FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

For Whom the Pell Tolls

Here is a question that many readers did not know was in search of an answer:  which students are more likely to go prison after graduating from high school:  (a) those enrolled in a charter school or private school as a result of participation in a voucher program or (b) those enrolled in a public school, both groups coming from the same geographic area and having parents of similar income levels.  For seeking the answer to that question  (at taxpayer expense) we are indebted to Congressman Chris Collins from New York.

On July 31, 2015, he introduced H.R. 3327.  The Bill, it says, may be addressed with the catchy title of “Kids Before Cons Act.”  The fascinating question for which it seeks an answer is only a small part of Mr. Collins’s Bill.  The Bill’s main purpose is to address the recently surfaced pesky problem of whether or not the federal government should be giving Pell Grants to prisoners who are slated to be released in less than five years after qualifying for the grant.  The reason that question has arisen goes back to 1994.

From 1965, when the Pell Grant program was first started, through 1994, prison inmates received $34.6 million a year in Pell Grants which was a small part of the $150 billion Congress hands out on a yearly basis in higher education grants and loans. In 1994 Congress, in its infinitely limited wisdom, increased criminal penalties for a wide variety of offenses and, at the same time, provided that prisoners in state and federal prisons were no longer entitled to receive Pell Grants.

By increasing prison times for offenders,  Congress enabled the United States, a world leader in many arenas, to add a  new notch to its leadership belt.  According to the Sentencing Project: “The United States is the world’s leader in incarceration with 2.2 million people currently in the nation’s prisons or jails-a 500% increase over the past thirty years.”  The graph reveals that the most dramatic increase came after the 1994 sentencing reforms were enacted.)

The elimination of Pell Grants for prisoners forced many prison programs to close, and the cost of attending those that survived had to be paid by the families of attendees.  A 2013 study by the Rand Corporation demonstrates what a mistake it was to eliminate educational opportunities for inmates.   The study found that inmates who participate in education programs had “43 percent lower odds of recidivating than those who did not.”  Four to five dollars were saved as a result of not having repeat visitors to the prison system for every dollar spent on education.

A bill has been introduced to lift the ban on Pell Grants for prisoners but,  as with all legislation in Congress, there is no way of knowing when or whether it will be enacted.  If the ban on Pell Grants is legislatively lifted it would most likely occur when the Higher Education Act is reauthorized in the coming months.  Unwilling to wait for that, however, on July 31 the administration announced that a pilot program was being initiated that would give some prisoners access to Pell Grants.  Known as the “Second Chance Pell Pilot Program”, its goal is to restore Pell Grants for prisoners and measure the effect of the grants on employment when prisoners are released.  Although Congress would have to approve a permanent lifting of the ban, the administration says it has the authority to run a pilot program without waiting for Congress to act.

No sooner was the pilot program announced than Rep. Collins introduced H.R. 3327 to block its implementation.  Since he had obviously not read the Rand Report, he came out with a statement born of the sort of ignorance frequently associated with members of Congress, saying:  “The Obama administration’s plan to put the cost of a free college education for criminals on the backs of the taxpayers is consistent with their policy of rewarding lawbreakers while penalizing hardworking Americans. . . . [H.R. 3327] closes the loophole the Obama administration is trying to exploit and protects taxpayers from footing the bill for criminals’ educations.”

The second part of his Bill asks the question described at the beginning of this column.  The downside to getting the answer to that question is that getting the answer will cost taxpayers money since the Bill says that the Secretary of Education has to carry out the study and then has to publish its results on its publicly available website.  The upside is that the required study is probably the only study that has ever been conducted to determine how quickly secondary school graduates end up in prison as distinguished from how many go to college. An extension of the study might include asking the graduates who are incarcerated whether they harbor any ambitions to run for Congress once they are released.

The actions of many in Congress (such as Rep. Collins) suggest that a few years in prison may be every bit as valuable in preparing to serve in that institution as a few years spent in a different sort of institution of higher education.

More articles by:
July 18, 2018
Bruce E. Levine
Politics and Psychiatry: the Cost of the Trauma Cover-Up
Frank Stricker
The Crummy Good Economy and the New Serfdom
Linda Ford
Red Fawn Fallis and the Felony of Being Attacked by Cops
David Mattson
Entrusting Grizzlies to a Basket of Deplorables?
Stephen F. Eisenman
Want Gun Control? Arm the Left (It Worked Before)
CJ Hopkins
Trump’s Treasonous Traitor Summit or: How Liberals Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the New McCarthyism
Patrick Bond
State of the BRICS Class Struggle: Repression, Austerity and Worker Militancy
Dan Corjescu
The USA and Russia: Two Sides of the Same Criminal Corporate Coin
The Hudson Report
How Argentina Got the Biggest Loan in the History of the IMF
Kenn Orphan
You Call This Treason?
Max Parry
Ukraine’s Anti-Roma Pogroms Ignored as Russia is Blamed for Global Far Right Resurgence
Ed Meek
Acts of Resistance
July 17, 2018
Conn Hallinan
Trump & The Big Bad Bugs
Robert Hunziker
Trump Kills Science, Nature Strikes Back
John Grant
The Politics of Cruelty
Kenneth Surin
Calculated Buffoonery: Trump in the UK
Binoy Kampmark
Helsinki Theatrics: Trump Meets Putin
Patrick Bond
BRICS From Above, Seen Critically From Below
Jim Kavanagh
Fighting Fake Stories: The New Yorker, Israel and Obama
Daniel Falcone
Chomsky on the Trump NATO Ruse
W. T. Whitney
Oil Underground in Neuquén, Argentina – and a New US Military Base There
Doug Rawlings
Ken Burns’ “The Vietnam War” was Nominated for an Emmy, Does It Deserve It?
Rajan Menon
The United States of Inequality
Thomas Knapp
Have Mueller and Rosenstein Finally Gone Too Far?
Cesar Chelala
An Insatiable Salesman
Dean Baker
Truth, Trump and the Washington Post
Mel Gurtov
Human Rights Trumped
Binoy Kampmark
Putin’s Football Gambit: How the World Cup Paid Off
July 16, 2018
Sheldon Richman
Trump Turns to Gaza as Middle East Deal of the Century Collapses
Charles Pierson
Kirstjen Nielsen Just Wants to Protect You
Brett Wilkins
The Lydda Death March and the Israeli State of Denial
Patrick Cockburn
Trump Knows That the US Can Exercise More Power in a UK Weakened by Brexit
Robert Fisk
The Fisherman of Sarajevo Told Tales Past Wars and Wars to Come
Gary Leupp
When Did Russia Become an Adversary?
Uri Avnery
“Not Enough!”
Dave Lindorff
Undermining Trump-Putin Summit Means Promoting War
Manuel E. Yepe
World Trade War Has Begun
Binoy Kampmark
Trump Stomps Britain
Wim Laven
The Best Deals are the Deals that Develop Peace
Kary Love
Can We Learn from Heinrich Himmler’s Daughter? Should We?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Franklin Lamb, Requiescat in Pace
Weekend Edition
July 13, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Brian Cloughley
Lessons That Should Have Been Learned From NATO’s Destruction of Libya
Paul Street
Time to Stop Playing “Simon Says” with James Madison and Alexander Hamilton
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: In the Land of Formula and Honey
Aidan O'Brien
Ireland’s Intellectuals Bow to the Queen of Chaos 
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail