Category: huffington post

My 2016 Wish List: 3 Ways to Improve Illinois’ Criminal Justice System

by Hilary Gowins, posted in huffington post

Originally published on Huffington Post.

Fairness and safety are the cornerstones of criminal justice, and Illinois saw several important reform victories in 2015. For one, a new law requires that law-enforcement agencies that make use of body cameras must use them when responding to calls (but turn them off when interviewing crime victims, witnesses or informants). Politicians also signed on to create a pilot program in Cook County to ensure that certain indigent jail residents charged with property offenses don’t languish in jail because they can’t afford bail.

But if Illinois wants to ensure public safety while addressing problems such as ex-offenders’ difficulty re-entering the workforce and overcrowding in jails and prisons, there’s plenty of room left to improve.

1) Sealing reform – Many ex-offenders in Illinois are barred from entering their chosen professions – or simply from securing well-paying jobs – after serving their time. Without hope for a brighter future, it’s not hard to see why half of ex-offenders end up back behind bars within three years. Record sealing gives reformed ex-offenders a chance at re-entering the workforce in a meaningful way. One of the main barriers to good work that ex-offenders face is the scarlet letter a criminal record leaves on a job application, even after an ex-offender has served his or her time. In 2013, Illinois passed a law allowing ex-offenders to petition to have their records sealed, meaning only law enforcement and certain types of employers, such as schools, can see an ex-offender’s criminal record. But a person is only eligible for sealing after waiting three to four years from the end of his or her sentence, and not all ex-offenders are eligible. Illinois can break the cycle of crime and truly give ex-offenders a second chance by broadening sealing and eliminating wait times altogether.

2) Decriminalization – Violent crime is down, and while the state’s prison population has dropped slightly, it’s still far too high. Illinois’ largest category of offenses is drug crimes – 18.9 percent of the state’s incarcerated prisoners are serving time for violations of either the Controlled Substance Act or the Cannabis Control Act, according to research from the Illinois Department of Corrections. In 2012, Chicago City Council voted to move to civil instead of criminal penalties for possessing small amounts of marijuana.

Nearly three years later, the rest of the state almost followed suit. The Illinois General Assembly passed a bill sponsored by state Rep. Kelly Cassidy, D-Chicago, in spring 2015 that would have punished possession of less than 30 grams of marijuana with a fine of $100 to $200, and would have lowered penalties for possession of between 30 and 500 grams of marijuana. That bill fizzled out, but Cassidy has reintroduced a revised version she hopes will earn the governor’s signature and become law. This version of the bill would make possession of up to 10 grams punishable by a fine – that means people caught with minor amounts of marijuana will be ticketed, not needlessly sent to jail, at great cost-savings to the state residents who pay for prisons and jails.

Moving to civil from criminal penalties means the state won’t continue devoting resources to keeping a number of nonviolent offenders behind bars, and will go a long way toward achieving Gov. Bruce Rauner’s goal of reducing the state’s prison population by 25 percent come 2025.

3) Bail reform – It’s time to make “innocent until proven guilty” mean something. Most inmates in local jails haven’t been found guilty of any crimes – 90 percent of inmates in the Cook County Department of Corrections are awaiting trial. Others are there because they can’t afford to pay their bail. This type of system results in absurdities such as a pregnant 30-year-old in jail for 135 days for stealing two plums and three candy bars, according to information released by the Cook County Sheriff. Cara Smith, Chief Strategy Officer at the Cook County Jail, saidthis woman, to whom she referred as M.H., was still in jail for this offense when M.H. gave birth to a baby girl she named Miracle. M.H.’s stay in the jail cost taxpayers $19,305.

Instituting a more reasonable system means taxpayers can avoid paying to lock up someone who doesn’t pose a safety risk pre-trial, and who likely shouldn’t have to experience exposure to jail in the first place. While it’s important to keep dangerous criminals off the streets, a person’s freedom before he or she has been convicted of a crime shouldn’t depend on how much money he or she has. Alternatives to money bail already exist: A court notification program in Multnomah County, Oregon, reduced failure-to-appear rates by 45 percent in two years. In Washington, D.C., defendants can’t be held in jail because they don’t have the ability to pay bail – yet 88 percent of all arrestees appear for their court hearings.

