--were twice as likely to be wrong when evaluating
Black people as White people. One of the first independent
studies analyzing the use of risk assessment in pretrial
showed that decisionmakers using risk assessment tools--in
this case, Kentucky judges--ignored their results over time,
while also overseeing an increase in failures-to-appear at
court and an increase in pretrial arrests. A further recent
analysis showed that risk assessment tools are as accurate as
a prediction made by a random human selected over the
Internet.
We cannot introduce algorithmic risk assessment into the
assignment of housing and release decisions or rehabilitative
opportunities without sufficient transparency, independent
testing for decarceral and anti-racist results prior to
implementation, and regular effective oversight for not just
what the tool purports to predict, but how decisionmakers in
our prison system use it. The Act uses ``risk assessments''
in an untested manner. It fails to ensure transparency,
independent testing, or analysis of the proposed risk
assessment system or its results prior to its adoption or
implementation. And again, it doesn't require the tool to be
designed or tailored for the individuals it is meant to
judge.
Without these things, and in the hands of the nation's most
prominent proponent of a punishing, rather than a
rehabilitative criminal justice system, ``risk assessments''
will further embed racism into the meting out of resources
that could change prisoners' lives--like access to treatment,
work, and most importantly, the ability to earn time off of a
sentence.
The Overbroad List of Exclusions: The majority of people in
prison will eventually be released. Categorically excluding
entire groups of people from receiving early-release credits
will undermine efforts to reduce prison overcrowding and
improve public safety since such exclusions weaken the
incentive to participate in recidivism-reduction programming.
Furthermore, many of these exclusions, such as those based on
immigration-related offenses, could have a disproportionate
impact on people of color.
The Overbroad Discretion Provided to Attorney General
Sessions: The bill gives broad authority to the Attorney
General and would rely upon implementation by this
administration. Despite assurances to the contrary, this
administration has failed to take any active steps to improve
the justice system, has dismantled existing protections, and
has shown outright hostility to people of color and other
historically marginalized communities. Furthermore, Attorney
General Jeff Sessions is a well-known, longtime opponent of
sentencing and prison reform. It would be unwise and harmful
to vest so much discretion in an Attorney General so hostile
to meaningful justice reform.
The Misplaced Incentive System: Effectively reducing
recidivism requires targeting those most likely to reoffend
with rehabilitative programming. Yet, under this bill, only
``minimum'' and ``low-risk'' prisoners would be able to
redeem their earned time credits, and they would earn more
credits than prisoners categorized as ``medium'' or ``high-
risk.'' Given that time credits would also be subject to
denial by the BOP warden and they are not real time off of a
sentence but rather a flawed mechanism to transition into a
decreasing number of halfway houses or to home confinement
that is rarely used by BOP, the bill is unlikely to provide
the incentives that would meaningfully reduce recidivism.
Allows for the privatization of certain public functions
and allows private entities to profit from incarceration. The
bill retains a provision that in order to expand programming
and productive activities, the Attorney General shall develop
policies for wardens of each BOP facility to enter into
partnerships with private entities and industry-sponsored
organizations.
The Absence of Appropriations for Implementation: The
resources needed to expand programming authorized under the
bill have not been--and may never be--appropriated. In fact,
Congress could decide today, absent this legislation, that
prison programming should be funded and increase the BOP's
budget by $50 million a year for the next five
[[Page H4317]]
years. Instead, the FY19 BOP budget calls for a reduction.
Furthermore, the recidivism reduction programming that
currently exists in the federal prison system is grossly
underfunded and not enough to serve those currently
incarcerated. Therefore, without any guarantees that the
necessary funding will be appropriated, this bill is an empty
promise.
The Undetermined Human and Fiscal Impact: It is unclear
what the fiscal impact of this bill will be, given that the
Congressional Budget Office has not released a score for the
bill. Moreover, it is unclear what the human impact of this
bill will be, given that neither the BOP nor the U.S.
Sentencing Commission has produced updated estimates on the
number of people projected to be impacted by the legislation.
Proponents argue that at least 4,000 people will be impacted
by the good time fix alone; however, relying on that number
is misleading because it is based upon data that is over a
decade old. No hearings have been held and there is no CBO
score available in order to explore these questions further.
The Omission of Sentencing Reform: Sentencing reform and
prison reform are both important, but one will not work
without the other. Meaningful reform requires both.
Furthermore, advancing prison reform as a stand-alone will
undermine longstanding, bipartisan efforts in the Senate to
advance a comprehensive justice reform package that includes
sentencing reform.
Last week, we were joined by over 70 civil rights
organizations in opposing this well-intentioned, but
misguided legislation at the House Judiciary Committee
markup. Many of our concerns were also shared by the American
Federation of Government Employees representing 33,000
federal correctional workers in the Bureau of Prisons, as
well as Representatives Lewis, Jackson Lee, and Senators
Durbin, Booker, and Harris in a recent Dear Colleague letter.
While we appreciate the inclination to support legislation
that endeavors to reform our prison system, we believe that
this particular bill would do more harm than good and would
have unintended consequences that ripple into the future.
Finally, if presented with one choice, ``to take what we
can get now,'' then we must ensure that ``what we get'' will
not perpetuate the existing harms of mass incarceration or
give false hope to the men and women languishing in prison
and the communities we represent. Our communities are being
demonized and criminalized so we must stand firm to resist
the lure of a compromise that is ultimately a false promise
that may never be realized and isn't in their best interests.
For the foregoing reasons, we urge you to vote ``No'' on
the FIRST STEP Act and The Leadership Conference will include
your position on the bill in our voting scorecard for the
115th Congress.
Sincerely,
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights; 334
East 92nd Street Tenant Association; A. Philip Randolph
Institute; African American Ministers In Action; American
Civil Liberties Union; American Federation of Labor-Congress
of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO); American Humanist
Association; Arkansas United Community Coalition; Asian
Americans Advancing Justice--AAJC; Asian Pacific American
Labor Alliance; Association of University Centers on
Disabilities (AUCD); Autistic Self Advocacy Network; Autistic
Women & Nonbinary Network; Bazelon Center for Mental Health
Law; Bend the Arc Jewish Action; Black Alliance for Just
Immigration; Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law;
Buried Alive Project; Campaign for Youth Justice; Casa de
Esperanza: National Latin@ Network for Healthy Families and
Communities.
Center for Community Change Action; Center for Community
Self-Help; Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP); Center
for Popular Democracy; Center for Responsible Lending;
Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA); Coalition of
Black Trade Unionists; Coalition on Human Needs; CURE
(Citizens United for Rehabilitation of Errants); Defending
Rights & Dissent; Demos; Disability Rights Education &
Defense Fund; Drug Policy Alliance (DPA); Equal Justice
Society; Equal Rights Advocates; Equality California; Equity
Matters; Evangelical Lutheran Church in America; Faith Action
Network--Washington State; Faith in Public Life.
Government Information Watch; Harm Reduction Coalition; Hip
Hop Caucus; Hispanic Federation; Human Rights Watch;
Immigrant Legal Resource Center; Indivisible; Japanese
American Citizens League; Jewish Council for Public Affairs
(JCPA); Justice Strategies; Juvenile Law Center;
LatinoJustice PRLDEF; Law Enforcement Action Partnership;
Let's Start, Inc.; Mommieactivist and Sons; MomsRising;
NAACP; NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.;
National Action Network's Washington Bureau; National
Alliance to End Sexual Violence.
National Association of Human Rights Workers; National
Association of Social Worker; National Bar Association (NBA);
National Black Justice Coalition; National Center for Lesbian
Rights; National Coalition Against Domestic Violence;
National Coalition on Black Civic Participation; National
Council of Churches; National Disability Rights Network;
National Education Association; National Employment Law
Project; National Hispanic Media Coalition; National
Immigrant Justice Center; National Immigration Law Center;
National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild;
National Juvenile Justice Network; National LGBTQ Task Force
Action Fund; National Organization for Women; National
Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE);
National Religious Campaign Against Torture.
