This document discusses the negative impacts of mass incarceration in the United States, particularly how it disproportionately affects minority families and communities. It notes that the "War on Drugs" led to a tenfold increase in incarceration rates, especially for non-violent drug crimes. This has resulted in minority groups making up a disproportionate percentage of the prison population compared to their percentage of the general population. The document also examines the emotional, financial, and social effects this has on families and communities through incarceration and after release. It calls for reform of the criminal justice system to reduce these negative consequences.

1. 1
The Criminal Injustice System:
An Affront to Iowa Families & Communities
By Patrick Barnes, Samantha Conger, Marisa Mansfield, and Miryam Stone
July 2015
Bureau of Justice. (2015, February 12). The growth of incarceration [digital image]. Retrieved from
http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2015/02/12/chart-of-the-day-americas-prison-population-over-the-past-100-years/
Jacobsen, T. (2013, August 27). Untitled image [digital image].
Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-
way/2013/08/27/21617 3925/for-some-kids-summer-camp-includes-
seeing-dad-in-prison
Sesame Street Workshop. (2013). Untitled image [digital image]. Retrieved from
http://www.sesamestreet.org/parents/topicsandactivities/toolkits/incarceration
Imagine this list of side effects:
 a feeling of social stigma
 low self-esteem
 anxiety
 depression
 attention disorders
 physical aggression
 decreased academic performance
 juvenile involvement in the criminal justice
system.i
These are effects children experience when one
of their parents is incarcerated. If these were
warnings listed on a medication bottle, the
public would take note, demand a recall, and
probably sue. Since these negative effects are
tied to the criminal justice system, however,
many have turned a blind eye to the issues
caused by incarceration in the United States.
But the problem is so common that there is
even a Sesame Street episode and tool kit on
the topic. It is time to look at the criminal
justice system and ask:
What can be done to lessen these negative
effects on our families and communities?
While emotional and behavioral effects on
children whose parent is incarcerated are
important, there are also financial effects on the
family. Males that are incarcerated may have
provided only modest financial contribution to
the family, but it was often critical for the
family’s survival.ii
Their inability to contribute
financially while in prison leads to less direct
income, but we must also
consider the additional
financial burden placed
on the family. They often
spend money on care
packages, travel to visit
their incarcerated loved
one, pay for collect phone
calls, and provide for the
basic needs of their
family member in prison.
And this does not even
include the “room and
board” charges enforced
by some penitentiaries.
How Did We Get Here?
The initiation of the “War on Drugs” in the
1980s led to an almost tenfold increase in the
number of individuals incarcerated, and a
disproportionate number of minorities
incarcerated compared to their White
counterparts. Longer, harsher sentences were
Iowans for
Communities And
Racial Equality

2. 2
Drug Policy Alliance. (2015, February 25). Untitled image [digital image]. Retrieved from
http://www.empowermagazine.com/powder-vs-crack-study-identifies-arrest-risk-disparity-cocaine-use/
adopted to deter individuals from committing
drug crimes. However, the increased mandatory
minimum sentences for drug related crimes
made the sentencing similar to murder. An
individual caught with two to four ounces of
drugs can be incarcerated for 15 years, the same
as someone convicted of second-degree
murder.iii
Yet many substance-related crimes are
a result of addiction. Why are drug crimes
receiving the same sentencing as violent crimes
that result in death?
If only this was the extent of the unjust terms in
the War on Drugs. One of the laws passed in the
1980s created harsher sentences for possession
of crack cocaine than for powder cocaine. An
individual with 5 grams of crack cocaine would
have a felony charge, whereas one must possess
500 grams of powder cocaine to have the same
felony charge.iv
The law was changed in 2010 to
counter this injustice, but it was not retroactive
(those already sentenced did not get a new trial),
and the disparity is still 18:1. This continued
disparity in sentencing is based on the
philosophy that crack cocaine is more potent
than powder cocaine. But to fully understand the
institutional discrimination in the law we must
also realize that crack cocaine is associated with
Blacks and powder cocaine associated with
Whites.
Effects on Families & Communities
When a felon is released from prison, we may
assume their families will now benefit from
having another adult in the home to help provide
for the family. However, when many people are
incarcerated from one community and released
in the same year, there is a flood of competition
in the job market upon their release. Not only
are these individuals competing for jobs, if they
had a 10 year sentence from 18-28 years old,
they lost a critical time in their life to obtain
education and introductory employment
opportunities to help them improve their
circumstances. If they are unable to find work,
many are then further punished by some states’
bans on public assistance for felons such as food
assistance, cash assistance, and public housing.v
If these restrictions are related to felony charges,
is it fair to have certain communities targeted
and certain individuals more often charged with
felonies because of their race? What is being
done to these communities and what cycle is
started that will hinder self-sufficiency?
The effects of incarceration extend to the
community as well. Communities with high
arrest rates, steeper sentencing, and high
incarceration rates suffer. Many agencies exist to
provide services to communities with high
incarceration rates, including social service
agencies.vi
These agencies often come into
communities negatively affected by poverty,
single parent households, and other risk factors.
Released prisoners face barriers to:
 gaining successful employment
 regaining custody of children
 obtaining housing
 receiving public benefits
Additional barriers:
 lack of programs to help update job skills
 limited access to treatment for mental and
physical illnesses
 social stigma associated with serving time
in jail or prison
-The Band Back Together Project
Why are drug crimes receiving the
same sentencing as violent crimes
that result in death?

3. 3
Avaaz. (2014, July 31). Is this justice? [digital image]. Retrieved from http://swmeetscj.tumblr.com/
When felons reenter these communities,
agencies are inundated with additional work,
without additional financial or workforce
resources. The already overworked and under-
funded programs are stretched even further to
provide services to the families of these
communities.
Families of incarcerated individuals suffer a
great deal of stress while their loved one is
incarcerated, but also upon release. Considering
the effects on families and communities is
important, and reform is needed with the current
legal system.
Mass Incarceration More Often
Affects Minority Families
Although families of all kinds are affected by
mass incarceration in the United States, the
overrepresentation of minorities in the justice
system is especially concerning. It is helpful to
first get a sense of what this looks like both from
a national perspective and then more locally in
the state of Iowa. While our country is
composed of more diversity than simply White
and Black, for our purposes this is where the
focus will frequently remain. The data related to
arrests in particular makes identifying people of
Latin descent more difficult since different
agencies have been in the habit of often placing
individuals of this culture under the heading of
White.
In 2012, there were approximately 313 million
citizens in the United States, 76% identifying as
White and 13% identifying as Black.vii
Bearing
this in mind, then consider that there were over
12 million arrests made nationally in 2012, 69%
of them White and 28% of them Black.viii
Blacks
were therefore more than twice as likely to be
arrested as their White counterparts. This trend
continues when we look at national numbers
estimating who has been sentenced in either
federal or state prisons. In 2013, more than 1.5
million people received sentences with the
percentages as follows; White (30%), Black
(35%), and Latino (21%), with other groups
representing a very small remaining fraction.ix
The state of Iowa greatly lacks diversity with
91% White residents and 3% Black residents.x
It
is illuminating to examine what happens to this
3% by looking at who is incarcerated in Iowa.
In 2011 Whites represented 67% of the prison
population while Blacks represented 25%, and
the forecast for this trend is not a positive one.xi
When Black people are far more likely to
be arrested and far more likely to be
sentenced to serve time, there seems to be
a great injustice at work in America.
0
50
100
% of
Population
% of
Prisoners
Iowa Prison
Disparity
White Black

4. 4
Schmidt, K.E. (2012, August 31). Untitled [digital image]. Retrieved from http://qctimes.com/
It was projected that in the next six years Blacks
will constitute 27.5% of the prison population in
our state and that the number of Latino prisoners
will increase 100%.
Three percent of the population in Iowa
represents more than a quarter of our prison
population, and this eight-fold likelihood also
tells another story. In addition to being far more
likely to be arrested and sentenced, black people
in Iowa are also receiving longer sentences.
This triple whammy compels us to look at
policing activity as it leads to arrests followed
by an exploration of sentencing alternatives that
might help to alleviate this shocking state of
affairs.
Things to Consider
Accessibility & Transparency of Data
One of the issues related to these topics is the
accessibility of data. Different agencies
throughout the United States contribute
information to the FBI which serves as the
repository and organizing entity. The data
system, known as Uniform Crime Reporting
(UCR), covers a lot of ground, but the
information it provides is very broad. It also has
as its focus the crimes themselves and even who
the victims of crimes may be, but it does not
give information on who is arrested.
There is a newer system called the National
Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) that
collects more specific data and does include this
information. It is a step forward in providing
meaningful numbers on a broader scale, but the
number of participating agencies is far fewer. In
Iowa, for example, the Davenport Police
Department participates in NIBRS and so
obtaining information on who is arrested in this
city is possible. But there are obstacles.
If you were to call the Davenport Police
Department and request demographic
information on who is arrested by their officers
you would be informed that there is a ten-day
waiting period and an associated cost. This cost
is very roughly estimated to be $14.00 an hour
though it is difficult for them to say how long it
will take to provide the data until the request has
been made and they have executed the process.
The data that they collect is sent to the
Department of Public Safety in Des Moines
where it is aggregated and then ultimately sent
to the FBI. Even with the improved nature of
the information sent as part of NIBRS, the FBI
reports on the information as a whole for each
state and so without making requests
individually to the reporting agencies it is
impossible to compare data by city or agency.
The Department of Public Safety reports that in
Without making requests individually to
the reporting agencies it is impossible to
compare data by city or agency.

5. 5
People do not often wish to stay in areas of
high crime, which then impacts the
community’s ability to stabilize resources.
Curtis, W. ( Photographer). (2014, August 12). Untitled [digital image]. Retrieved from
http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2014/08/officals_in_ferguson_mo_pressu.html
2009 nearly 77% of arrests made in Iowa were
of White people and 21% were of Black
people.xii
There is no way, however, to see how
close to that 21% each city may fall, whether it
be higher or lower, without making contact at
each of the different agencies.
Agencies that have chosen to participate in the
NIBRS program have done so voluntarily and
should be applauded. It appears to be a step in
the direction of becoming more transparent. It’s
worth thinking about what might have happened
in places like Ferguson, for example, if it were
made readily apparent years ago who their
police department seemed to target when
making arrests. Researchers and journalists
seem to comment on such issues after there has
been a tragedy, and it seems a shame that even
for cities where demographic arrest data is
available that there are obstacles to obtaining it
(though this is assuming that people even know
that this is possible—they don’t seem to).
After the decision to participate in the NIBRS
system, it seems that the next logical step would
be for individual agencies to provide this data
annually in an effort to help guide their practices
more fully towards justice, instead of waiting to
be asked for the information after a tragedy has
occurred.
Location, Location, Location
While it may be easiest to jump to conclusions
about arrest rates based on race, it may also be
the area of a city or town where an individual
lives that needs further consideration. There are
certain factors that may influence arrest
statistics. One such factor is the area barriers that
prevent the development of resources that could
enhance a community’s problem solving
skills.xiii
Also, the 1970s labor market moved
away from the industrial and manufacturing jobs
and pushed toward retail or customer service
jobs. This created an environment where factory
workers’ skill sets were no longer valued. There
are also theories that police have to respond
aggressively to calls regarding minorities who
live in or near White communities.
Certain area barriers, such as crime rates, could
impact a community’s stability, as people do not
often wish to stay in areas of high crime, which
then impacts the community’s ability to stabilize
resources in that area.xiv
Police also often feel
pressure from majority communities to be extra
intolerant of the minority population’s behavior
to prove a point. If that minority race happened
to be Black or Hispanic, that would influence the
arrest rates in that community. Future research
should be conducted on how communities and
neighborhood level indicators can influence
police discretion.
Police also use a great deal of discretion
when determining charges during an arrest.xv
Upgrading or downgrading charges based on
the factors of the crime (seriousness, victims,
witnesses, and evidence) or people in the
majority feeling compelled to use power and
control over the minority population are
often factors that the police unconsciously
take into account. It is important to consider
the environment just as much as the
perpetrator or the officer’s race. The
environment is also proven to influence the
officer’s response to a criminal situation and
more research should be conducted.

6. 6
Race
It has been shown time and time again that our
justice system is influenced by the perpetrator’s
race. For example, in 2008, it was found that in
the United States, Black males were incarcerated
six times more than White males.xvi
This statistic
is something that deserves national attention and
questioning. How and why is this happening?
This is a social issue that goes beyond Black vs.
White. Other races are effected by police
discretion as well. In the cases of “Driving
While Brown”, Hispanic drivers were cited
88.3% of the time while the White drivers were
merely warned most frequently at 12.5 %.xvii
Acknowledging the difference between minority
races also allows us to see past the problem and
start thinking of solutions, specific to certain
races, areas and departments.
As previously mentioned, it has also been
proven that minority populations have a much
higher probability of being arrested than Whites.
On average, minorities have a 30% higher
chance of being arrested than Whites.xviii
It is
also suggested that because of discretion within
the different levels of the criminal justice
system, such as a county attorney offering a plea
deal, the discrepancy regarding race can
continue to become further distorted. Some
necessary discretion, however, has been
removed from the sentencing structure that is
further exacerbating the problem.
Mandatory Minimum Sentencing
One approach to justice that is meant to
eliminate the possibility for juries and judges to
treat criminals of different races, classes, or
genders in different ways is mandatory
minimum sentencing. Certain crimes also carry
certain minimum prison sentences in order to
deter individuals from committing those crimes.
For example, the knowledge that one would
spend a minimum of ten years in federal prison
for attempting to distribute a kilogram of
heroinxix
should influence a potential criminal—
White or Black, rich or poor, male or female—
not to engage in such activity. There is a
growing consensus in the United States on the
left and the right, among community groups,
citizens, judges, and legislators, that these
mandatory minimums are not achieving their
intended goals, and are actually fiscally and
socially damaging.
Community Groups: Tax Money Wasted
Both the progressive American Civil Liberties
Union and the conservative Right on Crime
Initiative question the amount of taxpayer
dollars being spent on incarcerating Americans;
$80 billion was spent in 2010 on the
imprisonment of 2.3 million Americans.xx
That
is enough money to pay one year’s salary for the
same number of people, or to send 15.6 million
students to a four-year public university for two
semesters.xxi
Since 1985, spending on federal
incarceration in the United States has increased
1,100%.xxii
If almost one in ten citizens in jail or
prison isn’t surprising, consider that the U.S.
incarcerates more people per capita than any
country in the world—five times more than most
On average, minorities have a 30% higher
chance of being arrested than Whites.

7. 7
http://www.economist.com/node/18744637
Associated Press. (2011, May 26). Not that unusual [digital image]. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/18744637
countries—even though the level of crime is
comparable to that of other industrialized
nations.xxiii
The Justice Department has called
mass incarceration a “budgetary nightmare” and
a “growing and historic crisis” (Saslow, 2015).
Mandatory minimum sentences often
unnecessarily increase the amount of time
criminals spend in prison, and therefore the
amount of money we spend on them, with very
little return on investment since prisons are
notoriously not great places for rehabilitation.
Citizens: Government is #1 Problem
The amount of money the U.S. spends on
incarceration may be justified if our rate of
imprisonment was reasonable (it’s not) and if
American taxpayers were worried about crime
rates (they’re not). A recent Gallup poll does not
even mention crime among the most important
problems in the United States.xxiv
The
government is listed as number one, and
mandatory minimums are
set by state and federal
governments; the
economy is listed as
number two, and wasting
taxpayer dollars on
imprisoning low-level,
non-violent criminals for
inexplicably long periods
of time is not going to
grow the economy. The
Pew Research Center
also published a report
indicating that 63% of
Americans identify
states’ moves away from
mandatory minimums for non-violent drug
crimes as “a good thing”.xxv
Judges: Hands Are Tied
Given that almost half of federal inmates are
there on drug chargesxxvi
, and that most of them
are couriers or street-level dealersxxvii
, mandatory
minimums largely effect low-level, non-violent
criminals, and judges have little authority to
make any exceptions, including to alternatively
sentence offenders to drug court or mental health
court. Statistical and anecdotal evidence both
indicate that despite being convicted less often
and entitled to relief more often, low-level
offenders “bear the burden of mandatory
minimum sentences—not the kingpins”.xxviii
In
the last several years, different measures have
been passed to address the shortcomings of
mandatory minimums, such as the “safety
valve”, which allows federal judges to give
lesser sentences to offenders that did not kill or
seriously injure anyone, for example.
Unfortunately, the safety valve has increased
disparity; Blacks are denied relief more often
than other races, to the point that the criminal
justice system has been referred to as a new
form of Jim Crow laws. U.S. District Judge
Mark Bennett of Sioux City, Iowa has described
sentencing as “unjust and ineffective”, “gut-
wrenching”, and wrote, “Prisons filled, families
The U.S. incarcerates more people per capita than
any country in the world—five times more than
most countries—even though the level of crime is
comparable to that of other industrialized nations.

8. 8
Alliance of Baptists
American Civil Liberties Union
American Coalition for Criminal Justice Reform
Americans for Tax Reform
Association of Prosecuting Attorneys
BOOM!Health (NY)
Bread for the World
Brennan Center for Justice
Broken No More
Cabrini Green Legal Aid (IL)
Center for Living and Learning (CA)
Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race & Justice
Coalition to Reduce Spending
Colorado Criminal Justice Reform Coalition
The Constitution Project
The Daniel Institute
Delaware Center for Justice
Drug Policy Alliance
Drug Policy Forum (HI and TX)
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Faith & Freedom Coalition
Families Against Mandatory Minimums
Families for Justice as Healing
Family Research Council
Fellowship of Reconciliation
Frederick Douglass Foundation
FreedomWorks
Friends Committee on National Legislation
Heartland Alliance for Human Needs & Human Rights
Heritage Action for America
Justice Fellowship/Prison Fellowship Ministries
Justice Strategies
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law
Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
NAACP
National Association of Evangelicals
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence
National Council of Churches of Christ, USA
National Organization for Women
Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House
Peace Alliance
Prison Policy Initiative
Protect Families First (RI)
The R Street Institute
Salvation Army National Headquarters
Student Peace Alliance
Taxpayers Protection Alliance
Texas Public Policy Foundation
Union for Reform Judaism
United Church of Christ, Justice & Witness Ministires
United Methodist Church, Board of Church & Society
U.S. Dream Academy
Young Americans for Liberty
SUPPORTERS
OF THE
SMARTER SENTENCING ACT
divided, communities devastated”.xxix
A letter
signed by 130 former federal prosecutors,
federal judges, state attorneys general, and other
former high-ranking law enforcement officials
from across the country pleaded the case for
reform to the chairs and ranking members of the
House and Senate judiciary committees.xxx
“Individuals most likely to receive a [federal]
mandatory minimum sentence were street-level
dealers, not serious and major drug dealers,
kingpins, or importers…Only seven percent had
a leadership role in the crime and 84 percent did
not possess or use guns or weapons”.
Legislators — Rare Bi-Partisan Support
Legislators and politicians across the aisle have
recognized the need to address the problem of
mandatory minimums. The Smarter Sentencing
Act (SSA) of 2015 is currently being reviewed
in committee in both the House (H.R. 920),
where the bill has been sponsored by 36
Democrats and 14 Republicans, and the Senate
(S. 502), with seven Democratic and six
Republican sponsors. SSA would reduce prison
populations and costs—over $3 billion in the
next decade according to the Congressional
Budget Office—by:
 Reducing certain 20-year, 10-year, and 5-
year mandatory minimum drug sentences
to 10, 5, and 2 years, respectively
 Reducing the mandatory minimum life
without parole sentence for a third drug
offense to 25 years (Senate bill) or 20
years (House bill)
 Expanding the “safety valve” to give
nonviolent, low-level offenders with old,
minor, or misdemeanor convictions for
which they served no time fairer sentences
 Allowing almost 9,000 federal prisoners
incarcerated for crack cocaine crimes (the
vast majority of whom are Black) to seek
fairer sentences in line with a 2010
unanimously passed bill (not retroactive)
that reduced the racially discriminatory
disparity between crack and powder
cocaine sentences.xxxi

9. 9
Unfortunately, the bill only has an eight percent
chance of being passed in the Senatexxxii
and a
two percent change of being passed in the
Housexxxiii
, partially due to resistance by Senator
Chuck Grassley (R-IA), the Chairman of the
Senate Judiciary Committee who has spoken
several times in opposition to the bill. But…
YOU CAN HELP!
This is a complex issue, we’ve barely scratched
the surface, and we still have a lot to do!
 Educate yourself and read more from
the Generation Opportunity Institute
(www.genoppinstitute.org) or Families
Against Mandatory Minimums
(www.famm.org)
 Watch a documentary such as
Frontline’s Snitch (or the identically titled
movie featuring “The Rock!) or any of the
several video clips available on YouTube
 Talk to your friends, family, and fellow
taxpayers to let them know what is
happening to families in our communities
 Call, email, fax, or send a letter to your
representatives in the House and the
Senate expressing your concern over your
tax dollars being spent on unjustly
imprisoning thousands of people. You can
find them at www.opencongress.org
 Register to vote because your
representatives (or their staff) will check
up on you if you are asking them to
support a bill. You can register by mail
with help from the U.S. Election
Assistance Commission (www.eac.gov or
866-747-1471)
 Write a letter to the editor of your local
newspaper to inform others of the injustice
that is harming their families and
communities
What Can Be Done?
Many options are available for reducing the
effects of incarceration on families throughout
the United States. The following
recommendations provide a starting point for
reform that would benefit many communities
throughout the nation. Pick the one that speaks
to you most, learn more, and start advocating!
 Reducing severity of sentencing for non-
violent crimes including minimum
sentences
 Educating police force and developing
strategies to reduce discrimination in
arrest rates
 Publishing local arrest data annually to
enhance transparency within agencies
and to the public, and to identify
problems before they get worse
 Offering alternative sentencing such as
drug court or mental health court
QUESTIONS or COMMENTS?
Contact ICARE
(Iowans for Communities and Racial Equality)
IowaICARE@gmail.com
Iowans for
Communities And
Racial Equality

10. 10
i
Lee, A. F. (2005). Children of Inmates: What Happens to
These Unintended Victims? Corrections Today, 67(3), 84-
95.
ii
Sugie, N. F. (2012). Punishment and Welfare: Paternal
Incarceration and Families' Receipt of Public Assistance.
Social Forces, 90(4), 1403-1427.
iii
Smith , E. & Hattery, A.J. (2010). African American Men
and the Prison Industrial Complex. Western Journal Of
Black Studies, 34(4), 387-398.
iv
Smith & Hattery, 2010
v
Smith & Hattery, 2010
vi
Smith & Hattery, 2010
vii
American FactFinder. (2015). Retrieved June 21, 2015,
from United States Census Bureau:
http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml
viii
Snyder, H., & Mulako-Wangota, J. (2015). Arrest Data
Analysis Tool. Retrieved June 17, 2015,
from Bureau of Justice Statistics: www.bjs.gov
ix
Carson, E. A. (2015). Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Retrieved June 17, 2015, from Sentenced state and federal
prisoners, by age, race, and Hispanic origin, December 31,
2013: www.bjs.gov
x
American FactFinder, 2015
xi
Iowa Department of Human Rights Division of Criminal
and Juvenile Justice Planning. (2011).
Iowa Prison Population Forecast FY2011-2021. Criminal
and Juvenile Justice Planning (CJJP).
xii
Iowa Department of Public Safety. (2009). Retrieved
June 20, 2015, from Iowa Department of Public Safety:
Annual Report 2009: http://www.dps.state.ia.us/commis/
ucr/2009/iacrime.shtml
xiii
Parker, K.F., MacDonald, J. M., Alpert, G. P., Smith, M.
R., Piquero, A. R. (2004). A Contextual Study of Racial
Profiling: Assessing the Theoretical Rationale for the Study
of Racial Profiling at the Local Level. The American
Behavioral Scientist, 47(7), 943-959.
xiv
Parker, MacDonald, Alpert, Smith, & Piquero, 2004
xv
Lum, C. (2011). The Influence of Places on Police
Decision Pathways: From Call for Service to Arrest. Justice
Quarterly, 28(4), 631-659.
xvi
Sabol, W. J., West, H. C., & Cooper, M. (2009).
Prisoners in 2008. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Justice
Statistics.
xvii
Tillyer, R., Engel, R. (2013). The Impact of Drivers’
Race, Gender, and Age During Traffic Stops: Assessing
Interaction Terms and the Social Conditioning Model.
Crime & Delinquency, 59(3), 369-395.
xviii
Rinehart Kochel, T., Wilson, D.B., Mastrofski, S.D.
(2011). Effect of Suspect Race on Officers’ Arrest
Decisions. American Society of Criminology, 49(2), 473-
504.
xix
Families Against Mandatory Minimums. (2013). Federal
Mandatory Minimums. Retrieved from http://famm.org/wp-
content/uploads/2013/08/Chart-All-Fed-MMs-NW.pdf.
June 27, 2015.
xx
Carlson, J. (February 4, 2014). America’s cautionary tale
of mandatory minimums. Toronto Star (Canada).
xxi
Coalition Against Insurance Fraud. (n.d.). How big is
$80 billion? Coalition Against Insurance Fraud. Retrieved
from http://www.insurancefraud.org/80-
billion.htm#.VYHSP_lVhBc. June 17, 2015.
xxii
Families Against Mandatory Minimums. (June 17,
2015). More than 100 former federal prosecutors, judges,
and other former law enforcement officials call for federal
sentencing reform. Retrieved from http://famm.org/more-
than-100-former-federal-prosecutors-judges-and-other-
former-law-enforcement-officials-call-for-federal-
sentencing-reform/. June 18, 2015.
xxiii
Wagner, P., Sakala, L., & Begley, J. (n.d.). States of
incarceration: The Global Context. Prison Policy
Initiative. Retrieved from
http://www.prisonpolicy.org/global/. June 17, 2015.
xxiv
McCarthy, J. (March 12, 2015). Americans name
government as no. 1 U.S. Problem. Gallup. Retrieved from
http://www.gallup.com/poll/181946/americans-name-
government-no-problem.aspx. June 17. 2015.
xxv
Pew Research Center. (April 2, 2014). America’s new
drug policy landscape. Retrieved from http://www.people-
press.org/files/legacy-pdf/04-02-
14%20Drug%20Policy%20 Release.pdf. June 18, 2015.
xxvi
Federal Bureau of Prisons. (2015). Offenses. Retrieved
from http://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/
statistics_inmate_offenses.jsp. June 17, 2015
xxvii
Dahl, A. (2014). Eric Holder’s recent curtailment of
mandatory minimum sentencing, its implications, and
prospects for effective reform. BYU Journal of Public Law,
29(1), 271-297.
xxviii
Dahl, 2014.
xxix
Saslow, E. (June 6, 2015). Against his better judgment.
The Washington Post. Retrieved from
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2015/06/06/ag
ainst-his-better-judgment/. June 17, 2015.
xxx
Families Against Mandatory Minimums. (June 17,
2015). More than 100 former federal prosecutors, judges,
and other former law enforcement officials call for federal
sentencing reform. Retrieved from http://famm.org/more-
than-100-former-federal-prosecutors-judges-and-other-
former-law-enforcement-officials-call-for-federal-
sentencing-reform/. June 18, 2015.
xxxi Families Against Mandatory Minimums. (April 9,
2015). The Smarter Sentencing Act FAQ. Retrieved from
http://famm.org/the-smarter-sentencing-act-faq/. June 18,
2015.
xxxii
Gov Track. (2015). S. 502: Smarter Sentencing Act of
2015. Retrieved from
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/s502 July 2,
2015.
xxxii
GovTrack. (2015). H.R. 902: Smarter Sentencing Act
of 2015. Retrieved from
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr920 July 2,
2015.