Racial Disparities in Criminal Justice in Wisconsin Pamela Oliver Outline • The problem: National overview of imprisonment trends 1926-1999 • Bringing it home: Comparing Wisconsin to the US across time [some new charts] • Trends in Wisconsin by type of admission and offense • Age Patterns • Impacts on families and youth • County Comparisons & Patterns (optional) • Implications for policy National Trends: The Magnitude of the Problem Comparing International Incarceration Rates (Source: Sentencing Project) World Incarceration Rates in 1995: Adding US Race Patterns US Blacks prison 1995 US whites prison 1995 US blacks prison & jail 1995 US whites prison & jail 1995 Russia Romania South Africa Ukraine England & Wales Scotland Switzerland Sweden Netherlands Japan Italy Germany France Denmark China Canada Belgium Austria 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 Nationally, The Black Population is Being Imprisoned at Alarming Rates • Nearly 40% of the Black male population is under the supervision of the correctional system (prison, jail, parole, probation) • Estimated “lifetime expectancy” of spending some time in prison is about 32% for young Black men. • About 12% of Black men in their 20s are incarcerated (prison + jail), about 20% of all Black men have been in prison • 7% of Black children, 2.6% of Hispanic children, .8% of White children had a parent in prison in 1997 – lifetime expectancy much higher About Rates & Disparity Ratios • Imprisonment and arrest rates are expressed as the rate per 100,000 of the appropriate population • Example: In 1999 Wisconsin new prison sentences 1021 Whites imprisoned, White population of Wisconsin was 4,701,123. 1021 ÷ 4701123 = .000217. Multiply .00021 by 100,000 = 22, the imprisonment rate per 100,000 population. 1,266 Blacks imprisoned, Black population of Wisconsin was 285,308. 1266 ÷ 285308 = .004437. Multiply by 100,000 = 444 • Calculate Disparity Ratios by dividing rates: 444/22 = 20.4 the Black/White ratio in new prison sentence rates Black and White prison admissions, historical Black & White Prison Admits per 100,000 1200 10 9 1000 8 7 6 600 5 4 400 3 2 200 1 0 1925 0 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 Black 1960 1965 White 1970 1975 Disparity 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Disparity Ratio Prison Admissions 800 Imprisonment Has Increased While Crime Has Declined • Imprisonment rates are a function of responses to crime, not a function of crime itself • Property crimes declined steadily between 1970s and 2000 • Violent crime declined modestly overall, with smaller ups and downs in the period Crime Trends Source: Crunching Numbers: Crime and Incarceration at the End of the Millennium by Jan M. Chaiken Based on Bureau of Justice Statistics data from National Crime Victimization Survey. Figures adjusted for changed methodology, shaded area marks change. Property Crime So what has been going on? The 1970’s Policy Shift • Shift to determinate sentencing, higher penalties • LEAA, increased funding for police departments • Crime becomes a political issue • Drug war funding gives incentives to police to generate drug arrests & convictions: this escalates in the 1980s • Post-civil rights post-riots competitive race relations, race-coded political rhetoric.? Timing of Black Protests, Riots Jenkins & Eckert Disparities by offense B/W Disparity Ratios in Prison Admits, by Of f ense. All States in NCRP 25.0 20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 Violent Rob/Burg Thef t Drug Other 19 99 19 98 19 97 19 96 19 95 19 94 19 93 19 92 19 91 19 90 19 89 19 88 19 87 19 86 19 85 19 84 19 83 0.0 Black & White, drug vs other sentences Black & White Prison Sentence Rates (NCRP) per 100,000, by Of f ense Type 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Drug White Non-drug White Drug Black Non-drug Black National White Prison Sentences by Offense White Ne w Se nte nce s pe r 100,000 pop, by offe ns e . All State s in NCRP 18 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 Drug 2 Rob/burg Other Theft Violent 0 0 1983 