Another Chicago Alderman Moves to Keep Food Carts Out of Affluent, North Side Neighborhood

by Hilary Gowins, posted in huffington post

Originally published on Huffington Post.

Another Chicago alderman is moving to limit where newly legal food carts can operate in the city.

Alderman Michele Smith, 43rd Ward, introduced an ordinance Dec. 9 that would ban food carts from a number of heavily trafficked areas in the popular Lincoln Park neighborhood.

The neighborhood is a prime destination for retailers and restaurateurs alike — the proposed ordinance goes on at length about Lincoln Park’s economic vitality.

“Lincoln Park is a diverse arts and cultural hub that serves as a leading destination for tourists visiting the City of Chicago,” the ordinance reads.

There’s no question that a major driver behind Smith’s move is to protect existing brick-and-mortar businesses. Her ordinance notes that Lincoln Park “has the highest ratio of pedestrian-retail street designations throughout the City of Chicago.”

The ordinance also says that Lincoln Park is home to over 300 retail food licenses.

Despite spending so much time and energy explaining Lincoln Park’s existing retail and dining options, Smith ultimately argues that restricting food carts is necessary to protect pedestrian accessibility and public safety.

It’s an action that seems more appropriate for a homeowner’s association than a city government plagued with police corruption and a massive debt crisis.

Smith isn’t the first Chicago official to use her power to restrict where food carts can operate.

On Sept. 24, Chicago City Council lifted its ban on food carts. But less than a day after this decision, Alderman Brendan Reilly, 42nd Ward, proposed limitations in more than 30 areas downtown and in the city’s River North neighborhood. These restrictions passed City Council in October. Alderman Tom Tunney, 44th Ward, pushed through an ordinance in October that limits where food-cart vendors can operate in Wrigleyville, keeping vendors away from busy hubs along Addison and Clark streets near Wrigley Field.

Instead of allowing vendors and customers to decide where food carts can operate, Chicago government officials are taking pre-emptive action to keep upscale neighborhoods such as Wrigleyville and Lincoln Park free of food-cart vendors.

Food carts should be a boon to Chicago neighborhoods, with the potential to bringup to 6,400 new jobs and create more than $8 million in new local sales-tax revenue.
While many of Chicago’s more than 1,500 food-cart vendors are eager for the chance to serve their delicious food in affluent areas, they primarily serve low-income neighborhoods where food options are often scarce. And they are a beloved part of their communities – kids pick up elotes for after-school snacks, walkers grab champurrado on cool mornings, and anyone looking for a delicious lunch knows vendors’ tamales won’t disappoint.

Unfortunately, the hardworking food-cart vendors who fought so long for the city to recognize their industry now operate at the mercy of all-powerful local aldermen, many of whom use their authority to grant political favors and keep out businesses they don’t like.

Now that Chicago has lifted its ban on food carts, there should be no restrictionson where vendors can operate. City Council’s Sept. 24 vote to legalize the industry was a huge victory for the small-time entrepreneur – it would be a mistake for aldermen to continue walking it back.

Higher Dread: A Chicago Public University Is Poised to Seize Private Property

by Hilary Gowins, posted in huffington post

Originally published on Huffington Post.

Bill Tong grew up on the northwest side of Chicago. He’s the grandson of Chinese immigrants and feels a deep sense of responsibility to preserve his family’s legacy.

That’s impossible now.

Bill has been fighting for months to stop a state university from seizing the property his family has owned since just after World War II — and he’s about to lose.

Bill’s story sounds like those of many others whose property has become the object of desire for government bureaucrats. When most people think of eminent domain, they probably imagine the government seizing a cornfield to build a highway. But eminent domain has become a real threat to individuals and families like the Tongs, who don’t have the deep pockets necessary to fight back.

