Q&A WITH MARK MAUER: PRISON ALTERNATIVES

Mark Mauer, assistant director of The Sentencing Project, was in Austin last
week to promote his book ``Race to Incarcerate.'' The group, based in
Washington, D.C., advocates for alternatives to incarceration and prison
construction.

Incarceration is an important topic in Texas, which leads the nation in
prison construction. The unprecedented expansion of the U.S. prison system
in the past 20 years has resulted in a $40 billion a year industry. As a
result, the United States is now the world's No. 1 jailer. The majority of
the 1.7 million people incarcerated in this country have low incomes.

Mauer met with Texas lawmakers while he was in Austin.

Here are excerpts from Mauer's interview with editorial writer Susan Smith:

Q: What are your thoughts on the role of state jails for nonviolent drug
offenders?

A: All the research tells us that dollar for dollar, treatment is more
effective than continuing to build prisons and expanding these mandatory
prison terms. It doesn't mean that every last treatment program is going to
be effective or that we shouldn't scrutinize them. But studies from Rand
Corp. and the State of California always confirm that treatment is a more
effective approach.

Q: Tell me about your meeting with Texas lawmakers.

A: There are some very thoughtful people here. But I think a lot of damage
has been done. The state has made an enormous commitment to building prisons
under (former Gov.) Ann Richards and Gov. George W. Bush. That's not going
to be undone. Even if the rate of prison growth slows down, Texas still has
a record prison population.

Now the issue is how do you make treatment more efficient in the prison
system. What I heard from many people is that you have a better chance of
getting treatment if you commit a crime than if you are not in prison or
jail.

Treatment is the first alternative. You don't wait until it escalates into
crime before you deal with it. And yet the impact of public-policy decisions
is that the criminal justice system becomes the treatment site. That
shouldn't be the preferred solution. (Former first lady) Betty Ford didn't
have to commit a crime to get treatment.

Q: Three out of 10 African American males born today will be incarcerated in
the future, you write in your book. Why are incarceration rates higher for
African Americans than other groups?

A: Part of it has to do with crime rates. African American rates for
committing violent crimes are higher than for other groups. We also know
that much of that is correlated for poverty. If you control for social
class, a lot of these racial differences disappear. Further, we know that
it's not just poverty but concentrated poverty, much of that has to do with
segregated housing patterns.

Criminal justice policies, including the war on drugs, are the other half of
the equation. The most substantial increase in the prison population is drug
offenders, who disproportionately affect low-income communities of color.
Then the kicker is mandatory sentences, such as the federal crack cocaine
sentences.

Q: You argue that there is no direct correlation between declining crime
rates and prison building. What's the basis for your statement?

A: One would think that if we added 1 million additional inmates over 25
years, it would have a dramatic impact on crime. There are several reasons
why we don't see that. First, it's who we are locking up. If you're locking
up the Charles Mansons of the world that would have impact on crime. If it's
a low-level drug dealer, he's replaced with another drug dealer in 20
minutes. So as we increase the prison cells for low-level drug dealers, we
also are incurring enormous costs for incarceration.

Also, under three-strikes-and-you're-out laws, we're locking up older and
older inmates, who, demographically speaking, are less likely to commit
crimes the older they get. The aging process is one of the best
crime-reduction methods around. . . . The real crime years for males are
between 15 to 24 years of age.