19 8 3 19 8 4 19 8 5 19 8 6 19 8 7 19 8 8 V io lent 19 8 9 19 9 0 Ro b / B ur 19 9 1 19 9 2 Thef t 19 9 3 19 9 4 Drug 19 9 5 Ot her 19 9 6 19 9 7 19 9 8 19 9 9 1999 National Black Prison Sentences by Offense Black Ne w Se nte nce s pe r 100,000 pop, by offe ns e . All State s in NCRP 300 300 Drug Rob/burg Violent Theft Other 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 1983 1984 1983 1985 1986 1987 1988 V iolent 1989 1990 Rob/ B ur 1991 1992 Thef t 1993 1994 Drug 1995 Ot her 1996 1997 1998 1999 1999 Drug Use Graphs Source: 2003 National Survey on Drug Use & Health, Department of Health & Human Services Any Illegal Drug, % of Persons 26+ who have used, 2002-3 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 White Black Hispanic Asian Lifetime Last Year Last Month Source: SAMHSA, Office of Applied Studies, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2002 and 2003. Any Illegal Drug, % of Persons 18-25 who have used, 2002-3 70 60 50 White Black Hispanic Asian 40 30 20 10 0 Lifetime Last Year Last Month Source: SAMHSA, Office of Applied Studies, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2002 and 2003. Any Illegal Drug, % of Persons 12-17 who have used, 2002-3 35 30 25 White Black Hispanic Asian 20 15 10 5 0 Lifetime Last Year Last Month Source: SAMHSA, Office of Applied Studies, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2002 and 2003. Marijuana, % of Persons 26+ who have used, 2002-3 45 40 35 30 White Black Hispanic Asian 25 20 15 10 5 0 Lifetime Last Year Last Month Source: SAMHSA, Office of Applied Studies, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2002 and 2003. Marijuana, % of Persons 18-25 who have used, 2002-3 60 50 40 White Black Hispanic Asian 30 20 10 0 Lifetime Last Year Last Month Source: SAMHSA, Office of Applied Studies, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2002 and 2003. Marijuana, % of Persons 12-17 who have used, 2002-3 25 20 White Black Hispanic Asian 15 10 5 0 Lifetime Last Year Last Month Source: SAMHSA, Office of Applied Studies, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2002 and 2003. Cocaine, % of Persons 26+ who have used, 2002-3 25 20 White Black Hispanic Asian 15 10 5 0 Lifetime Last Year Last Month Source: SAMHSA, Office of Applied Studies, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2002 and 2003. Crack Cocaine, % of Persons 26+ who have used, 2002-3 8 7 6 5 White Black Hispanic Asian 4 3 2 1 0 Lifetime Last Year Last Month Source: SAMHSA, Office of Applied Studies, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2002 and 2003. Cocaine, % of Persons 18-25 who have used, 2002-3 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 White Black Hispanic Asian Lifetime Last Year Last Month Source: SAMHSA, Office of Applied Studies, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2002 and 2003. Crack Cocaine, % of Persons 18-25 who have used, 2002-3 4.5 4 3.5 3 White Black Hispanic Asian 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Lifetime Last Year Last Month Source: SAMHSA, Office of Applied Studies, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2002 and 2003. Cocaine, % of Persons 12-17 who have used, 2002-3 4 3.5 3 2.5 White Black Hispanic Asian` 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Lifetime Last Year Last Month Source: SAMHSA, Office of Applied Studies, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2002 and 2003. Crack Cocaine, % of Persons 12-17 who have NOTE: THESE ARE <1% used, 2002-3 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 White Black Hispanic Asian` 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Lifetime Last Year Last Month Source: SAMHSA, Office of Applied Studies, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2002 and 2003. White kids are more likely to use and sell illegal drugs than Black kids Wisconsin Prison Admissions Including Detailed Time Trends 1990-1999/2003 National & Wisconsin Imprisonment Rates Black & White Prison Admits per 100,000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 Black White WI Black 1970 WI White 