Prison Admissions Are Heading Down Faster Than Overall Incarceration

Yesterday I posted a chart showing the (slight) decline in the US incarceration rate in 2016. However, a reader points out that the prison admission rate is more interesting as an indicator of what’s happening right now, and the decline there is more impressive. Here are admissions and releases over the past three decades:

Since its peak in 2006, new prison admissions have dropped by 19 percent. When admissions fall below releases, the total prison population shrinks—something that happened in 2009 for the first time since 1980 and has continued since then. Eventually, as some of the prisoners with long sentences doled out in the 80s and 90s come up for release at the same time that new admissions continue to decline, the incarceration rate should start dropping more steeply.

If we want the overall incarceration to come down even faster, the key is not just fewer admissions, but shorter sentences. US sentences tend to be far longer than those in the rest of the world, and now that crime rates have declined to the levels of 50 years ago we can probably afford to start handing out more reasonable sentences.

POSTSCRIPT: Note that this data is for prisoners only, not local jail inmates. The average jail sentence is only a few months, so admissions rates don’t have the same meaning as they do for prisons.

POSTSCRIPT 2: As with yesterday’s chart, I calculated these rates as a share of the non-elderly population, not the entire population. This means that the exact numbers are different from the ones you’ll see in other charts—though the basic shape isn’t much different. Why do I do this? Because if you use the entire population, some of the decline in the prison numbers is simply due to the growing number of those over 65, who account for about 0 percent of the prison population. I think it’s more useful to look at incarceration rates as a percentage of the population that’s actually responsible for nearly all crime and nearly all prisoners.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest