Drug Sentences Driving Federal Prison Population Growth, Government Report Finds

Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs');
by Phillip Smith

In a report released Wednesday, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that growth in the federal prison population is outstripping the Bureau of Prisons' (BOP) rated capacity to house prisoners and that the bulge in federal prisoners is largely attributable to drug prisoners and longer sentences for them. That growing inmate overcrowding negatively affects inmates, staff, and BOP infrastructure, the GAO said.

The federal prison population increased 9.5% from Fiscal Year 2006 through FY 2011, exceeding a 7% increase in rated capacity. Although BOP increased the number of available beds by 8,300 during that period by opening five new facilities (and closing four minimum security camps), the number of prisons where overcrowding is occurring increased from 36% to 39%, with BOP forecasting overcrowding increasing to encompass 45% of prisons through 2018.

The drug war and harsh federal drug sentencing are the main drivers of the swelling federal prison population. The GAO reported that 48% of federal prisoners were drug offenders last year, and that the average sentence length for federal drug prisoners is now 2 ? times longer than before federal anti-drug legislation passed in the mid-1980s.There are also now more than 100,000 federal drug prisoners, more than the total number of federal prisoners as recently as 20 years ago.

The negative effects of federal prison overcrowding include "increased use of double and triple bunking, waiting lists for education and drug treatment programs, limited meaningful work opportunities, and increased inmate-to-staff ratios," the report found. All of those "contribute to increased inmate misconduct, which negatively affects the safety and security of inmates and staff." The report also noted that "BOP officials and union representatives voiced concerns about a serious incident [read: riot] occurring."

For this report, the GAO also examined prison populations in five states and actions those states have taken to reduce populations. It found that the states "have modified criminal statutes and sentencing, relocated inmates to local facilities, and provided inmates with additional opportunities for early release," the report found.

Noting that the BOP does not have the authority to modify sentences or sentencing, it nevertheless identified possible means for Congress to address federal prison overcrowding. It could reduce inmate populations by reforming sentencing laws or it could increase capacity by building more prisons, or some combination of the two.

Or it could remove drug control from the ambit of criminal justice altogether and treat the use and distribution of currently illegal drugs as a public health problem.

(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Tyranny/Police State
- Texas Cop Drags 77-Yr-Old Grandmother from Car for Refusing to Show ID
- Texas Police Kill Unarmed Man Before Confiscating Witness Camera and Deleting Images
- Police Learn Propaganda Tactics at Internet Conference
- Tarnished badges: Opa-locka's troubled police force
- Officer Enforcing Leash Law Shoots Family's Dog, Witness Horrified
- 90-Plus Arrests of D.C. Cops in Under 4 Years
- Infiltrating Occupy: Austin Activists Face Charges for Equipment Provided by Undercover Police
- LRPD officer Josh Hastings has 6 suspensions in 5 years, currently on paid leave after killing 15-yr-old

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy

View the original article here

Population Control – Eugenics Depopulation Agenda

Has eugenics faded away with time, or has the pseudo science morphed and cloaked itself under new auspices. Were some of the original founders of population control efforts themselves eugenicists? How and when did eugenicists shift from golden era ideas to Malthusian population control. While there are examples of eugenics in practice in its pre-World War II form, eugenicists have course scaled back rhetoric and reframed their ideas in the post-World War II world. Eugenicists who have still caught on to the discredited principles of eugenics, now attach these ideas to environmentalism and population control in an attempt to carry on eugenics in a more veiled form. Malthusian population control was now emphasized.

Several prominent families are responsible for funding and promoting eugenics in America. Namely the Rockefeller, Carnegie, Harriman, and Osborn families. Two families, the Rockefellers and the Osborns, are particularly significant. John D. Rockefeller senior contributed a large amount of money to develop Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in the early 1900s, which housed the eugenics records office from 1910 to 1944. Rockefeller influence also spread overseas to Germany, where the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Psychiatry and the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Eugenics, Anthropology, and Human Heredity resided. Much of the money used to run these facilities came directly from Rockefeller. These institutes became centers for Nazi eugenics programs during the reign of Adolf Hitler.

In 1932, the third international eugenics conference was held in New York City. The conference was hosted by Henry Fairfield Osborn. It was during this conference that an honored guest from Germany attended. Ernst Rüdin was elected by the conference attendees as president of the International Federation of Eugenics Organizations. Rüdin went on to craft the policies that governed Adolf Hitler’s genocide programs, at the Kaiser Wilhelm institute.

Fredrick Henry Osborn, the cousin of Henry Fairfield Osborn, praised the Nazi eugenics programs as a vital experiment. Osborn wrote in 1937 “The German sterilization program is apparently an excellent one, although it is generally doubted whether equal or better results might not have been obtained by a voluntary rather than a compulsory system. Taken altogether, recent developments in Germany constitute perhaps the most important experiment which has ever been tried.”

The influence of the Rockefeller family continued in 1945, when John D. Rockefeller Jr donated the land in which the United Nations stands in New York City. With the founding of the United Nations, the Rockefeller family heralded a new beginning for eugenics under the guise of population control.