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 National & Wisconsin Disparities Black & White Prison Admits per 100,000 2500 25 2000 20 1500 15 1000 10 500 5 0 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 Black 1950 1955 White 1960 WI Black 1965 WI White 1970 1975 Disparity 1980 WI Disp 1985 1990 1995 0 2000 • To WI compared to national graphs for more details Graphs from my analysis of Wisconsin Department of Corrections Data Wisconsin Total Prison Admits: Includes Parole/Probation Violators 1400 Black Rate per 100,000 population 1200 1000 800 AmerInd 600 Hispanic 400 200 Asian White 0 1990 1991 1992 1993 White, NH total 1994 1995 Black, NH total 1996 1997 Hispanic total 1998 1999 2000 2001 American Indian Total 2002 2003 Asian Total Proportion of Admissions Involving New Sentences (1991-9) 60% 43% 39% 40% 18% 20% 0% New Only New + Viol Viol Only White Admissions WhitesStatus Wisconsin Total 35 Violation Only 30 New Sentence Only 25 20 15 10 5 Violation + New 0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 prison admits per 100,000 White viol only White new only 1996 White viol+new 1997 1998 1999 Blacks Admission BlacksStatus Wisconsin Total 700 600 Violation Only New Sentence Only 500 400 300 200 100 Violation + New 0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 prison admits per 100,000 black viol only Black new only Black viol+new 1997 1998 1999 Wisconsin Prison Admissions (Violations Only) 600 (Possible data coding changes after 2000?) Black Rate per 100,000 population 500 400 White AmerInd 300 200 Hispanic 100 Asian 0 1990 1991 1992 1993 White, NH total 1994 1995 Black, NH total 1996 1997 Hispanic total 1998 1999 2000 2001 American Indian Total 2002 2003 Asian Total Wisconsin Prison Admissions (New Sentences Only) 600 Black Rate per 100,000 population 500 400 300 AmerInd Hispanic 200 100 Asian White 0 1990 1991 1992 1993 White, NH total 1994 1995 Black, NH total 1996 1997 Hispanic total 1998 1999 2000 2001 American Indian Total 2002 2003 Asian Total Wisconsin Prison Admissions (All New Sentences) New only plus (new + violation) 900 Black 800 Rate per 100,000 population 700 600 500 400 AmerInd Hispanic 300 200 Asian White 100 0 1990 1991 1992 1993 White, NH total 1994 1995 Black, NH total 1996 1997 Hispanic total 1998 1999 2000 2001 American Indian Total 2002 2003 Asian Total Offense trends in new prison sentences by race. 14 14 Wisconsin Imprisonment Rates (All New Sentences), White Non-Hispanics (3-Year Averages) Whites Violent Imprisonment Rate (per 100,000) 12 10 Rob/burg Other 8 6 4 Theft Drug 2 0 1990 1991 VIOLENT OFFENSES 1992 1993 1994 ROBBERY/BURGLARY 1995 1996 1997 DRUG OFFENSES 1998 1999 LARCENY/THEFT 2000 2001 2002 OTHER OFFENSES 2003 UNKNOWN 300 Wisconsin Imprisonment Rates (All New Sentences), Black Non-Hispanics (3-Year Averages) 300 Blacks Imprisonment Rate (per 100,000) 250 Drug Violent 200 150 Rob/burg 100 50 Theft Other 0 1990 1991 VIOLENT OFFENSES 1992 1993 1994 ROBBERY/BURGLARY 1995 1996 1997 DRUG OFFENSES 1998 1999 LARCENY/THEFT 2000 2001 2002 OTHER OFFENSES 2003 UNKNOWN 100 100 Wisconsin Imprisonment Rates (All New Sentences), Hispanics (Any Race) (3-Year Averages) Hispanics 90 Imprisonment Rate (per 100,000) 80 Drug 70 Violent 60 50 Rob/burg 40 Other 30 20 10 Theft 0 1990 1991 VIOLENT OFFENSES 1992 1993 1994 ROBBERY/BURGLARY 1995 1996 1997 DRUG OFFENSES 1998 1999 LARCENY/THEFT 2000 2001 2002 OTHER OFFENSES 2003 UNKNOWN 120 Wisconsin Imprisonment Rates (All New Sentences), American Indians (NonHispanic) (3-Year Averages) Amer Inds Imprisonment Rate (per 100,000) 120 100 Violent 80 60 Rob/burg Other Theft 40 20 Drug 0 1990 1991 VIOLENT OFFENSES 1992 1993 1994 ROBBERY/BURGLARY 1995 1996 1997 DRUG OFFENSES 1998 1999 LARCENY/THEFT 2000 2001 2002 OTHER OFFENSES 2003 UNKNOWN 20 20 Wisconsin Imprisonment Rates (All New Sentences), Asian/PIs (Non-Hisp) (3-Year Averages) Asians 18 Violent Imprisonment Rate (per 100,000) 16 14 12 10 Rob/burg Drug 8 6 Theft 4 2 Other 0 1990 1991 VIOLENT OFFENSES 1992 1993 1994 ROBBERY/BURGLARY 1995 1996 1997 DRUG OFFENSES 1998 1999 