Bill grew up in the building that Northeastern Illinois University, or NEIU, wants to take, which rests on a busy main street in a blue-collar neighborhood. Because racial discrimination kept their family out of area residential housing when they built the commercial property in 1954, the Tongs have always lived on the top floor. Now, Bill’s elderly mother lives in the upstairs apartment, the place where she raised a family. The family business, a restaurant called Tong’s Tea Garden, was downstairs. Today, the restaurant is called Hunan Wok and is owned by another Chinese immigrant, Maria Lin, who rents the space from the Tongs. Perhaps the most tragic irony of Bill’s situation is that he is an NEIU alumnus, and worked as a lab manager at NEIU’s Earth Science Department for about seven years, later serving as an adjunct lecturer at the school for several years.

But soon Bill and others who have called this stretch of the neighborhood their own will likely be cleared out by NEIU, which plans to bulldoze existing small businesses to make room for a developer to build apartment-style student housing. The development will also include private, retail shops on the ground floor, replacing businesses that have been on the block for decades.

The university refuses to change course on this plan, despite public outcry and the availability of more than 60 acres of undeveloped land on campus at its disposal.

NEIU President Sharon Hahs said this project is necessary because NEIU is the only Illinois state college without student housing. She claims the neighborhood is economically depressed, and this project will spur growth and revitalization. But the block is home to many small businesses, such as Caren Real Estate, Hunan Wok and Bryn Mawr Breakfast Club.

Ordinary people such as Bill Tong and his family can’t afford to fund lengthy court battles. The state can, however, and government is almost always able to wait out anyone who refuses to give up his property without a fight.

This isn’t just a Chicago problem.

Drought-crazed California is making moves to take 300 farms to build Gov. Jerry Brown’s proposed water tunnels in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.

In Glendale, Colorado, the local government is trying to seize property where a local family has had a carpet business for 25 years so a developer can build an “entertainment district.”

At least seven property owners in St. Louis are facing down city officials who want to seize their land to make way for a supersized federal-government facility.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio is making headlines with his plans to seize properties on Coney Island through eminent domain.

NEIU’s president and other proponents of the government’s prerogative to seize private property say they are well within their legal rights to pursue eminent domain. Under the law, they’re correct. But “legal” and “moral” aren’t always overlapping terms.

If the government can take land from Bill Tong and property owners in St. Louis and Colorado, the same thing can and will continue to happen to others across the country.

Chicago Aldermen Giveth, Taketh Away Food-cart Freedom

by Hilary Gowins, posted in huffington post

Originally published on Huffington Post.

A month after Chicago overturned its ban on food carts, city aldermen are poised to restrict them once again.

Less than a day after Chicago lifted its ban on food carts on Sept. 24, city aldermen with a history of limiting the city’s food options started making moves to restrict vendors’ ability to operate in lucrative locations.

The city’s license committee approved restrictions in the area surrounding Wrigley Field and other parts of Chicago’s Lakeview neighborhood on Oct. 27 at the behest of Alderman Tom Tunney, a former restaurant owner. Alderman Brendan Reilly also proposed limitations in more than 30 areas downtown and in the River North neighborhood — the license committee moved these forward as well.

City Council will vote on the proposed food-cart bans on Oct. 28, the same day aldermen are scheduled to vote on a highly contentious property-tax hike worth$588 million, making it the largest tax hike in modern Chicago history.

Food carts should be a boon to Chicago neighborhoods, with the potential to bring up to 6,400 new jobs and create more than $8 million in new local sales-tax revenue. Unfortunately, the hardworking food-cart vendors who fought so long for the city to recognize their industry now operate at the mercy of all-powerful local aldermen, many of whom use their authority to grant political favors and keep out businesses they don’t like.

Chicago’s more than 1,500 food-cart vendors are primarily Latino and serve low-income neighborhoods where food options are often scarce. They are a beloved part of their communities – kids pick up elotés for after-school snacks, walkers grab champurrado on cool mornings and anyone looking for a delicious lunch knows vendors’ tamales won’t disappoint.

Now that Chicago has lifted its ban on food carts, there should be no restrictionson where vendors can operate. City Council’s Sept. 24 vote to legalize the industry was a huge victory for the small-time entrepreneur — it would be a mistake to walk it back.

Double Trouble: Faced With Massive Local Tax Hike, Chicagoans Frustrated With Talk of Increase at State Level

by Hilary Gowins, posted in huffington post

Originally published on Huffington Post.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel is poised to squeeze city residents with the largesttax hike in modern Chicago history on Oct. 28. His plan includes a $588 million property-tax hike, a new $9.50 per-month garbage fee and other payment increases.

Emanuel isn’t the only politician soaking Chicagoans for more money. His counterparts in the state Capitol are hoping for more tax dollars as well.

Illinois has been without a state budget for more than 100 days; budget gridlock in the General Assembly has carried on for months as politicians who would continue asking for more from Illinoisans face off against those who want to fix Illinois’ structural problems, including more than $111 billion in pension debt and $6 billion in unpaid bills.

Unsurprisingly, Chicagoans aren’t warming to the idea of more tax hikes – on the state or local level.

When pollsters at Ogden & Fry surveyed people in Cook County, including many Chicagoans, on Oct. 21-22 to learn more about their opinions on government finances, more than 50 percent said they would have an unfavorable view of any elected official who votes for tax increases to balance the budget. The pollsters also found that the Illinoisans surveyed blame state politicians and Illinois House Speaker Mike Madigan for the budget gridlock.

Raising tax revenues on the back of a booming economy is one thing, but neither Chicago nor Illinois is experiencing growth on par with the rest of the country. And people are starting to feel the pain: Fewer than 1 in 5 Chicagoans think the city’s economy is becoming more prosperous.

The message is clear: The people of Illinois are frustrated with politicians who are unwilling to do what’s needed. Just 9.8 percent of the Illinoisans Ogden & Fry surveyed approve of the General Assembly’s performance; that’s even worse than Congress’ approval rating, which sits at 19 percent.

The hard truth elected officials are unwilling to face is that the only way to balance the budget in the long term without cutting services is through cost-saving measures and structural reforms to spur a moribund state economy.

As long as politicians refuse to do what’s necessary, those in need will continue to go without essential services, people counting on life-changing lottery winningswill continue receiving IOUs and Chicagoans will continue having to worry each day if they’re going to be able to pay the bills – in addition to footing the tab for more and more tax hikes.

Fly the W: Why can’t Chicago City Hall be more like the Cubs?

by Hilary Gowins, posted in huffington post

Originally published on Huffington Post.

It takes grit and endurance to make it in Chicago.

It also takes hope. That’s what the Chicago Cubs are giving their city.

They’ve showed Chicago that it’s possible to change a losing culture. For as long as anyone can remember, the Cubs have been a laggard franchise used to scraping the bottom of the National League rankings. But with a new manager and a talented young lineup, the team has energy. Manager Joe Maddon has instilled an expectation of winning in the dugout.

And it’s catching on. Chicagoans are emanating a palpable sense of hope and unity. People walk down Clark Street in Jake Arrieta and Kris Bryant jerseys. Strangers shout “Go Cubs” to each other as they walk to work in the Loop. Diners at restaurants across the city break bread with the TV on at the bar, enjoying a meal and cheering in unison for the lovable losers that just might have a shot at greatness.

But as the North Siders square off against the New York Mets for the National League pennant, Mayor Rahm Emanuel is poised to deliver a crushing blow.

His timing couldn’t be worse.

While the Cubs have changed their destiny, Emanuel wants more of the same for Chicago. He’s pushing for City Council to vote in the largest tax hike in modern Chicago history Oct. 28, the same day as Game 2 of the World Series — a game in which the Cubs could be playing, if they can come back from a two-game deficit against the Mets. The mayor’s tax hike includes a $588 million property-tax hike, a new $9.50-per-month garbage-collection fee, a $0.50-per-ride fee for Uber and other ridesharing services and more payment increases on residents.

Worst of all, it won’t even be enough to balance the city’s books in the long term.

The mayor and aldermen who run the city are scraping for money wherever they can find it, as the city of Chicago is facing more than $33 billion in debt.