NETWORK Lobby for Catholic Social Justice; Pennsylvania
Immigration and Citizenship Coalition; People For the
American Way (PFAW); PFLAG National; Prison Policy
Initiative; Safer Foundation; Sargent Shriver National Center
on Poverty Law; Service Employees International Union (SEIU);
Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund (SALDEF);
Southeast Asia Resource Action Center (SEARAC); Southern
Poverty Law Center (SPLC); Students for Sensible Drug Policy;
The Center for Media Justice; The Daniel Initiative; The
Decarceration Collective.
The National Council for Incarcerated and Formerly
Incarcerated Women and Girls; The United Church of Christ;
The United Methodist Church--General Board of Church and
Society; T'ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights;
UndocuBlack Network; UnidosUS; Union for Reform Judaism;
United Church of Christ, Local Church Ministries; United
Church of Christ, Justice and Witness Ministries; United We
Dream; V-Day and One Billion Rising; Washington Lawyers'
Committee for Civil Rights & Urban Affairs; We Belong
Together; Woodhull Freedom Foundation; World Without
Genocide.
____
The Sentencing Project,
Washington, DC, May 21, 2018.
Re FIRST STEP Act, H.R. 5682, falls far short of meaningful
criminal justice reform.
Hon. Paul D. Ryan,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Mitch McConnell,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Charles E. Schumer,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Ryan, Majority Leader McConnell and Minority
Leaders Pelosi and Schumer: As Congress prepares to consider
the FIRST STEP Act, I write to express The Sentencing
Project's significant concerns regarding the bill's
deficiencies in addressing the overcrowding, staffing and
programming crisis within the Bureau of Prisons (BOP). Reform
of the federal prison and sentencing system is long overdue
and The Sentencing Project has been at the forefront of
promoting comprehensive recommendations to ensure a more
humane, fair and proportional system for more than two
decades.
Unfortunately, H.R. 5683 falls short of these objectives in
two key areas. First, it would divert limited resources for
programming by requiring a complex risk assessment process
that would primarily benefit people deemed at a low or
minimal risk of recidivating. Second, without provisions in
the bill to reduce the excessive sentencing produced by
mandatory minimums for drug offenses, overcrowding will
persist and thereby divert resources from programs to reduce
recidivism.
The federal prison system currently operates at 14 percent
above capacity, and at higher rates at high and medium
security institutions, 24 percent and 18 percent
respectively. Along with an ``inmate to correctional
officer'' ratio among the highest in the country at 8.9 to 1,
prison safety concerns are at critical levels. Indeed, the
rate for some types of assaults in federal prisons has
steadily increased since 2014. In order to successfully
reform the federal prison system, including improving
conditions of confinement in areas such as medical and mental
health care, and to comprehensively rehabilitate instead of
warehouse the people confined within, Congress should adopt
policies to reduce the population, invest in correctional and
programming staff, and fully fund programming for all
incarcerated people.
H.R. 5682 would authorize only $50 million per year to
carry out the bill's mandates to create a risk assessment
tool to determine earned time credit eligibility, and expand
programming and community corrections capacity. While The
Sentencing Project supports the bill sponsors' stated
intentions to reform prisons, their promises of change ring
hollow. For example, the bill excludes thousands of people in
prison from benefiting from the programming incentives that
allow for earlier transition into community corrections. By
doing so it conflicts with research that demonstrates that
prison programming and associated incentives are most cost-
effective when provided to the highest risk groups.
Current authorization levels will only scratch the surface
in overcoming the huge deficit of programming at the BOP.
Indeed, the waiting list for the BOP's literacy program alone
is 16,000. Moreover, because of overcrowding and staff
shortages, many programming staff are regularly required to
[[Page H4318]]
augment correctional officer duties, resulting in fewer
programming opportunities. This staffing shortage may partly
explain why the number of people completing their GED dropped
by 59 percent between FY2016 and FY2017. Congress must take
more determined and thoughtful steps to change this dire
situation.
The Sentencing Project is pleased by the growing bipartisan
consensus among lawmakers to prioritize change in the
nation's criminal justice system. We will continue to be a
part of this conversation and look forward to strengthening
effective bipartisan reforms to achieve shared goals of
justice, fairness and safety.
