 The Wisconsin State Capitol on Sept. 19, 2025. Photograph by Margo Kirchner. By Alexandria Staubach and Margo Kirchner The Wisconsin Assembly's Committee on Corrections on Jan. 7 will hear two bills relating to hygiene products for those in state and county custody. WJI supports and urges passage of both bills. The humane treatment of incarcerated individuals is at the core of Wisconsin Justice Initiative’s mission. Everyone in the government’s custody deserves the ability to care for their bodies, ensuring dignity and promoting the Department of Correction’s administrative rules regarding hygiene. The DOC cannot reasonably require good personal hygiene without providing the basic tools. The bills being heard, AB741 and AB736, move Wisconsin closer to humane treatment of those in custody. AB741 would require the DOC and county jails to provide at least two types of each personal hygiene product on a list in the proposed legislation, including deodorant, antiperspirant, shampoo and conditioner, various soaps and lotions, toothpaste and floss, and shaving cream. The products cannot be sold at more than 125% of the sales price of the product at the highest-grossing retail chain in the state. In addition, at least two varieties of culturally sensitive personal hygiene products such as shampoo, conditioner, and natural hair oil must be provided for different hair types, at no more than 100% of the sales price of the product at the highest-grossing retail chain in the state. The bill also requires the DOC or jail to provide each person in their care with a monthly personal hygiene stipend of $25 to purchase personal hygiene products from the commissary. The bill provides the funding to DOC to cover the stipends. WJI has submitted written testimony in favor of the bill. In November 2024, WJI spoke to an individual at Green Bay Correctional Institution who shared that base pay at GBCI is a mere five cents per hour, someone earning a degree makes 12 cents an hour, and the highest paying positions pay 42 cents an hour. The canteen at a DOC institution is a monopoly. Incarcerated persons cannot price shop. AB 741 first limits the cost of hygiene products to prevent price gouging, yet the merchant still makes its profit. The $25 monthly stipend helps the individual in custody afford those products without spending a week or more of pay. The requirement that facilities provide culturally sensitive products for different physical attributes is important for the people held in DOC care and in jails, many of whom are minority individuals. AB736 would requires the DOC and jails to provide free of charge to anyone in custody with an active menstrual cycle at least three brands of tampons in a variety of absorbencies, three brands of menstrual pads in various absorbencies, and one brand of reusable menstrual cup. The facility would also have to provide a means to sanitize inmate menstrual cups as needed. In WJI's view, AB736 should be regarded as critical legislation for women in the care of the DOC and in jails. As noted above with AB741, hygiene products in prisons are exorbitantly expensive, yet menstrual products are a basic necessity for a woman’s health and dignity. Last year, before DOC renegotiated its canteen contract, a box of tampons cost $2.61 for a pack of eight. That is $0.33 for a single tampon. They came in one size. For those unfamiliar, menstruating women often need at least five tampons per day. That number may double for perimenopausal women, who often experience irregular periods with very heavy blood flow and may need more, larger-flow menstrual products. The Mayo Clinic website recommends changing tampons every four to eight hours. Incarcerated women may spend hours working to afford these products, to hopefully keep blood and discharge from leaking and staining their clothes, which they must also pay to wash. For those who have never experienced a period, imagine working several hours or days to afford toilet paper. Placing feminine hygiene products behind a paywall asks women to choose between safe and hygienic products and homemade alternatives that are unsanitary and may cause infection. If insufficient menstrual products are provided, women may even leave tampons in place for many hours, risking toxic shock syndrome. A carceral system in which women experience restricted access to menstrual products is inhumane. Restricted access to menstrual products undermines a woman’s right to dignity. In November 2025, the Prison Policy Initiative released an analysis of prison rules and sanctions that demonstrates how the carceral system punishes women for menstruating—a physiological process over which they have no control. Rules that govern movement limit access to bathrooms, showers, and laundry services. Rules that govern contraband limit access to tissue paper and its proper disposal or punish women for sharing or trading menstrual products or keeping adequate supplies on hand. PPI identified that in Wisconsin, menstruating women may be disciplined under rules regarding damage to state property (if blood stains affect state-owned items), unauthorized transfer of property or possession of contraband regarding menstrual supplies, poor personal hygiene, and refusal to work or go to school.
