How Do You Eat an Elephant? Reducing Mass Incarceration in California One Small Bite at a Time

Abstract

While most states are considering reducing the impact of mass incarceration in their prison systems, few states have faced a larger challenge than California, and few states have reduced their convict and parole population as much as California. Federal court intervention and a series of legislative and voter-initiated reforms in California have changed the landscape in one of the nation’s largest criminal justice systems. This article draws on a variety of data sources to explore a potentially historic moment in the quest to end mass incarceration; it remains to be seen whether the public debate over appropriate punishments changed among criminal justice interest groups, such as corrections officers, law enforcement, prosecutors, the judiciary, victim advocates, and liberal and conservative spokespersons. Has the fear of crime among the citizenry changed, and has the public embraced a different response to lawbreakers? There have been important law changes that reduce some felonies to lesser crimes and incentives to punish offenders in local corrections rather than state prisons (known as Realignment), but genuine reductions in mass incarceration will require even more actions. Based on my review of California trends in crime, punishment, and public opinion, I argue that even while there will likely be more progress in decriminalizing drug crimes and other nonviolent crimes, public attitudes toward more serious offenders will be decisive in forecasting the future of mass imprisonment and the California prison gulag. At present, California is pursuing an incremental approach to reducing the numbers in prison for very serious crimes. Reform of prisons is likely to consist of small bites of change in sentencing and parole policies.