Raising tax revenues on the back of a booming economy is one thing, but Chicago is not the Midwestern titan it once was. People are starting to feel the pain. Fewer than 1 in 5 Chicagoans think the city’s economy is becoming more prosperous.

Chicago is also the slowest-growing major city in the country. Houston is poised to overtake Chicago as the third-largest city in the U.S. by as soon as 2030.

After years of pain on the field and in the city’s 1 million households, it’s time for a reason to cheer. For countless Cubs fans on the North Side and across the city, a pennant and a World Series title would be the renewal of a promise that “next year” might bring something better. Victory would be the culmination of a lifetime of cheering for the lovable losers; not just the lifetimes of today’s Chicagoans, but those of their fathers, grandfathers and great-grandfathers as well, who remained blindly faithful that better days were ahead, despite a dry spell dating back to 1908.

Even down 0-2 to start their series against the Mets, nothing is impossible: In 2004, the Boston Red Sox, another long-beleaguered team, came back from an 0-3 deficit to capture their first World Series championship since 1918.

But say the Cubs do fight their way back, bringing a World Series trophy to Wrigleyville in 2015. What then? After fans dry tears of joy from their eyes? After all the confetti is swept off of Clark Street? After the 107-year itch is scratched?

A World Series ring doesn’t mean much on a begging hand. The city’s economy will continue sputtering under the weight of red tape, along with a tax-and-spend status quo at City Hall.

The biggest tax hike in a century shouldn’t overshadow the city’s biggest sporting event in 100 years. It’s about time politicians were brave enough to hit reset like the city’s beloved Cubs and give struggling residents the wide-eyed hope of October baseball outside the diamond.

Chicago needs a win.

Food-truck bust in the Loop sets disturbing precedent for Chicago chefs

by Hilary Gowins, posted in huffington post

Originally published on Huffington Post.

Every weekday, close to a dozen food trucks line up at Wacker Drive and Adams Street in downtown Chicago to serve lunch. But Oct. 5, city officials ticketed trucks and told them to leave. The food-truck bust serves as a chilling reminder to Chicago’s culinary entrepreneurs: No matter how popular or productive your business, the city can shut it down on a whim.

Bruges Brothers, a popular local vendor that sells Belgian-style frites, was one of the trucks the city ticketed. The citation, which came with a $25 fine, said the food truck had violated a city parking ordinance that prohibits trucks, buses or other commercial vehicles from parking on any business street in the city.

But that doesn’t add up. Chicago’s Municipal Code allows mobile-food vehicles to vend at a location for the lesser of two hours or the maximum time allowed for parking at that spot. If city officials ignore the sections of the code that allow food trucks to operate and ban these vendors from business streets, some of the city’s most popular meal options are likely to vanish.

Charles Belt, who does social media outreach and works daily on the Bruges Brothers food truck, said the ticket his truck received yesterday set an unsettling precedent.

“What the ticket was saying was that none of the food trucks were allowed to operate anywhere in the Loop, if you take into account that ticket on top of the 200-foot rule and the two-hour rule,” Belt said.

“That’s what bothered us. The people who came through gave everyone a ticket, told us to leave and said if we didn’t leave they’d put boots on the trucks. We chose to stay because we really don’t have a choice. We’re a small business: Every day matters, and every dollar matters. To give up real estate is not an option for us.”

It’s possible the ticketing flurry on Oct. 5 was just a fluke.

But attorney Robert Frommer worries that incidents like this could be a sign of something more. Frommer, an attorney for the Arlington, Virginia-based Institute for Justice, is representing the Cupcakes for Courage food truck in a lawsuit challenging Chicago’s food-truck rules.

“If the city is going to maintain that [its code] prevents food trucks from parking on any business street, notwithstanding what other parts of the city code say, then they are essentially banning all food-truck vending on public property in Chicago,” he said.

“I cannot believe that is what they actually intend; if it is, though, then Rahm is basically saying he intends to destroy the entire food-truck industry.”

