Justice System Reform Bill 1 2015 (Passed)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Is there any potential for downsizing the prison system. I mean we are obviously not throwing people in the slammer for just a little weed like IRL. I would think we have potential to remove some of the capacity possibly.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What is the current prison population that is composed of people in real life, who have committed crimes that have since been decriminalized? I think that would be the best way to determine how to reduce the capacity.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

We still haven't achieved much in the way of reducing prison capacity. I would think we can effectively reduce 15% to 20% as just a rough guess, but of course harder numbers might indicate a higher or a lower number. We would need to figure out what the split is from those jailed prior to the law changes and those who were not prosecuted as a result of the new laws to determine what percentage would be not incarcerated as a result.

Any question of course pertains to how many of these now legalized acts had previously resulted in time in a Federal Prison as opposed to a state/regional prison system?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Anyone have any other ideas for reducing prison capacity?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So you mean like a kind of "serious" drug rehab (not the spas that the celebs go to and then claim they are clean after thirty days) for number 1?

2. For number two, we would need some kind of criteria on which to base those reductions of course. SHould it be more then just the convictions they have and their behavior in prison? Are there other measures that should be taken to determin whether someone should be released early as a part of accomplishing your point number 2?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Indeed, I urge the new Senate will work with me to finish this.


I would be willing to assume sponsorship.


I also invite and encourage you to provide input and/or any feedback you might have post leaving office as a distinguished former Senator, whose input on such matters of social policy, I have generally and will continue to value greatly.

I would appreciate any feedback on my last post, particularly the second question I posted about the criteria for determining sentence reductions and any and all factors that should fit into that criteria. The two I came up with were the sentence (any by extension is severity) and also their behavior whilst in prison. Are their anymore that extend beyond these two?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I figured I would be waiting until after the speakership election.


Anyway, since it went a bit quicker than I would think, I will leave one more day for feedback and then offer an amendment. I prefer to get it right on the first attempt but I am under no presumptions about succeeding in that and at the very least a controversial path will spark discussion and guides us in the right direction.

I will proceed with establishing the sentence reduction criteria that I mentioned in my last post and one prior to that.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How does this look?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How does this look?

It's an amendment?
If yes, what number is X?

Not yet, I wanted to feel out where people were by posting a potential text.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This seems like a good idea to me. I assume that said review process will not result in sentences being increased?

I tried to avoid that but admittedly, I am still not satisfied with the last sentence as it was troubling the first several iterations before I finally landed at that one at nearly four in the morning.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

     I guess the difference is taking their behavior in prison into account? I would suppose that commuting their sentences would have taken the new laws into account.

Not automatically. For instance a commutation could be given to someone under the same laws by the executive through his pardon power. Bush did this with almost everyone of his modifications, leaving the actual conviction in place, but commuting the sentence and releasing them from prison. This angered both Dick Cheney who wanted a full pardon for Libby and the border hawks who wanted a full pardon for Ramos and Compean.

This would be altering sentences to comport with current law. However that cannot be done automatically since person is to be subject to the laws as they existed at the time of the conviction until either pardoned or some kind of sentence review established. The States do this a lot using newer laws, usually when new technology like DNA, which wasn't even available more or less sanctioned by the law at the time, comes to hand and demonstrates innocence.  The review is essentially a retrial. Which means we should probably make that clear as well, because the authority and manner in which it operates would be similar.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Also, Cris, I haven't really worked on the matter of working it into the current text, since right now my priority is to engage discussion on these important key points and throwing up a wall of text would distract from the priority right now. Once I have a functional text, inclusion should be a simple matter, including giving it a clause number.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What is the appropriate appropriation in the current text for on-going costs of management?It is presently XXXX in the bill?

With that decided, we can then decide on a reduction formula subject to reductions in inmates as a result of the amendment just offered, reaching a minimum threshold (Say 5%).

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

No feedback on my question?


What about my last amendment, I kind of wanted to finish this by month's end but that requires at least one more amendment to fless out that missing variable and handle some remaining issues.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

When you get a chance that would be most helpeful, PiT.


Cris, when you get a chance can you go ahead and process my amendment three posts up?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

PiT did you get a chance with regards to that cost estimate yet?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Its an appropriation, the Executive branch cannot appropriate money.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There is nothing else being delayed by this. The Convention is its own ing entity and its members are not the same as the Senate members. For those members of both, it is their responsibiltiy to maintain their responsibilities. We should not shut down and abandon two projects that are very close to being finished on these grounds. Once we do, the Senate is just going to sit idle and everyone is going to end up being expelled from it, or perhaps that is the plan. Either way, it isn't going to happen.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I support the amendment.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

AYE