Sincerely,
Marc Mauer,
Executive Director.
____
[From the Washington Post, May 21, 2018]
There's Something Huge Missing From the White House's Prison Bill
(By Eric H. Holder Jr.)
Over the past decade, Republicans and Democrats across the
country have joined forces to advocate for a fairer, more
effective criminal-justice system--one that would keep us
safe while reducing unnecessary mass incarceration. At the
heart of that effort has been an attempt to reduce overly
punitive sentences that fill our prisons for no discernible
public-safety rationale.
But now the Trump administration is pushing a misguided
legislative effort--likely to be voted on in the House this
week--that threatens to derail momentum for sentencing
reform. The bill is a tempting half-measure, but lawmakers
should resist the lure. The chance to implement real,
comprehensive reform may not come again any time soon.
It's easy to miss, but the push for bipartisan sentencing
reform has slowly been gaining strength. It was nothing short
of remarkable when Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) led the
Senate Judiciary Committee this past February to approve a
measure that would revise the federal government's outdated
federal mandatory minimum sentences. Grassley's move--in
direct defiance of the administration--was the most
significant legislative step toward federal criminal-justice
reform in decades.
Unfortunately, this progress has hit a roadblock with the
Trump administration's modest prison reform bill, called the
First Step Act. The bill seeks to improve prison conditions--
such as by requiring that inmates be housed within 500
driving miles of their families and by prohibiting shackles
on pregnant women. It also includes education, job training
and other personal development programs, as well as a system
of incentives to participate in the programs. These narrow
reforms are important, but they do not require congressional
action, nor do they deliver the transformative change we
need. The only way to do that is by amending the bill to
include comprehensive, bipartisan sentencing reform.
Why is this so important? The statistics are stark and, by
now, well-known. The United States has 5 percent of the
world's population, but 25 percent of its prisoners. Mass
incarceration is a core civil rights struggle for this
generation: One in three black men will be behind bars at
some point, a disparity that perpetuates underemployment in
the black community and contributes to the racial wealth gap.
The system is hugely expensive and ultimately unfair. And it
is not necessary to prevent and punish crime.
It is impossible to right this wrong unless we send the
right people to prison for appropriate lengths of time. That
starts by making sure that federal prison sentences are smart
on crime rather than thoughtlessly ``tough.'' The Justice
Department worked toward that goal when I led the agency
under President Barack Obama, blunting the impact of harsh
mandatory minimum sentences by directing federal prosecutors
to seek lower charges when possible. It worked. The federal
prison population dropped while the nation continued to
experience near-record-low crime rates.
As Grassley's support shows, this is not just a priority
for Democrats. He worked with Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.)
and others to advance the Sentencing Reform and Corrections
Act, which would reduce some mandatory minimum sentences. The
bill failed in 2016 as a victim of election-year politics,
but when Grassley doggedly brought it up again in February,
it passed through the committee by a vote of 16 to 5, with
support from several members of his own party.
Republicans and Democrats are enacting bold sentencing
reforms at the state level, too. Texas, Oklahoma and
Massachusetts are just a few of the states that have made
changes to cut back on overly punitive mandatory minimum
sentences.
Unfortunately, the White House has different ideas.
President Trump warned of ``American carnage'' in his
inaugural address, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions has
stoked false and misleading claims of rising crime. Bowing to
the president's most extreme allies, the White House has put
forward the First Step Act, which leaves out sentencing
reform entirely.
By choosing a tepid approach, the prison bill abandons
years of work and risks making it harder for Congress to
advance more serious legislation in the future. Meaningful
sentencing reform will be less likely to occur if the narrow
prison bill is enacted.
Fortunately, lawmakers have time to change course. They can
ensure that any legislation includes sentencing reform, on
which there is such strong consensus. Progressive lawmakers
in particular should fight to extend, not abandon, the Obama
administration's criminal-justice legacy. Conservative allies
such as Grassley have stepped forward for a shared strategy
and needed policies; Democrats should stand with them.
