This summer,
In 1994, Congress banned Pell Grants for prisoners. The rule remains in place, but last year the Obama administration announced a pilot program in partnership with 67 colleges and universities to let some prisoners earn a degree while they serve their sentences. The program launched last month, but allowing all inmates to benefit is up to Congress: Rep. Donna Edwards, D-Md., introduced legislation to strike the prisoner prohibition last year, and recently Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, brought a matching proposal to the Senate. Both should pass.
Legislators made a mistake two decades ago. They decided that educating prisoners for free would reward bad behavior at the expense of law-abiding students who struggle to pay tuition. But prisoner education encourages good behavior; inmates who make the effort should be encouraged. And the expense is modest: In 1993 and 1994, funding for prisoners took up less than 1 percent of Pell Grants. Backers of the restorations legislation say Congress could reinstate inmate eligibility without depriving students outside of the prison system.
In fact, programs that reduce recidivism save money. Right now, 68 percent of prisoners end up back behind bars within three years of release. Recidivism rates decrease to less than 14 percent when prisoners receive associate’s degrees and to less than 6 percent when they earn bachelor’s degrees. Every dollar spent on educating prisoners saves $5 in reincarceration costs, a Rand Corp. analysis found.
Those dollars also can change lives. Inmates leave prison to find a world different from the one they left. They struggle to reunite with families, rejoin communities and rebuild their lives. Without education, the adjustment is harder and joblessness more likely. As a result, too many offenders re-enter the outside world only to find themselves serving another sentence after just a few years, and too many other Americans are hurt by their crimes. In two pages and fewer than 1,000 words, Congress could change that.
The Washington Post