No matter what motivated the city to issue tickets to food trucks at this intersection, one thing is clear: Chicago’s food-truck rules make it difficult for these entrepreneurs to operate. The city continues to issue licenses to new vendors, but it is not increasing the amount of space available to food trucks that want to meet high customer demand.

Chicago already restricts food trucks from operating within 200 feet of a restaurant and mandates that trucks have GPS trackers to monitor their movements –requirements Frommer’s lawsuit seeks to overturn. Limiting where food trucks can operate based on their proximity to brick-and-mortar eateries does nothing to protect the public – this rule exists purely to shield restaurants from competition.

“We operate under rules that other cities don’t have to deal with,” Belt said. “In Portland and LA, where there are thriving food-truck communities, they don’t have to deal with stuff like this. Rahm wants Chicago to be a first-class city. A strong food-truck scene is paramount to that.”
“It’s something the city — the people — want. We have the people on our side.”

The intersection at Adams and Wacker was barren of food trucks on Oct. 6, the day after the city’s bust. Chicago Alderman Brendan Reilly, whose ward encompasses the Wacker and Adams location, did not respond to a request for comment on the incident. Reilly was among the chief proponents of heavy restrictions on food trucks when City Council considered the topic over the last several years.

“We’re just trying to make a living out here,” said John Nguyen, owner of Chicago Lunchbox. “The city makes me feel like I’m doing something illegal.”

History repeating: Chicago aldermen who opposed food trucks now seek to restrict operations for food carts

by Hilary Gowins, posted in huffington post

Originally published on Huffington Post.

Less than a day after Chicago lifted its ban on food carts on Sept. 24, city aldermen with a history of limiting the city’s food options made moves to restrict vendors’ ability to operate in lucrative locations.

Two aldermen have launched proposals to limit where food carts can set up: Alderman Tom Tunney, whose ward covers the Wrigleyville neighborhood and who formerly owned restaurants of his own, and Alderman Brendan Reilly, whose district encompasses River North and many of the city’s most well-known brick-and-mortar dining spots, are leading the charge.

Food carts should be a boon to Chicago neighborhoods, with the potential to bring up to 6,400 new jobs and create more than $8 million in new local sales-tax revenue. Unfortunately, the hardworking food-cart vendors who fought so long for the city to recognize their industry now operate at the mercy of all-powerful local aldermen, many of whom use their authority to grant political favors and keep out businesses they don’t like.

Chicago’s more than 1,500 food-cart vendors are primarily Latino and serve low-income neighborhoods where food options are often scarce. They are a beloved part of their communities – kids pick up elotés for after-school snacks, walkers grab champurrado on cool mornings and anyone looking for a delicious lunch knows vendors’ tamales won’t disappoint.

Now that Chicago has lifted its ban on food carts, there should be no restrictions on where vendors can operate. City Council’s Sept. 24 vote to legalize the industry was a huge victory for the small-time entrepreneur – it would be a mistake to walk it back.

But the move isn’t surprising. History has shown Chicagoans where Tunney and Reilly stand when it comes to culinary competition.

Even though the city does allow food trucks to sell, aldermen imposed severe restrictions on how these businesses can operate. Food trucks can’t set up shop within 200 feet of a restaurant. To enforce this rule, the city requires food trucks to install GPS tracking devices. Vendors must stay in one location for no more than two hours, and there are just 35 designated “food stands” in which food trucks are allowed to park.

Tunney and Reilly were among the chief proponents of heavy restrictions on food trucks when City Council considered the topic over the last several years. Tunneymade no secret that the main reason behind the city’s oppressive rules is to protect established businesses.

“One of the major issues is spacing from brick-and-mortar restaurants,” Tunney told the Chicago Sun-Times in 2011. “We’ve got work to do. We need to hear from all sides. We need to make sure we protect … restaurants and foster a trend that, I think, is gonna be here for a while.”

Tunney was right about one thing: Despite heavy regulations, food trucks are thriving in Chicago. These mobile vendors have become immensely popular among the thousands of workers looking for variety in their lunch options downtown. Trucks like La Cocinita, The Jibarito Stop and Boocooroux bring new flavors and choices to diners, in a location where brick-and-mortar chains used to dominate. Now that City Council has unleashed food carts, there’s no reason to doubt that these vendors will receive a warm reception from diners across the city.