As stated by PPI, “(t)here is no ‘safety and security’ interest in denying people the basic sanitary products they need to manage normal bodily functions.” The United Nations Human Rights Council in 2024 underscored that countries have the “responsibility to ensure the full realization of all human rights, including those relating to menstrual hygiene, and must take steps . . . to respond fully to menstrual hygiene and other health care-related needs by all appropriate means, including in particular through the adoption of relevant legislative measures.” A carceral system in which women experience restricted access to menstrual products is inhumane. Restricted access to menstrual products undermines a woman’s right to dignity. WJI has submitted written testimony of the bill. AB741 is sponsored by 19 Democratic Assembly members and four Democratic senators, but no Republicans—yet it has received a hearing in the Republican-controlled committee. AB736 is sponsored by 27 Democratic Assembly members and just one Republican Assembly member, but that Republican, Dean Kaufert (R-Neenah), happens to be the chair of the committee. AB736 is sponsored by nine Democratic senators as well. The Committee on Corrections consists of six Republicans and three Democrats.
0 Comments
By Alexandria Staubach Menus recently obtained by Wisconsin Justice Initiative for Green Bay Correctional Institution show a diet dominated by ultra-processed foods high in carbohydrates, fat, and sugar, raising concerns about chronic illnesses and the health of those held in Wisconsin’s prisons. WJI enlisted University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee Professor Renee Scampini, director of the school’s undergraduate public health program, to evaluate menus WJI obtained through an open records request. The Department of Corrections provided menus from GBCI for a sample week in January 2025. The menus included a general menu plus some specialty menus for those needing halal, kosher, soft food, or other diets. Scampini looked most closely at the general menu.  Scampini. Photograph from the UW–Milwaukee website. “This overall diet makes for high total fat content, added sugar content and other cardiac/cancer concerns,” Scampini opined. Taken at face value, the menus indicate incarcerated individuals are provided with an average of 2,689 calories a day if they eat everything provided. That amount is consistent with recommendations from “The Merck Manual” for sedentary adult males, ages 19 to 60. “This menu looks like it was specifically written to meet an institutional standard of the U.S. dietary requirements,” Scampini told WJI. The calories based on serving size provided in the DOC menus are “probably close to correct,” she said. But she added that how “that actually meshes with what's eaten/tolerated is questionable." As an example, Scampini pointed out that satisfaction of protein goals was primarily met though milk—a questionable practice as many U.S. adults are lactose intolerant. Scampini said this intolerance is even more prevalent in minority groups, particularly Asian American, African American, and Native American populations. “This is the same practice that most U.S. schools use because they contract out dietary services,” said Scampini. The practice yields a “massive industry of processed prepared (e.g., heat-and-eat) foods that ‘match’ U.S. dietary guidelines,” she said. “Whole grains, fruit, and vegetable goals are woefully low, which also makes fiber low,” Scampini told WJI. She also said that other nutrient needs, such as vitamins and minerals, were likely being met through fortified and enriched processed foods like cereals and muffins. Scampini’s concerns are consistent with insights from inside GBCI. An anonymous resident there told WJI that breakfast was “strictly dry cereal and bread that at times is old.” The same source told WJI that for a while the lunches and dinners during the weekend were a “bag meal which consisted of basically nothing but junk food and/or old (Un)Crustable peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.” Scampini hypothesized, based on her time spent in industrial kitchens, that animal-based products in the DOC diet may also be ultra-processed. “For example, chicken is often a reconstituted meat of chicken plus fillers/stabilizers for moisture/easy preparation,” she said. Scampini conservatively estimated that 75% to 83% of calories provided by DOC come from ultra-processed foods. That number that could be higher, as she assumed for her calculations that all fruits and vegetables listed on the menu were fresh, which she told WJI was “highly unlikely.” According to Scampini, the long-term concerns associated with eating an ultra-processed diet stem from its effects on the metabolism. In one multinational study, higher ultra-processed food consumption was associated with an increased risk of cancer and cardiometabolic diseases.  A table showing Scampini's calculations of total unprocessed and total ultra-processed calories for each day of the sample GBCI menu. The menu’s calorie count presumes that a prison resident eats or drinks everything, including all of the ketchup, mustard, mayonnaise, sugar packets, and milk provided. For those who are lactose intolerant, do not eat every condiment, or are tired of Uncrustable sandwiches and chips, the calorie intake will be less. There “hasn’t been a meal I’ve had in a while that was fulfilling or even warm to enjoy, which causes me not to even want to eat it, but since I’m not that fortunate to have canteen, I partake in what I can to survive,” the GBCI resident said. Even if an individual has funds to buy items at the canteen, several food items there are also ultra-processed.  The menu at Green Bay Correctional Institution from Jan. 5-11, 2025, provided by the Wisconsin Department of Corrections in response to Wisconsin Justice Initiative's open records request. By Margo Kirchner
Gov. Tony Evers just vetoed a bill that would have required the Department of Corrections to recommend revocation if a person on extended supervision, parole, or probation is charged with a new crime. In his veto message, Evers wrote that he objected "to the unfunded mandate that such revocation would impose on the Department of Corrections, which would move Wisconsin in the wrong direction on criminal justice reform without improving public safety. This bill is estimated to have a fiscal impact of more than $330 million in just the first two years and hundreds of millions of dollars in unknown, ongoing costs to state taxpayers in the years to follow. This significant price tag does not include construction costs to build additional state correctional facilities, which would likely be needed, or take into account the fiscal impact on local governments. This fiscal impact is particularly untenable on the heels of the legislature significantly underfunding existing operations at the Department of Corrections in the most recent state budget." Evers wrote that "Wisconsin should be investing in data-driven, evidence-based programming that addresses barriers to reentry, enhances educational and vocational opportunities for individuals who will be released after completing their sentence, and provides treatment for mental health and substance use issues, which will help to reduce recidivism and save taxpayer money while improving public safety." Wisconsin Justice Initiative and Wisconsin Justice Initiative Action wrote to Evers on Wednesday, urging him to veto the bill, AB 85. Currently, the DOC has discretion to pursue revocation when a person on release is charged with a new crime. Revocations are then decided by administrative law judges, rather than sentencing judges. AB 85 would have taken away the DOC’s discretion and required that the department recommend revocation, even though new charges are based only on probable cause and could later be dropped or defeated at trial. The Assembly passed AB 85 in March along party lines with the exception of cross-over votes by one representative from each side. The Senate passed the bill in June along party lines. The bill was sent to Evers yesterday. As of today, Wisconsin holds 23,346 people in prison. The most recent available number of people on probation or parole, from May 31, is 63,420. Estimates indicated that if the bill became law, more than 4,600 additional people would end up in Wisconsin prisons each year, with a price tag of $250 million annually once the additional population was in place. In written testimony in the Legislature, even the Badger State Sheriffs’ Association and Wisconsin Sheriffs and Deputy Sheriffs Association questioned the bill, expressing concern about its cost and impact on jails and prisons. WJI and WJI Action's letter to the governor said that “the bill turns the long-standing American concept of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ on its head. The bill would require that a person on supervision is presumed guilty of a violation of the terms of release merely upon accusations of other, as yet unproved, conduct, which are made on only probable cause.” Further, WJI and WJI Action wrote, “individuals on supervision or parole already face overwhelming odds against making it to the finish line. . . . People on release face a long list of behavior controlled by the DOC, and for more than a decade, the Department of Corrections has failed to develop rules and guidance implementing 2013 Wisconsin Act 196 to provide those on release with guidance.” As WJI reported recently, Act 196 calls for DOC to develop a list of sanctions that may be imposed for the most common violations, offering “clear and immediate consequences for violations.” The law also mandates that any rule developed by DOC take into account the impact of revocation on an offender’s employment and family. WJI and WJI Action pointed out that Wisconsin’s prisons are already at capacity and that this bill sends that number higher, at great fiscal and societal cost. The organizations also questioned the removal of discretion from the DOC. Minister Roy Rogers, executive director of The Onesimus Group Milwaukee and a WJI board member with personal experience in the justice system, had this to say about the bill: "Assembly Bill 85—though cloaked in the language of accountability—is, in truth, a reactionary measure. It weakens due process, disrespects the discretion of our criminal justice professionals, and burdens our communities with costly, ineffective incarceration." "Out of the 6,280 individuals charged with new crimes while under supervision in 2019, we must ask: how many of those charges ended in actual convictions? According to the Department of Corrections and the Badger Institute, more than half did not. Yet this bill would treat every charge as though it were already a conviction—punishing men and women based solely on an accusation." "That’s not justice," he told WJI. "That’s preemptive punishment—a direct threat to the constitutional principle of 'innocent until proven guilty.' . . . Charges can stem from false accusations, mistaken identity, or insufficient evidence. And in historically over-policed, marginalized communities, we know all too well that it doesn't take much to find yourself charged." Rogers, too, noted that the bill stripped discretion from DOC agents and administrative law judges, who "weigh the severity of the violation, the individual's risk level, and history. That’s what smart justice looks like. AB 85 would remove all that wisdom and replace it with a blunt, one-size-fits-all mandate—rooted in fear, not facts." "Public safety is essential," Rogers told WJI. "But AB 85 did not offer real safety—it offered mass disruption under the guise of accountability. We cannot incarcerate our way into healthy neighborhoods. We need wiser strategies that reduce harm, restore people, and invest in transformation." By Alexandria Staubach