LARCENY/THEFT 2000 2001 2002 OTHER OFFENSES 2003 UNKNOWN Age Patterns for Imprisonment Wisconsin Total New Prison Sentence Rates (No Prior Felony) 1998-9 (annualized) By Age Rate per 100,000 population 1600 1200 800 400 0 <18 18-19 20-21 22-24 25-29 30-34 Age White Black 35-39 40-44 45+ Whites: Prison Admits by Age, Offense (New Sentences Only, No Prior Felony)Wisconsin Total, 1998-9 summed 30 Rate per 100,000 population 25 20 15 10 5 0 <17 18-19 20-21 violent 22-24 25-29 rob/bur drug 30-34 theft 35-39 other unk 40-44 45+ Black Prison Admits by Age & Offense (New Sentences, No Prior Felony) Wisconsin Total, 1998-9 annualized 800 700 Rate per 100,000 population 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 <17 18-19 20-21 violent 22-24 25-29 rob/bur drug 30-34 theft 35-39 other unk 40-44 45+ Black/White Disparity Ratios in Prision Admissions by Age, Offense (New Sentences, No Prior Felony) Wisconsin Total Ratio of Per Capita Imprisonment Rates 100 80 60 40 20 0 <17 18-19 20-21 22-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 Age violent rob/burg drug theft other 40-44 45+ White kids are more likely to use and sell illegal drugs than Black kids, but Black kids are MUCH more likely to be arrested and prosecuted for drug offenses Incarceration Exacerbates the Effects of Racial Discrimination • Next few slides are from research by Devah Pager, new PhD from University of Wisconsin Sociology, now on faculty at Princeton • This was a controlled experiment in which matched pairs of applicants applied for entrylevel jobs advertised in Milwaukee newspapers Figure 4. The Effect of a Criminal Record on Employment Opportunities for Whites Percent Called Back 40 34 35 30 25 20 17 15 10 5 0 Criminal Record No Record Figure 5. The Effect of a Criminal Record for Black and White Job Applicants Percent Called Back 40 34 35 30 Criminal Record 25 20 17 14 15 10 5 5 0 Black White No Record Why Black Men’s Incarceration Increases Black Child Poverty Father not in household Male imprisonment rates Child Poverty Father has lower earning capacity Social Conditions, Political Processes, Crime, and Corrections Feedback from Imprisonment to Social Conditions Crime Social & Demographic Conditions Social Control, Deterrence Arrests Judicial Processes Corrections Outcomes Police Enforcement Political Processes Laws, Penalties Prison Interests An Individual Life Course Model of Crime With Policing Added Parental Unemployment, Economic & Educational Disadvantage School Failure Father Absence/ Family Disruption Peer & Normative Context Parental Involvement in Crime Juvenile Crime Labeling and/or Intervention Processes Juvenile Unemployment Adult Unemployment/ UnderEmployment Policing Practices Adult Crime Intergenerational Effects Imprisonment Imprisonment as a Cause of Crime? Labeling Etc. Processes reduces ? Family Disruption + Imprisonment Rates + + + Crime + reduces ? + Unemployment Middle Class Flight + + + + Economic Distress Aggressive Policing Deviant Culture (Gangs, Drug Trade, Criminality as a way of life) + due to Political Powerlessness + + Spatial Isolation of Poor Blacks Interpreting Disparity Data Steps to Incarceration Discriminatory Processes, Inequalities Social Conditons Decisions to Offend Criminal Acts Enforcement Decisions Arrests - Citations - PP holds Prosecution etc Decisions Pre-Trial (Hearing) Detention, Charges Court Decisions Sentences Incarceration Contributors to Disparity • Statistical artifacts: rates calculated on small populations are unstable and can be distorted by non-residents. Keep track of residency status in data. • Underlying rates of actual offending: especially for serious offenses, most of the disparity is due to rates of offending. Examine larger problems of social inequality, discrimination outside criminal justice system. • Discrimination (direct or indirect) in criminal justice system: enforcement, prosecution, adjudication, etc. – Individual-level conscious & unconscious prejudice – System-level processes that have disparate effects, especially those correlated with economic standing