Social work and the politics of criminal justice reform
By Lindsey LaPointe, Illinois-based criminal justice advocate.
A previous Smart Justice blogger explained that social workers should acknowledge our expertise and knowledge to inform effective changes in criminal justice practice and policy. I could not agree more, with an emphasis on the effective policy change component since this is a realm social workers too often shy away from. As a social worker who just spent five plus years working within state government collaboratively muscling out criminal justice reform programming and policy on a state and county level, I have much to say about the urgent need for more social workers in this space (i.e., more people with a social justice and systems lens). Near the top of my list of lessons learned is the undeniable stock and trade of big p and little p politics, which I quickly learned, is braided throughout everything. The big p politics we all know well: electoral campaigns, legislative bodies, and the age old liberal vs. conservative. The small p politics we also know well, but often fail to recognize the effect on our day to day. Simply put, this refers to the daily constraints of our institutions, leaders and relationships: Who is accountable to who? Whose agenda matters? And all the nitty gritty of human relationships. Here’s a little background before I explain.
I was housed at a small state agency in the executive branch of Illinois state government, assisting to administer a justice reinvestment type of program that provides grant funding and technical assistance to counties implementing locally-controlled and designed alternatives to incarceration for non-violent offenders. Although started in 2010 using federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funding, the program soon after shifted to state general revenue funds. This move to state funding was logical since the entire program aims to reverse the current system that incentivizes counties to commit individuals facing felony charges to state prison since once they do, the cost shifts from local to state government. The idea behind this justice reinvestment program is to provide resources for local justice systems (i.e., counties) to run effective evidence-based community corrections programs, leading to better outcomes for individuals, families and communities. The programs are locally controlled and designed and include supervision and services. Think drug courts, mental health courts and special probation programs and enhanced services such as cognitive-behavioral therapy, recovery support, trauma treatment, and housing assistance. Surely these tools of alternatives to incarceration are familiar to social workers, but what does Politics and politics have to do with it? As it turns out, A LOT. I’ve boiled it down to two main buckets to make a case for the (primarily local) politics of criminal justice reform and why social workers must pay attention. Of note, since 87% of all prisoners in the United States are held in state systems, these reflections focus on local-county and state justice systems which process the bulk of criminal proceedings and hold the most promise for reform.
Just look up
When we think of politics and criminal justice, it’s tempting to focus on the biggest electoral political stage (the presidency) and the federal criminal justice system however these politics are far less important than the political actors at the local county level. In reality, our criminal justice system is not a system at all, but a gaggle of 3,144 locally controlled criminal justice systems, owing their shape to both elected and appointed officials, primarily at the county-level, and subject to the local political climate of the day.
Social workers and others tackling criminal justice reform at the state or county-level — whether programmatically or legislatively — need to simply keep looking up to find an elected official. Working with a State Director of prisons or the Parole Board Chairperson on a re-entry program? Appointed by the elected governor. Working with the Director of a county probation department to bring more services to probation? Appointed by the Chief Judge who in turn is elected by a group of his or her peers. Meeting with an executive leader at the county jail to build out correctional programming? Hired by the elected Sheriff. Working with leaders in the Public Defender’s and Prosecutor’s offices to divert individuals facing non-violent charges from prison? Appointed by the County Board President or Chairperson and elected by the county voters, respectively. Want to ensure all of the county justice departments have sufficient funding and budget in a way that prioritizes a fairer and more humane criminal justice system? Talk to the elected County Board President and the independently elected commissioners.
On top of this Political and political web to navigate, it’s no secret that government is a very top down discipline so expecting any middle-management (integral to operationalizing any aspect of criminal justice reform) to buck their leaders is an ill-advised gamble. Social workers must acknowledge the local politics of criminal justice reform, get to know the players, and perhaps most importantly, the political and non-political constraints they deal with on a day to day basis. Once social workers are proficient in the above, we must stay flexible and tuned in for personnel changes since many of these local political actors fight tooth and nail for their jobs every 4 years.
The political climate — Upcoming elections
The political climate is critical to any sort of policy change, especially in the present day moment of 24 hour news and all-access information. In this context, the local political climate undeniably shapes the process and progress of criminal justice reform at the local and state level.
Due to the funds required to have a shot in any electoral campaign and the short terms of office holders, now more than ever our elected officials are in constant campaign mode. This is generally understood to be a bad thing for sound public policy which includes criminal justice reform. Campaigns are geared toward generic voting blocks and are always ripe to reduce even a smart policy decision into an attack mailer or one line of a television commercial. In one expensive and highly watched 2016 race for Illinois State Representative, one campaign reduced its opponent (who happened to have a long history of social justice and criminal justice reform work) to a myopic and false accusation that her past decisions led to the unfettered release of prisoners from jails and prisons. This sort of reductive fear-mongering is very effective in swaying voters and yet ultimately unproductive as it’s based on anecdotes (instead of data) and leads to quick, short sited, and fiscally unsound decisions (i.e., lock ’em up and throw away the key). Politicians are notoriously risk averse and politicians mulling over criminal justice reform with an upcoming election are risk averse on steroids, living in fear of their own Willie Horton moment. Elected officials shaping or voting on criminal justice and public safety policy will never forget Willie Horton and will always proceed with extreme caution, however in recent years the conventional political wisdom of “soft on crime” is changing, becoming much less of a political liability while the notion of “smart on crime” is getting more airtime, even among conservative politicians. As with many areas of social change, the public is ahead of the policy makers on criminal justice reform and the public’s readiness for change has been documented in more than one public opinion poll.
Social workers pushing for criminal justice reform policy must not only be aware of and ready to mitigate this ultimately unproductive and often destructive local political climate of local elections, but also armed with real time information and data (i.e., public opinion, program evaluation, fiscal arguments) to push risk-averse towards justice reform.
And more
The influence of any given local political climate on the process and progress of criminal justice reform is vast and upcoming elections are just one small piece of the puzzle. Other areas call for attention from social workers pushing for criminal justice reform policy as well, components that carry a deep influence over mitigating the harm of our criminal justice system(s). To name just a few more to put on a shelf for a future blog post:
• The local media and subsequent public pressure.
• The omnipresent potential for other issues to eclipse reform or “suck up all the oxygen in the room.” In present day Illinois, these issues are the state’s two year budget impasse, hyper-partisan political gridlock, a bitter fight over education funding, and a state that many concede is simply broke in lieu of any structural reform.
• The opportunities and/or constraints provided by the inevitable leadership change at the elected official, executive staff, and board level.
Social workers are certainly adept at both advocating for people impacted by the criminal justice system and pushing for much-needed policy reforms. Let’s get even more adept by making it a point to navigate the politics of criminal justice reform so we can be more effective at tackling one of the biggest human rights and social justice issues of our time.
Lindsey LaPointe is a social worker based in Illinois with experience in both community-based non-profits and state government. She spent 5.5 years working for the state of Illinois where she was responsible for collaboratively scaling up alternatives to incarceration partnerships and programs in 39 counties. Lindsey is committed to collaboratively working to decrease the use of incarceration in Illinois and the United States and considers decarceration a key component of social justice work. In September 2017, she will go back to the non-profit sector to continue work in the justice reform field. She can be reached at lapointe_lindsey@yahoo.com