More than 60 people appeared at a virtual Department of Corrections hearing Tuesday morning to comment on the Department of Corrections’ failure to implement a decade-old law that could change revocations statewide. Attendees raised personal, ethical, and legal arguments about the DOC’s proposed new administrative rule to implement 2013 Wisconsin Act 196. DOC proposed the new rule two weeks ago. As WJI reported last week, Act 196 requires the DOC to develop a list of sanctions that may be imposed for the most common violations, offering “clear and immediate consequences for violations.” The law also mandates that any rule developed by DOC take into account the impact of revocation on an offender’s employment and family. Advocates say that the DOC until now has largely ignored Act 196, which passed with bipartisan support. Participants at today’s hearing said the proposed rule remains insufficient to bring DOC into compliance with the law. The Wisconsin Legislative Council has said that the current rule “does not set forth a list of sanctions for the most common violations, nor does it explain what specific evidenced-based responses may be applied to a violation (e.g., when revocation is the required response). Instead, it implies that the list of sanctions and responses will be contained in a document somewhere outside the administrative rules.” Many at today’s hearing shared personal stories about how lengthy and unpredictable terms of supervision have impacted them. “It feels arbitrary and excessive,” said JenAnn Bauer, who has served eight years of supervision, which she said was more than 75% of any possible prison sentence. She said that despite making significant payments toward restitution, fees for extended supervision and her financial obligations to the court system keep growing. “I feel trapped in a cage made of numbers, not bars,” she said. Sean Wilson, Senior Director of Organizing and Partnerships at Dream.org, also expressed concerned about the impact of fees accrued during supervision. He said the proposed rule would actually codify profits into supervision, giving private vendors control over fees. A section of the proposed rule says “a vendor is authorized to charge a fee to probationers, parolees, and persons on extended supervision to cover the cost of supervision and administration of the contract.” Wilson called the DOC’s proposed rule a “missed opportunity” because the rule continues to be “focused on managing people rather than their success.” He said he recognized that DOC faces significant issues in staffing, but elsewhere in the nation departments use technology like kiosks to reduce the burden of check-ins on supervisees who are least likely to reoffend. Marianne Olson, an advocate with Ex-Incarcerated People Organizing who has been on supervision for eight years and has another 18 to go, said “people are being sent back (to prison) not to protect public safety but to punish past behavior,” in violation of federal law. Supervision “should be an opportunity for restoration, not retaliation” she said, calling extended supervision “retaliation disguised as support.” Shannon Ross of The Community expressed concern that the DOC seemingly did not engage any formerly incarcerated people in developing the rule. “A lot of us would be great in those rooms at the end of these things,” he said. WISDOM's Tom Gilbert, who has met with DOC about this issue since 2019, said the decisions that the DOC and its “agents make every day regarding people under your supervision, widely affect families, employers, health care providers, social services providers, schools—in other words, whole communities and this whole state.” The public comment period on the proposed rule will remain open through August 8. Instructions for submitting comments can be found here. By Alexandria Staubach
The Wisconsin Department of Corrections will hold a virtual hearing on July 8 for public comments on proposed new rules that could improve supervision and avoid revocations, though an advocate says the rules could be even better. More than a decade ago, the Legislature passed 2013 Wisconsin Act 196, which says the DOC “shall” create rules for a system of short-term sanctions for violations of supervision conditions, with “a list of sanctions to be imposed for the most common violations.” The rules were to give flexibility in imposing sanctions while providing “offenders with clear and immediate consequences for violations.” Implementation of the law had the potential to eliminate harsh revocation prison sentences and dramatically reduce the prison population. Instead, in 2019, the DOC created an administrative rule that an advocate says gives lip service to the law and continues opaque standards that prop up incarceration as the primary vehicle for revocation sanctions. “The rule was one sentence,” WISDOM’s Tom Gilbert recently told WJI. “It said they will adopt an evidence-based response to violations, which is what they had before the law was passed.” Gilbert calls the current administrative rule “wasted words and paper.” He strongly believes