‘Congressional Research Service’ Report, Recommends Increasing Good Time Credits and Reinstating Parole for Federal Offenders

‘Congressional Research Service’ Report, Recommends Increasing Good Time Credits and Reinstating Parole for Federal Offenders. [FCN/INST-170203]
– Historic, Groundbreaking ‘Congressional Research Service’ 2013 Report –
Recommends Increasing Good Time Credits and Reinstating Parole for Federal Offenders.
FedCURE Special Report:
Alleluia! After more then twenty-five years of campaigning for federal criminal justice reforms, to reduce the federal prison population, comes an historic, ground-breaking 2013 report, from of all places the Congressional Research Service (CRS)* titled, “The Federal Prison Population Buildup: Overview, Policy Changes, Issues, and Options.” The report documents the United States’ “historically unprecedented increase in the federal prison population.” It supports the long held view by many, including, but not limited to: FedCURE, its members, partners, fellow advocate organizations, former and current members of Congress, high level government officials, the nations most respected, independent nonpartisan think tanks, prominent scholars, criminal justice professionals and an overwhelming majority of the public, that Congress cannot build its way out of the mass incarceration dilemma it now faces, because of a failed criminal justice policy; and recommends Congress “changing or reversing some of the policies that have been put into place over the years which contributed to the increasing number of federal prison inmates,” inter alia, increasing good time and reinstating parole. The BARBER AMENDMENT, post,** a simple two sentence undisruptive statutory amendment, genuinely accomplishes these ends, with out disrupting release or reentry processes and public safety, by restoring–rolling back–federal good time allowances to pre-1987 levels. Virtually, BARBER is a $1.2 billion dollar annual austerity sentencing bill.
While elaborating on “several options Congress could consider if policymakers wanted to expand early release options for federal inmates, including (1) reinstating parole, (2) expanding good time credits, and (3) expanding the conditions under which courts could reduce sentences pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3582(c)(1)(A),” it is abundantly clear that the report concludes, inter alia, that the way out of the dilemma–to reduce the growth of the federal prison population–is for Congress to employ “Early Release Measures.” These measures include “(1) modifying mandatory minimum penalties, (2) expanding the use of Residential Reentry Centers, (3) placing more offenders on probation, (4) reinstating parole for federal inmates, (5) expanding the amount of good time credit an inmate can earn, and (6) repealing federal criminal statutes for some offenses.” BRAVO!
Moreover, according to the report and righteously so, “Congress might also consider changing or reversing some of the policies that have been put into place over the years which contributed to the increasing number of federal prison inmates. Some of these options include placing some inmates in alternatives to incarceration, such as probation, or expanding early release options by allowing inmates to earn more good time credit or allowing inmates to be placed on parole once again. Congress could consider reducing the amount of time inmates are incarcerated in federal prisons by limiting the number of crimes subject to mandatory minimum penalties or reducing the length of the mandatory minimum sentence. Finally, policymakers could consider allowing states to investigate and prosecute offenses that have become subject to federal jurisdiction over the past three decades.” Id., at p. 57.
Full Report, 60 pg. PDF (indexed to highlighted sections) available at: http://www.fedcure.org/documents/CRS_FederalPrisonPopulationBuildup_R42937-220113fc.pdf
* Note: The Congressional Research Service (CRS) is an arm of the Library of Congress devoted to providing for Congress research and analysis on legislative issues. In addition to meeting with Congressional members and staffers, CRS releases reports and issue briefs for members of Congress. These reports and issue briefs are made available to Congress through a web site that is not available to the general public. The CRS strongly believes that its sole purpose is to directly serve Congress and not the public. https://opencrs.com/faq/
** BARBER AMENDMENT: A bill to amend Title 18 U.S.C. Section 3624(b)(1) as follows: by striking the number “54” in the first sentence as it appears and inserting in lieu thereof the number “128”; and in the same sentence, by striking “prisoner’s term of imprisonment” and inserting in lieu thereof “sentence imposed.” This amendment is retroactive. [END].
NOTICE: The Barber Amendment has not been introduced. FedCURE is seeking bipartisan support for the bill in the 113th Congress.
Special thanks to Nathan James, Analyst in Crime Policy, CRS, njames@crs.loc.gov, for this report.
Kindly dissiminate this message and the report to your lists and to your Congressperson(s); and urge them to support the BARBER AMENDMENT | http://www.fedcure.org/documents/HR147.shtml

Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

They seem to always find a way to have these things not apply to sex offenders. Usually they will list, violent offenders. So, although much debate on hands on vs porn, they consider them all violent. All crimes have a victim. It will be interesting if this pans out. I know I have written the sentencing committee when they review the mandatory minimums over several years, without any movement during the overview process.

I think that would be a Fair thing to do reducing inmates time i think 80 to 85 percent is to to much time on a sentence good time should be lowerd

Current prison sentences are too long with little done to help the prisoner. The Internet sex offender not only must serve their complete sentence but are never truly free upon release. Internet sex offenders need separate guidelines that fit the crime.