Transcript Racial Disparities in Criminal Justice in Wisconsin Pamela Oliver Outline • The problem: National overview of imprisonment trends 1926-1999 • Bringing it home: Comparing Wisconsin.

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