that the current rule does little to address the requirements imposed by the law. “I understand the difference between the word ‘shall’ and the word ‘may,'" Gilbert said. “When I learned about Act 196 and its potential for changing the way things are done and the consequences, I thought this could be a game changer,” said Gilbert. On behalf of WISDOM, Gilbert has been meeting with DOC about the law and rule since 2019. WISDOM is a statewide network of faith-based organizations and others advocating for racial, social and economic justice. In 2024, more than 8,000 people were admitted to Wisconsin’s prisons, and roughly 60% of those admissions were based on revocations, per DOC data. Act 196 was designed to ensure that short-term sanctions for individuals who violate the rules of their probation, parole, deferred sentence, or community supervision are tailored and take several individual factors into account. While correcting the offender’s behavior, providing proportionate consequences, and protecting the public are all objectives, the law requires DOC also to ensure “that efforts to minimize the impact on an offender’s employment” and “efforts to minimize the impact on an offender’s family” are made when imposing sanctions. Gilbert said that if DOC followed the law and considered the impacts on a person’s employment and family, it would be a radical departure from its current Electronic Case Reference Manual, which “says very little about these things.” The statute also requires DOC to be transparent about specific sanctions for the common types of rule violations. Before Act 196 passed, and continuing today, DOC has determined revocation sanctions using an evidenced-based, but proprietary, tool called “the Compass,” Gilbert said. “Because it’s a proprietary tool, no one can see how (DOC) arrives at their decisions." Defendants and defense attorneys have no way of knowing what sanctions will be imposed for what violations or how decisions to revoke are made, he said. Proper implementation of Act 196 through an improved rule could require DOC to set forth a clear list of sanctions for the most common offenses. “People would know in advance,” and “that kind of transparency is sadly lacking in supervision today,” said Gilbert. This year, DOC proposed new rules, which are the subject of the July 8 public hearing. After the hearing, interested individuals will have 30 days to submit written comments. Gilbert said the proposed rules “still will not implement the law” because they merely quote the eight requirements of Act 196 and fail to develop the mandated system of short-term sanctions. He called this a “conscious omission, not an oversight.” However, “the release of the proposed Act 196 rules for public comment provides a real opportunity to communicate our vision of a community corrections system that focuses on restoration, both of affected individuals and the communities in which they and we live,” Gilbert told WJI. More information about the hearing and how to make public comments can be found here. By Alexandria Staubach
Prolific overcrowding at Wisconsin’s adult institutions is nothing new, but the problem is close to setting records. The state’s Legislative Fiscal Bureau estimated in June 2023 that Wisconsin’s prison population would reach its highest peak ever, at 24,800 individuals, in July 2025. While the system is not there quite yet, it is getting close. According to the Department of Corrections’ May 2 population report, a total of 23,266 persons are held in custody, with nearly every adult institution operating above capacity. The highest prison population to date was in the year before the COVID-19 pandemic, when the number reached 24,116 individuals, according to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau. Recent prison population data show that the Department of Corrections' current stated capacity, including beds it contracts from other jurisdictions, is 17,642. Dodge Correctional Institution is operating at 153% capacity, with 623 more individuals than the facility was designed to house. At Green Bay Correctional Institution, the DOC houses 382 more people than the facility was designed to house. The minimum-security Oakhill Correctional Institution is operating at more than 200% capacity. Waupun Correctional Institution, which made national headlines last summer over dire conditions, is the only maximum-security prison currently under capacity. Overcrowding is not exclusive to men’s facilities. Taycheedah, the women’s prison, is operating at 150% of capacity, while the Robert E. Ellsworth Center, a minimum-security women’s facility, is operating at more than 214% capacity. During the pandemic, from 2021 to 2022, the average daily adult prison population dropped to 20,138. The fiscal bureau anticipated significant growth from that number as courts resolved the cases that were backlogged during the pandemic. According to the Prison Policy Initiative, Wisconsin’s prison population grew by 11% between 2021 and 2023, and growth has not meaningfully slowed since then. WJI calculates that from May 2023 to the present the growth rate remains at about 10%. From May 2016 to May 2018, the growth rate was only 4%. This evening WJI hosts Nicole Porter of The Sentencing Project for a talk about reducing Wisconsin’s prison population. Porter, senior director of advocacy with The Sentencing Project, will discuss current efforts to reduce the nation’s prison population, the history of decarceration, and the political climate impacting the nation’s incarceration rate. Door admissions available at Milwaukee’s Turner Hall at 5:00 p.m. See www.wjiinc.org/events for cost and details.