Nobody is under any illusions: Criminal-justice reform is
hard. The White House might scuttle the bill entirely, and
wavering members of Congress might balk. But to reform
America's prisons, we must change the laws that send people
to them in the first place. Anything less represents a
failure of leadership.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close if the other side is,
and I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, in spite of the good intentions of this bill, I believe
the restrictions in the incentive system it would create with respect
to recidivism reduction programming could compound the injustices that
occur at earlier stages of the criminal justice process; that its
approval would lessen the odds of achieving sentencing reform; and
that, on balance, the negatives outweigh the positives of this bill.
A broad spectrum of dozens of civil rights and other organizations
agree and oppose this bill, including the Leadership Conference on
Civil and Human Rights, the ACLU, the NAACP, the NAACP Legal and
Education Defense Fund, the American Federation of Federal Government
Employees Council of Prison Locals, the National Immigration Law
Center, and Human Rights Watch.
For the reasons I have outlined today, I reluctantly oppose H.R. 5682
and ask that my colleagues do the same.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, in closing, I urge my colleagues on the other side of
the aisle to not oppose this very important piece of legislation before
us today. It appears their opposition to the legislation is based upon
what is not in the legislation rather than what is actually in it. I
don't believe there is a single provision in the bill that they oppose.
{time} 1345
In fact, many of the provisions in this bill are there because they
specifically asked for them. For example, Democrats asked for a fix to
the way the Bureau of Prisons calculates good time credit. We made
changes to clarify congressional intent on that section.
They also asked for language on the risk assessments to ensure that
dynamic factors were used to evaluate a prisoner's risk of
recidivating. That request was honored. Various pilot programs and a
prohibition of shackling pregnant inmates were also placed in the
legislation at the request of Democrats. Good requests, good changes,
and these are only a few of the many requests that were honored.
Voting against this meaningful and important bill is a disservice to
those men and women currently incarcerated and their families. It is a
disservice to those great men and women who work in our Bureau of
Prisons, and it is a disservice to the American people.
The vast majority of those incarcerated are going to get out one day.
Let's make sure they have the tools and the resources to successfully
reenter society. H.R. 5682 does just that.
I urge my colleagues to support the FIRST STEP Act, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition of H.R. 5682,
the FIRST STEP Act. While I support several provisions in the
legislation, including prohibiting shackling of pregnant inmates,
requiring that individuals be incarcerated closer to their families,
and clarifying good time calculations, I cannot support other
provisions of the legislation.
I strongly believe the House should be working to ensure that once
convicted individuals have paid their debt to society they have the
skills and support to reintegrate into society, but this bill puts in
place too many barriers to that goal.
The bill excludes undocumented individuals, including those who
remained in the United States longer than authorized from the
recidivism reduction programming. Worse, the bill also excludes some
lawful permanent residents from the program and could trigger their
[[Page H4319]]
removal. The bill also excludes those who have been convicted of drug
crimes, including marijuana related convictions.
Given that immigrant and minority communities make up a
disproportionate share of immigration and drug related offenders in the
criminal justice system, these exclusions will by their very nature
exclude those who most need the benefits of the bill.
Finally, any conversation about reducing recidivism must include
sentencing reform that would keep low risk nonviolent offenders out of
prison in the first place and address our draconian federal mandatory
minimum laws.
Mr. Speaker, we can do better, and we must do better if we are to
address this issue.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, first I would like to acknowledge
the gentleman from Georgia, Representative Doug Collins, and the
gentleman from New York, Representative Hakeem Jeffries, for their hard
work and dedication in improving this bill over the last several weeks.
Historically, the United States of America has been plagued with
serious, fundamental problems within our criminal justice system. For
far too long, policymakers have chosen to play politics and disapprove
of common-sense policy that is specifically geared towards reducing
crime by instead enacting so-called ``tough on crime'' slogans and
soundbites, such as ``three strikes and you're out,'' ``mandatory
minimum sentencing,'' and even rhymes such as, ``you do the adult
crime, you do the adult time.'' These policies may sound appealing, but
their impact ranges from a negligible reduction in crime to an actual
increase in crime.
Turning to the bill we are debating today, I recognize that the FIRST
STEP Act includes a fix to the calculation of good time credit, which I
have sought for many years. Calculating good time credit as Congress
had originally intended is a serious improvement made by this bill.
This bill also improves the auditing process for enforcing the Prison
Rape Elimination Act (PREA) to protect prisoners from sexual assault.
It places prohibitions on shackling pregnant and post-partum women. The
bill expands the use and transparency of compassionate release for
terminally ill prisoners. It also requires the federal Bureau of
Prisons to house prisoners closer to their primary residence, so they
can maintain ties to their family and community. And there is a
significant investment in programs designed to reduce recidivism.
But process is essential to crafting an effective bill. There were no
hearings on this bill. Nor has a CBO score been done. Nor has a prison
impact analysis been prepared. And it is obvious that experts had
little to do with drafting the bill. As a result of this process, there
are several problems with the bill. First, the version of the bill we
are voting on today is unnecessarily complicated by the use of a risk
assessment tool. I have reached out to experts in the field of prison
reform, and I have not found anyone who will say that risk assessment
tools should be used to determine which prisoners can use time credits
to gain early release from prison. Instead, they suggest that simply
increasing programming for everyone will reduce recidivism and the
complicated risk assessments are unnecessary and will stand in the way
of reducing recidivism for many prisoners. The risk assessment process
may also exacerbate existing racial disparities in the federal prison
system.
Second, experts have raised serious concerns about excluding groups
of prisoners from this program who we know will be released from prison
and therefore should be involved in the program.
Third, there are questions of cost and funding. The Bureau of Prisons
has cut contracts with halfway houses and terminated 6,000 correctional
officers. This bill cannot achieve its goals without an adequately
staffed prison system, as well as sufficient space at halfway houses.
Even in the absence of hearings and experts, we can see that some of
the opposition to this bill is almost comical, because it is lodged by
advocates who support other legislation that carries the same
provisions that are either similar to or worse than what they complain
about in the FIRST STEP Act. Others oppose the bill because it does not
include sentencing reform and therefore does not address mass
incarceration. Unfortunately, the bill those advocates hold up as
``sentencing reform'' fails to make any meaningful reduction in mass
incarceration, and may in fact add to mass incarceration.
It is in the context of this absurd process that we have to vote on
this legislation. Unfortunately, without the appropriate analysis, we
can only guess about its impact. Based on that guess, it is my
determination that no prisoner will be worse off, but many may be
significantly better off, under the FIRST STEP Act. I expect that
public safety will be enhanced by this bill, because more people will
receive programming to reduce their likelihood to commit future crimes.
Although this is a shameful process, I will therefore support the bill.
Mr. Speaker, as the process moves forward, I hope that the sponsors
of this legislation will continue to improve it, based on evidence and
research.
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today the House is
expected to consider H.R. 5682--the Formerly Incarcerated Reenter
Society Transformed Safely Transitioning Every Person Act or FIRST STEP
Act. This bill represents a good faith effort to improve the
reintegration of incarcerated individuals back into their communities
and reduce recidivism. In this political climate, we must always strive
to achieve meaningful reforms wherever possible. I believe that the
FIRST STEP Act will do just that and I intend to vote for this measure
when it is considered on the floor.
I acknowledge that this is not a perfect bill. Very few are, if any.
However, the STEP Act will offer a new opportunity for incarcerated
individuals to participate in evidence-based programming to reduce
their likelihood of recidivism. It is a bill that is supported by
prominent civil rights and criminal justice reform organizations such
as the National Urban League and the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition.
It passed the House Judiciary Committee on a 25-5 vote, and I feel even
more confidently about its passage on the House floor.
Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that this Congress can do more to not
only reduce recidivism through ``back-end reform,'' but also engage in
``front-end reform'' to keep individuals out of prison in the first
place. However, we must consider a bill entirely on its merits and not
just oppose a measure because it does not go far enough in its reforms.
The FIRST STEP Act is exactly that--a first step to make meaningful and
impactful changes to our prison system.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5682, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.
____________________