but not actual criminality. – Examine each part of the system separately Milwaukee County: Allocating Prison Disparities to Arrest vs. Post-Arrest Processing (1998-1999) Source s of Black /White Im pris onm e nt Rate Diffe re nce : Milw auk e e County Hom icide Due to Arrests Se x As s ault Due to P/A Ratio Agg As s ault Othe r As s ault All Robbe ry Ars on ~72% of difference is due to arrest differentials Burglary The ft/Fraud Pros titution Mfg/Sale Drug Pos s e s s Drug We apons Fam ily/Child Public Orde r De rive d Oth/Unk now n 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 Proportion of Difference in Imprisonment Ratios Dane County : Allocating Prison Disparities to Arrest vs. Post-Arrest Processing (1998-1999) So urces o f B lack/ Whit e Impriso nment R at e D if f erence: D ane C o unt y Due to Arrests Homicide Sex Assault Due to P/A Ratio Agg Assault Other Assault All Robbery Arson ~ 37% of difference is due to arrest differentials Burglary Theft/Fraud Prostitution Mfg/Sale Drug Possess Drug Weapons Family/Child Public Order Derived Oth/Unknow n 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 Pr opor tion of Diffe r e nce in Im pr is onm e nt Ratios Dane County 1990s Proportion Back in Prison by months after release (6-month intervals) 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 66 Months White Men Black Women White Women Other Men Black Men Other Women 72 78 84 County Comparisons Go to County Comparisons File What is to be done? • This is not a sound bite issue. • Factors include a combination of bias, real differences in serious crime, social & political conditions • Patterns are arising from the core structures of our society • But there are steps we can take Oppose the “drug war” • Treatment and public education are the most effective ways to reduce drug use • Drug enforcement just increases the profits of illegal drugs, makes the problem worse • Learn about the consequences of alcohol prohibition: drive-by shootings, organized crime • The largest racial disparities are for drug offenses • Association of violence with drugs is due to illegality & police enforcement Oppose “tough on crime” rhetoric • Help depoliticize crime as an issue • Distinguish among different kinds of crimes • Take the crime problems of poor (& economically integrated) neighborhoods seriously without over-reacting and “middle class panic” • Call for rehabilitation & restoration for lesser offenses, not “lock ‘em up” Revisit probation & parole • The vast majority of offenders are not murderers or rapists – they will get out • Insist the system focus on rehabilitating and reintegrating offenders, rather than looking for opportunities to incarcerate them • NOTE: Wisconsin has abolished parole, but has “extended supervision” Address “root causes” of crime • Reduce poverty and deprivation through income transfers (e.g. earned income credit), training programs, living wages • Provide social support, education, constructive alternatives for juveniles who are not doing well in school • Need to break the inter-generational cycle caused by massive incarceration Address racial bias & prejudice • Racial discrimination in employment & housing reduce constructive options • Conscious and unconscious biases, perceptions, assumptions affect policing & sentencing • White fear of crime more sensitive to presence of Blacks than to actual crime rates • Politicians play on Whites’ race-tinged crime fears in pushing “tough on crime” policies Racism and Justice: Conclusions • We cannot move from an unjust to a just situation by ignoring race and pretending the disparities are not there • We cannot achieve racial justice by ignoring the real differences in serious crimes, economic & social conditions • We cannot achieve racial justice by treating this as “somebody else’s” problem • Politics caused the problem, and politicians need to be part of the solution Web Site • Has copy of this presentation + lots of other stuff • http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~oliver • Follow the links to “racial disparities” section