By Alexandria Staubach
The Wisconsin Legislature last week moved forward on increasingly punitive measures that increase the likelihood of incarceration, ignoring community calls for systems and programs that decrease recidivism and address root causes of crime. Senate Bill 93/Assembly Bill 85 predominated at the Senate Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety’s 4½-hour public hearing on April 1. The committee has not yet voted on the bill. If it passes out of committee, it would then go to the full Senate, possibly in the next floor session period, which runs April 15-25. The bill has already passed in the Assembly If enacted, the bill would require the Wisconsin Department of Corrections to recommend revocation of probation or parole when an individual is charged with (not convicted of) a new crime. Law enforcement groups unanimously supported the bill at the hearing, while groups with ties to reentry services and justice reform unanimously opposed it. Committee member Sen. Dora Drake (D-Milwaukee) expressed concern over the potential costs of the legislation after one of the bill’s lead sponsors, Rep. Brent Jacobson (R-Mosinee), highlighted a fiscal planning estimate by the Wisconsin Department of Administration that as many as 47% of individuals currently on supervision could be subject to revocation if the law is enacted. The fiscal estimate anticipates that the legislation could eventually increase the prison population by 4,600 people, requiring $245.7 million in additional spending by the DOC. “It's an admission in itself that we have an issue,” said Jacobson. He said that while “impossible” to quantify, recidivism also has comparable community costs. While the DOC did not provide oral testimony at the hearing, it opposes the legislation, which it views as removing its discretion. Cost wasn’t the only hot topic. Deep frustration with repeat offenders squared off with the real-life ramifications for everyone on supervision. “It takes an act of Congress to get somebody revoked in our state,” said Dodge County Sheriff Dale Schmidt. He has heard from those on supervision that “probation and parole is a joke because I can do whatever I want on it,” he said. On the opposing side, Marianne Olson, operations director of Ex-incarcerated Persons Organizing, said, “I live in a world where not everyone gets along, and even being in the wrong place at the wrong time can lead to charges.” Olson is currently serving more than 20 years of supervision after being sentences for nonviolent offenses. She said that “revocation should never be based on mere allegations,” and that studies show “supportive interventions, not harsh penalties, promote lasting public safety.” When a person is revoked from community supervision, they serve the remainder of their sentence incarcerated – even if probation was ordered in the first instance. Speakers also shared concerns about revoking individuals without due process. Hearings on revocations are presided over by an administrative law judge, and due process protections are relaxed. “There is a concern for me” said Drake. “If someone is innocent until proven guilty, they should be treated as such.” “Senate Bill 93 does not just abandon the values of rehabilitation and reintegration,” but “it erodes due process,” said Sean Wilson, senior director of organizing and partnerships at Dream.org. “We cannot continue to double down on harmful polies that have pushed our correction system to a breaking point,” said Amanda Merkwae, ACLU of Wisconsin’s advocacy director. She shared statistics indicating that Wisconsin exceeds the national average regarding incarceration rates and revocations are a driving force behind that incarceration. Merkwae said revocations for rule violations and new charges “accounted for 60% of the total 8,155 new prison admissions in 2024” and that the overwhelming majority of cases recommended for revocation hearings result in incarceration. Shannon Ross, whose recent work includes helping usher in a bill creating what he calls a “one stop for reentry services,” shared his personal anxiety on supervision. Ross, successful founder of the reentry focused nonprofit The Community, which employs seven people, said he has 11½ years of supervision left on his own sentence. “At any given moment an allegation can send me back to prison,” and “it doesn’t matter the things I’ve done.” “People who have been out for so long in Wisconsin, the way we’ve structured our system, don’t have the same ability to stay in society and avoid going back in,” Ross said. “This is like writing business law without talking to business owners,” said Ross. His testimony was followed by others with real-life supervision stories.
