Pell grant (re)extended to prisoners?
07-28-2015, 01:38 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vehicle: MC + RD2 + AW11 + 944 = 4x Win
Pell grant (re)extended to prisoners?
http://www.wsj.com/articles/pell-gra...ers-1438029241
I see this as a good thing! Not only giving inmates something to do on the inside but also hope for the future is important in returning the prison system back to a rehabilitation process. The numbers on this just make sense! With 2.3 million incarcerated, alleviating return trips is going to be vital going forward. Not only that but with a surprisingly small sum of $53 million (based on the 1993 sum of $32 million), especially being revert directly back into taxable assets as the ex-convict leaves prison for the work force, that sum will make itself back in short time. The only down side the extreme right has proposed is the tax burden, but adding 52 million to a sum 1000 times that large is a non-issue imo. Even if that money were reverted to the current 8.8 million students using the exiting Pell grant it would amount to no more than $6 and a few pennies more per student. A pointlessly small sum especially in the face of higher education costs. I fail to see any down side to this proposal.
What are your thoughts?
The Obama administration plans to restore federal funding for prison inmates to take college courses, a potentially controversial move that comes amid a broader push to overhaul the criminal justice system.
The plan, set to be unveiled Friday by the secretary of education and the attorney general, would allow potentially thousands of inmates in the U.S. to gain access to Pell grants, the main form of federal aid for low-income college students. The grants cover up to $5,775 a year in tuition, fees, books and other education-related expenses.
Prisoners received $34 million in Pell grants in 1993, according to figures the Department of Education provided to Congress at the time. But a year later, Congress prohibited state and federal prison inmates from getting Pell grants as part of broad anticrime legislation, leading to a sharp drop in the number of in-prison college programs. Supporters of the ban contended federal aid should only go to law-abiding citizens.
A 2013 study by the Rand Corp. found that inmates who participated in education programs, including college courses, had significantly lower odds of returning to prison than inmates who didn’t...
The plan, set to be unveiled Friday by the secretary of education and the attorney general, would allow potentially thousands of inmates in the U.S. to gain access to Pell grants, the main form of federal aid for low-income college students. The grants cover up to $5,775 a year in tuition, fees, books and other education-related expenses.
Prisoners received $34 million in Pell grants in 1993, according to figures the Department of Education provided to Congress at the time. But a year later, Congress prohibited state and federal prison inmates from getting Pell grants as part of broad anticrime legislation, leading to a sharp drop in the number of in-prison college programs. Supporters of the ban contended federal aid should only go to law-abiding citizens.
A 2013 study by the Rand Corp. found that inmates who participated in education programs, including college courses, had significantly lower odds of returning to prison than inmates who didn’t...
What are your thoughts?
07-29-2015, 08:40 PM
#3
Super Moderator
Prisons were never supposed to be terrible and harsh. Hence the name, "Department of Corrections", not "Department of Punishment".
07-30-2015, 07:15 PM
#4
Super Moderator
Okay way to fail at knowing your history there buddy. Explain away the term "penitentiary" if you're so correct.
I'm in favor of doing this for the stated reason: STUDY. People on death row can rot, vs. getting degrees as they could before 1994. People with a release date or even a decent chance of getting out, we should study the effect of providing them education - at a community college-level sort of cost. If it shows the positive result it *might* then we should consider the cost of education vs. the cost of incarcerating recidivists, and educate our felons who may ever be released.
Of course the alternative also applies. If they don't have better outcomes, the study should be stopped and the tax money not taken from us at gunpoint.
I'm in favor of doing this for the stated reason: STUDY. People on death row can rot, vs. getting degrees as they could before 1994. People with a release date or even a decent chance of getting out, we should study the effect of providing them education - at a community college-level sort of cost. If it shows the positive result it *might* then we should consider the cost of education vs. the cost of incarcerating recidivists, and educate our felons who may ever be released.
Of course the alternative also applies. If they don't have better outcomes, the study should be stopped and the tax money not taken from us at gunpoint.
07-30-2015, 07:37 PM
#5
Super Moderator
I don't know of many prisons that still call themselves penitentiaries. Most are now "correctional institutions". Even when they were, they weren't intended to be harsh. Many ended up that way because of a lack of taxpayer funding, which is why many are now private. History is in the past. Today is what matters. An uneducated population commits more crimes, whether they've already been in the system or not. Non-violent criminals should be taught a trade. Here in Vegas, Shelby had prisoners working for them. When I was a BLM firefighter, I worked with "con-crews"... Nevada Division of Forestry crews that were made up of prisoners. We can spend money educating them now or we can spend money warehousing them forever when they keep coming back because they have no work or life training and only know how to steal or sling drugs.
07-31-2015, 10:38 AM
#7
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vehicle: MC + RD2 + AW11 + 944 = 4x Win
No privacy, no freedoms, prevalent
rape, gang violence ... Hell, everyone watches you sh*t! There are tons of reasons prison is bad. I am by no means suggesting we give every convict cable TV and internet, in fact I'd like to see jail become much more streamlined hence cutting costs. However I have yet to see a single study showing that an educated convict with a fair chance at gainful employment ($45k+/year) available on the outside is destined to return to crime. Most of the time crime is in fact a result of poor education and easy but limited money. It's not a 100% solution by any means. But rather than focusing on punishment, though still providing ample negative reinforcement, providing a self propelled solution and means to a better life is going to go much further in reducing our pandemic incarceration rate. It also alleviates stress on police officials by means of reducing repeat criminal activity. And I don't think anyone here will disagree that a reduction in the size and scope of police activity, not to mention reduced mental tension on officers, is a bad thing.
Fewer repeat offenders = fewer stressed out cops = fewer angry, abusive cops.
Example:
I personally live in a very low crime area, and becsue of that I have not received any tickets in my area in the past 3 years living here. I even got a "warning" for doing 85 in a 65. Why? Cops don't have the stresses of big city life and daily visits to the Jones' domestic disputes and homicides. Life is good for these guys and in response they are good to us. The community appreciates a police force that isn't dictator-esque, and in return the police force is a lot more lenient.
07-31-2015, 05:23 PM
#8
Super Moderator
07-31-2015, 08:36 PM
#9
Super Moderator
Originally Posted by i8acobra
Prisons were never supposed to be terrible and harsh.
Originally Posted by i8acobra
I don't know of many prisons that still call themselves penitentiaries.
Shifting the goalposts is not a good sign of your confidence in the original point
Prisons are for punishing people. You go there for doing bad things. Bad human, no liberties for you! Harshness depends on the crime and yes, some are bad on purpose even today. In the Roman empire, they had some prisoners converted to gladiators to be killed for sport. NEVER is a strong word to use before "supposed to be terrible".Not every modern prison is a supermax. Some are more like a summer camp where you never get to go home. Most are closer to a standard jail. Almost all are (arguably) better than freezing your balls off in the middle of winter, which is the alternative for some people.
07-31-2015, 10:41 PM
#10
Super Moderator
Nobody shifted anything. We're talking about America, not the Roman Empire. You'll note I used the word "supposed" in addition to the word "never". Prisons are designed to isolate criminals from the outside world and correct their bad behavior. Sometimes that correction comes by way of educating inmates in a skill or trade that gives them an alternative means to support themselves. Sometimes in comes in the form of a short sentence that hopefully knocks the loose screw back in place and helps people get their head on straight. The point of prison is to convince people that not committing crimes is better than committing crimes. If the point was simply to punish, there would be no point in ever releasing anybody since they would be almost guaranteed to return.
No prison has even been built with the intention of making life harsh.
No prison has even been built with the intention of making life harsh.
