{"title":"The Prison Industry Authority","authors":"Michael G. Hamilton","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.977084","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.977084","url":null,"abstract":"The California Prison Industry Authority (PIA) has not fulfilled its three statutory purposes: to be self-supporting, to employ inmates, and to give inmates work skills. PIA's management deserves most of the blame. PIA management failures include keeping excessive inventory, supporting failing businesses, and incompetence in sales. To better take advantage of the PIA's potential, the PIA should bring in new managers who have significant business experience. The PIA needs to shed the civil service rules that shackle its ability to pay managers for performance. It needs reward performance - where performance includes how much the PIA profits and how well the PIA rehabilitates inmates. This will encourage PIA managers to tighten their inventory, close unprofitable enterprises, increase sales, and rehabilitate prisoners.","PeriodicalId":372228,"journal":{"name":"Corrections & Sentencing Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"85 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121539395","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Building an Employment Bridge: Making Ex-Offenders Marketable, Getting Employers to the Table, and Increasing the Likelihood of an Employment Connection","authors":"R. Rodriguez","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.976999","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.976999","url":null,"abstract":"If an ex-offender lies about their criminal record on a job application, there is a risk of being fired if their criminal record is later discovered. If an ex-offender is honest and discloses their criminal record, there is a risk of not getting the job in the first place. Various strategies - financial incentives, erasing of criminal records after demonstrated rehabilitation, certificates of rehabilitation issued by the state, and third-party intermediaries - can make ex-offenders more marketable and employers more willing to hire ex-offenders.","PeriodicalId":372228,"journal":{"name":"Corrections & Sentencing Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114721526","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"A Return to the 'World of Work': An Analysis of California's Prison Job Training Programs and Statutory Barriers to Ex-Offender Employment","authors":"J. Lipez","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.977255","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.977255","url":null,"abstract":"This paper seeks to propose ways in which the State of California can help ex-offenders find employment upon their release from prison. In particular, the paper examines California's current prison employment programs and suggests that California should more effectively tailor them to train prisoners for those jobs that are both practically and legally available in California's current labor market. Note: Tables 1-5 for this paper are not included, please contact the author if you would like access to them.","PeriodicalId":372228,"journal":{"name":"Corrections & Sentencing Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130938649","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Broken Promises: A Response to Stenning and Roberts' \"Empty Promises\"","authors":"Jonathan Rudin, Kent Roach","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1215192","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1215192","url":null,"abstract":"The authors argue that the data relied upon in Stenning and Roberts' article \"Empty Promises: Parliament, The Supreme Court, and the Sentencing of Aboriginal Offenders\" do not support their conclusions that Aboriginal over-representation in prison is not a national problem and that Aboriginal offenders already receive shorter sentences than comparable non-Aboriginal offenders. The authors then argue that the proper purpose of s.718.2(e) is to reduce Aboriginal over-representation in prison and not, as Stenning and Roberts have argued, to eliminate discriminatory disparities in the sentencing of Aboriginal offenders. They suggest that s. 718.2(e) can be justified by theories that relate Aboriginal over-representation in prison to the unique experience of colonialism and not, as Stenning and Roberts suggest, to social and economic disadvantage that Aboriginal offenders may share with other offenders. Finally, the authors suggest that Stenning and Roberts' arguments against the reference to Aboriginal offenders in s. 718.2(e) are related to implicit assumptions about the needs for formal equality and sentencing tied to desert. These assumptions are not in accord with Canadian law, which favours substantive equality and sentencing that is not determined by desert.","PeriodicalId":372228,"journal":{"name":"Corrections & Sentencing Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"70 6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130664860","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Georgia Immigration Pardons: A Case Study in Mass Clemency","authors":"Elizabeth Rapaport","doi":"10.1525/FSR.2000.13.3-4.184","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/FSR.2000.13.3-4.184","url":null,"abstract":"The 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRAIRA) enlarged the class of aliens subject to mandatory deportation as \"aggravated felons\" under the Immigration and Nationality Act. There is only one way of avoiding deportation where a non-citizen has at any time in the past been convicted of an offense triggering removal, and that is to obtain a pardon. Over the 15-month period ending in June of 2001, the Georgia Board of Pardons and Parole granted 138 pardons to permanent resident aliens who had suddenly found themselves subject to deportation under IIRAIRA. Recipients of these pardons included people who had lived in the United States for many years, were married to U.S. citizens, and who had U.S. citizen children. Some of them had been convicted of very minor offenses years before IIRAIRA'S enactment.","PeriodicalId":372228,"journal":{"name":"Corrections & Sentencing Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2001-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124091078","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Bail Book: A Comprehensive Look at Bail in America's Criminal Justice System - Introduction","authors":"S. B. Baughman","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3200533","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3200533","url":null,"abstract":"Mass incarceration is one of the greatest social problems facing the United States today. America incarcerates a greater percentage of its population than any other country and is one of only two countries that requires arrested individuals to pay bail to be released from jail while awaiting trial. After arrest, the bail decision is the single most important cause of mass incarceration, yet this decision is often neglected since it is made in less than two minutes. Shima Baradaran Baughman draws on constitutional rights and new empirical research to show how we can reform bail in America. Tracing the history of bail, she demonstrates how it has become an oppressive tool of the courts that disadvantages minority and poor defendants and shows how we can reform bail to alleviate mass incarceration. By implementing these reforms, she argues, we can restore constitutional rights and release more defendants, while lowering crime rates.","PeriodicalId":372228,"journal":{"name":"Corrections & Sentencing Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"82 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130442437","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}