By Margo Kirchner Several organizations and activists this morning called on Wisconsin legislators and the governor to return 17-year-olds to the juvenile justice system and ensure that no 10-year-olds are eligible for the adult criminal justice system. The call came at a press conference outside the Milwaukee County Courthouse organized by Rev. Joseph Ellwanger on behalf of the Milwaukee Inner-city Congregations Allied for Hope (MICAH) Transformational Justice Task Force. Ellwanger was surrounded by more than two dozen supporters of youth justice reform, including two representatives from Wisconsin Justice Initiative. Ellwanger noted that the press conference was motivated by upcoming hearings in the case of a young boy who killed his mother when he was 10 years old. Under Wisconsin law, anyone charged with first degree intentional homicide, even a 10-year-old, is charged as an adult. (WJI guest columnist Roy Rogers previously wrote about the case here.) Hearings for a "reverse waiver" to juvenile court are set for next week in the young boy's case. Several speakers at the press conference referenced research indicating that the human brain does not fully develop until around age 25. Joshua Rovner of The Sentencing Project flew in from Washington, D.C. for the press conference. He noted that Wisconsin is one of only four states that treat all 17-year-olds as adults in the criminal justice system. (Wisconsin is aligned with Georgia, Texas, and Louisiana on that point.) Similarly, Wisconsin is one of just three states that allows a child as young as 10 years old to be charged as an adult for certain crimes, he said. Regarding the pending case, Rovner emphasized that “this is an elementary school child we are talking about.” Wisconsin’s Legislature and governor need “to fix these laws,” Rovner said. Emily Coddington, associate director of the Wisconsin Association of Family and Children’s Agencies, read a statement on behalf of the Raise the Age Coalition, a group of more than two dozen nonprofit and advocacy organizations pushing for legislation returning 17-year-olds to the juvenile justice system. “Wisconsin has failed to acknowledge what 46 other states already know: that raising the age (of adult prosecution) lowers recidivism rates, responds to often neglected mental health concerns and cognitive development research, provides a restorative and rehabilitative lens to youth justice, and begins to address racial disparities in the criminal justice system,” Coddington said. “We know that youth incarcerated with adults are 34% more likely to commit future crimes than youth served in settings designed to meet their unique needs, yet we continue to charge all 17-year-olds as adults,” she said. Wendy Volz Daniels, a clinical social worker and chair of the Felmers Chaney Advocacy Board, discussed how adults held by the Department of Corrections do not receive important anger management and cognitive behavior treatment until shortly before release. Several thousand individuals are on waiting lists for substance abuse and cognitive behavior treatment. “Sending children to the adult criminal justice system ensures that they will not get the treatment and rehabilitation that is needed,” she said. “Children cannot wait,” Daniels said. “Their needs are better served in the juvenile justice system, where they will immediately receive therapy and treatment,” she said. Two system-impacted individuals, including James Price, spoke about their own experiences as youth in the adult system and how children do not belong there. Price said that he “was absolutely scared” when he was age 14 in adult court in the building he now stood before, and he had to make adult decisions as a 14-year-old. Another system-impacted man said that when he was a teen and waived into adult court he “lost anything that looked like help,” including a social worker and psychiatrist who had been helping with his anger management. The Department of Corrections (DOC) called him “an overweight kid with PTSD” when he entered the corrections system, yet he did not receive necessary treatment for 27 years, shortly before his release. Other speakers included Sylvester Jackson, chair of the MICAH Transformational Justice Task Force; Dr. Kweku Ramel Smith, a psychologist and social justice advocate; and Dr. Richard Shaw, pastor of St. Matthew C.M.E. Church and MICAH president. Jackson emphasized that the DOC is “not prepared to deal with mental health and trauma” and “we should not forget that that’s a child,” referring to the pending case. He argued that society should not accept the charging of a 10-year-old as an adult Smith discussed how the education system has different levels of ages because of the vulnerabilities caused by mismatching age with setting, and the lack of such age differentiation in the adult corrections system. Shaw noted that God shows compassion and mercy, yet under current law “we have little to no compassion and mercy on children.” “We are challenging our government, we are challenging legislators, to change this law,” he said.  Wendy Volz Daniels speaks on June 18, 2024. Photograph courtesy of ACLU-Wisconsin. By Gretchen Schuldt The number of paroles granted last year was down 82% from a peak just three years earlier, Department of Corrections figures show. The number plummeted from 201 in 2020 to just 37 in 2023.  Source: Wisconsin Department of Corrections What happened?