In 1952, John D. Rockefeller III, the oldest son of John D. Rockefeller Jr, founded the population council. Population Council’s stated goal is to seek better understanding of the problems related to population. The first president of the council was Fredrick Henry Osborn, who was appointed by Rockefeller himself. Osborn was a prominent eugenicist who helped found the American Eugenics Society, which is now called the Society for the Study of Social Biology. Osborn headed the AES from 1946 to 1952, when he began to place greater emphasis on population control, rather than eugenics, signaling the shift in post-World War II eugenics.

Frank Notestein was one of the most prominent individuals who made the study of population an institutional practice. He was a member of the American Eugenics society, the American Philosophical Society, and the Council on Foreign Relations. Notestein also served as president of John D. Rockefeller’s Population Council, after Fredrick Osborn stepped down. He was also the first director of the United Nations population division, from 1946 to 1948. In a 1969 paper written by Notestein title The Problem with population Control, he outlined a strategy to depopulate target populations. Notestein admits that economic monetization will bring the birth rate down automatically, however, he goes on to state that more drastic measures must be taken, because in his opinion this method would not be fast enough. He writes “Given existing preferences in family size, governments must go beyond voluntary family planning. To achieve zero rate of population growth, governments will have to do more than cajole, they will have to coerce…. to impose more drastic changes on a large scale implies many risks, not least to the regime that undertakes them.
The price for this type of population control may well be in the institution of a totalitarian regime.”

View the original article here

Population Control – Eugenics Depopulation Agenda

Has eugenics faded away with time, or has the pseudo science morphed and cloaked itself under new auspices. Were some of the original founders of population control efforts themselves eugenicists? How and when did eugenicists shift from golden era ideas to Malthusian population control. While there are examples of eugenics in practice in its pre-World War II form, eugenicists have course scaled back rhetoric and reframed their ideas in the post-World War II world. Eugenicists who have still caught on to the discredited principles of eugenics, now attach these ideas to environmentalism and population control in an attempt to carry on eugenics in a more veiled form. Malthusian population control was now emphasized.

Several prominent families are responsible for funding and promoting eugenics in America. Namely the Rockefeller, Carnegie, Harriman, and Osborn families. Two families, the Rockefellers and the Osborns, are particularly significant. John D. Rockefeller senior contributed a large amount of money to develop Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in the early 1900s, which housed the eugenics records office from 1910 to 1944. Rockefeller influence also spread overseas to Germany, where the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Psychiatry and the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Eugenics, Anthropology, and Human Heredity resided. Much of the money used to run these facilities came directly from Rockefeller. These institutes became centers for Nazi eugenics programs during the reign of Adolf Hitler.

In 1932, the third international eugenics conference was held in New York City. The conference was hosted by Henry Fairfield Osborn. It was during this conference that an honored guest from Germany attended. Ernst Rüdin was elected by the conference attendees as president of the International Federation of Eugenics Organizations. Rüdin went on to craft the policies that governed Adolf Hitler’s genocide programs, at the Kaiser Wilhelm institute.

Fredrick Henry Osborn, the cousin of Henry Fairfield Osborn, praised the Nazi eugenics programs as a vital experiment. Osborn wrote in 1937 “The German sterilization program is apparently an excellent one, although it is generally doubted whether equal or better results might not have been obtained by a voluntary rather than a compulsory system. Taken altogether, recent developments in Germany constitute perhaps the most important experiment which has ever been tried.”

The influence of the Rockefeller family continued in 1945, when John D. Rockefeller Jr donated the land in which the United Nations stands in New York City. With the founding of the United Nations, the Rockefeller family heralded a new beginning for eugenics under the guise of population control.

In 1952, John D. Rockefeller III, the oldest son of John D. Rockefeller Jr, founded the population council. Population Council’s stated goal is to seek better understanding of the problems related to population. The first president of the council was Fredrick Henry Osborn, who was appointed by Rockefeller himself. Osborn was a prominent eugenicist who helped found the American Eugenics Society, which is now called the Society for the Study of Social Biology. Osborn headed the AES from 1946 to 1952, when he began to place greater emphasis on population control, rather than eugenics, signaling the shift in post-World War II eugenics.

Frank Notestein was one of the most prominent individuals who made the study of population an institutional practice. He was a member of the American Eugenics society, the American Philosophical Society, and the Council on Foreign Relations. Notestein also served as president of John D. Rockefeller’s Population Council, after Fredrick Osborn stepped down. He was also the first director of the United Nations population division, from 1946 to 1948. In a 1969 paper written by Notestein title The Problem with population Control, he outlined a strategy to depopulate target populations. Notestein admits that economic monetization will bring the birth rate down automatically, however, he goes on to state that more drastic measures must be taken, because in his opinion this method would not be fast enough. He writes “Given existing preferences in family size, governments must go beyond voluntary family planning. To achieve zero rate of population growth, governments will have to do more than cajole, they will have to coerce…. to impose more drastic changes on a large scale implies many risks, not least to the regime that undertakes them.
The price for this type of population control may well be in the institution of a totalitarian regime.”

View the original article here