“We’re trying to figure that out, too,” said Mark Rice, Transformation Justice Campaign coordinator at WISDOM. The nonprofit has long been active in criminal justice reform efforts. DOC did not respond to a request for reasons behind the decline. Inmates eligible for parole are those who were convicted of crimes that occurred before the state's 1999 truth-in sentencing laws took effect. Those laws eliminated parole. The drop seems part of reduced efforts to lower prison populations, Rice said. Gov. Evers and DOC Secretary Kevin Carr took steps to cut populations during the Covid pandemic but now “it’s back to business as usual,” Rice said. The number of parole-eligible inmates declines each year as more die or serve out their sentences, but the drop in grants also appears linked to Evers' 2019 hiring and then de facto dismissal in mid-2022 of Parole Commissioner Chair John Tate II. The rise and fall in grant numbers neatly matches the dates of Tate’s employment. The Republicans ran ads attacking Tate's use of parole to release incarcerated individuals, Rice said. “Some of it was total lies” and there were “a lot of attempts to dehumanize people,” he said. Tate’s Parole Commission, which granted parole to some serious offenders, brought Evers under heavy political pressure as he sought reelection in 2022. First Evers intervened in May 2022 to successfully request Tate to rescind a decision to parole convicted murderer Douglas Balsewicz, who stabbed his wife to death in front of their children. Less than a month later, in June, Tate was gone after Evers asked him to resign. He was replaced by former State Sen. Jon Erpenbach, who assumed office in January 2023. Parole grant numbers followed the events: there were 43 grants in the first quarter of 2022, before the Balsewicz controversy blew up; then 31 in the second quarter, as the drama unfolded and Evers requested Tate's resignation. The number of grants dropped after Tate left to 19 in the third quarter and 18 in the fourth, according to DOC figures. Meanwhile, those who were paroled during Tate's tenure generally are doing well and making positive contributions in their communities, Rice said. "No human being is irredeemable," he said. Evers ran on pledges to reduce the prison population, but he and Carr have not done what is within their power, including commuting sentences and granting more compassionate releases to seriously ill inmates, he said. In Wisconsin prisons, Rice said, "The problem isn't understaffing. It's overpopulation." By Alexandria Staubach
The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the phenomenon of lonely deaths in nursing homes and hospitals, but such lonely deaths continue in the Wisconsin prison system even post-pandemic. In the Wisconsin prison system, a terminal-illness diagnosis lands an imprisoned individual in Dodge Correctional Institution (DCI). While DCI principally serves as the reception center for all adult males entering the Wisconsin Department of Corrections (DOC) system, it also serves as the central medical unit for the male DOC population. It is where sentences begin and where life may end. Removal to DCI for terminal-illness care breaks bonds of friendship between incarcerated individuals that formed over years or even decades. “Once that person goes to DCI you know you may not ever see or talk to them again. You may not ever find out what happens to them,” said Roy Rogers, a former juvenile lifer in the Wisconsin prison system. (Rogers is now a data processor, a preentry and reentry liaison for The Community, and a WJI board member.) WJI inquired whether DOC permits video or any other form of visitation between terminally ill incarcerated persons and their incarcerated friends. “Wisconsin DOC has never allowed a person in our care to be on another person in our care’s visiting list,” John Beard, director of communications for the DOC, told WJI. “Dodge Correctional Institution is one of our institutions which has trained certified peer specialists within the population. So, if an individual requests peer support, they would have access to another person in our care who is trained to provide that,” Beard said. In other words, those who spend their last days as residents of the DCI infirmary have the companionship of staff or volunteers whom they do not know, but not of their friends from within the DOC. While incarcerated individuals may receive visitation with friends and family who are not incarcerated, the relationships formed between incarcerated persons are often their main relationships, said Rogers. Though in-person, peer-to-peer visitation among incarcerated individuals may not practically be feasible, DOC is equipped to and offers video visitation, according to its visitation policy. However, per Beard’s response to WJI, because the DOC does not permit persons in its care to be on each other’s visitation lists, the DOC does not permit video visits between individuals who are both incarcerated. Nearly 20% of the U.S. prison population is older than age 50 according to June 2023 Federal Bureau of Prisons statistics. Of the 21,171 persons incarcerated in the DOC as of May 31, 2023, nearly 24% were older than 50, including 46 individuals 80 or older. DCI’s infirmary unit holds 60 beds, with seven rooms dedicated to palliative care. According to the DOC, “a number” of incarcerated patients are residents of this infirmary. In June 2022 the oldest person incarcerated at DCI was 98 years old. The infirmary unit provides care to patients who require 24-hour or subacute nursing care. The palliative care program provides “a valuable service to patients with terminal illnesses, providing comfort and symptom management, when release to the community is not possible,” according to DCI’s 2022 Annual Report. |
Donate
Help WJI advocate for justice in Wisconsin
|
RSS Feed