But Tunney is dead wrong when he says the city must “protect” restaurants. It should be left to hungry Chicagoans – not all-powerful Chicago aldermen – to determine where vendors take their talents.

Rehabilitation, Restitution Undermined by Illinois’ Supersized Criminal-Justice System

by Hilary Gowins, posted in huffington post

Originally published on Huffington Post.

Too often, corrections programs focus solely on locking up offenders and throwing away the key … until their sentences are completed, at which point they are expected to become productive members of society.

This model serves no one: not the taxpayers who foot the bill for jails and prisons, not the people who serve time behind bars, and not the victims of crime and the public.

An ideal corrections program focuses first on keeping the public safe. Public safety depends on crime prevention, which means that an effective corrections program is one that isn’t simply punitive, but is transformative, aimed at stopping the cycle of crime in which the same people end up behind bars again and again.

Unfortunately, Illinois lags behind other states in its efforts to curb recidivism through offender rehabilitation, and the results are sobering: Offenders who serve time in Illinois prisons have a nearly 50 percent chance of returning within three years.

By not implementing enough effective offender-rehabilitation programs, the state jeopardizes public safety.

Illinois should look to successful programs in other states for guidance on recidivism prevention. One way to rehabilitate inmates convicted of nonviolent crimes – those who are serving time for offenses such as burglary, fraud and drug crimes, and make up 50 percent of all inmates in the custody of the Illinois Department of Corrections, or IDOC – can be seen in an impressive program in the Lone Star state.

In Texas, the Bridges to Life restorative-justice program has been in operation since 1998. Under programs like Bridges to Life, if the person found guilty of a nonviolent property crime and the victim of that crime agree, the two parties enter mediation to work out terms that allow the guilty party to repay the victim in lieu of serving jail time. Victims, who often take a back seat in the design of punishment-focused criminal-justice policies, report greater levels of satisfaction under such restorative-justice programs, according to research from Right on Crime.

This one reform – establishing a restorative-justice pilot program in Illinois – could save an estimated $780,500 in one year. Given that IDOC spending is at an all-time high ($1.4 billion in fiscal year 2015) the state must seize every such reasonable opportunity to reduce its prison costs.

Illinois’ prison population has increased by 330 percent since the 1970s. If the state is to meet Gov. Bruce Rauner’s goal of reducing its prison population by 25 percent by 2025, politicians need to get serious about embracing changes that address the state’s ever-growing incarceration problem. Restorative justice and other programs are one way to accomplish this goal, while at the same time ensuring that Illinois’ criminal-justice system is focused more on restitution and rehabilitation than on punishment alone.

Why the White House Is Opening Up About Occupational Licensing

by Hilary Gowins, posted in huffington post

Originally published on Huffington Post.

Abuse of occupational licensing schemes has become such a serious problem thatthe White House has taken notice. On July 28, the White House Council of Economic Advisers issued a nearly 80-page report outlining the many problems with occupational licensing in the states, adding one more piece of evidence in the annals of research proving just how harmful these regimes have become in the U.S.

It’s not just doctors and lawyers who need a license to work. More than 1,000occupations, such as upholsterers and hair braiders, are subject to regulation in at least one state across the country. Twenty-five percent of the workforce needed to obtain a license to work as of 2007; that number stood at just 5 percent in the 1950s.

Why is this growth so dangerous?

• It becomes more difficult – and more expensive – to enter the workforce as occupational licensing becomes harsher and more prevalent. For example, all 50 states require cosmetologists to have a government license to operate. In West Virginia, cosmetologists must go through 467 days of training and pay $185 before they can receive a state license to operate legally, according to a report from the nonpartisan Institute for Justice. These kinds of hoops affect the number of people who pursue careers in cosmetology. According to Kenyon College economistsDavid E. Harrington and Kathy J. Krynski, 100 hours of additional required training reduces the number of Vietnamese manicurists by almost 18 percent. These burdens inevitably harm low-income workers the most.

• Goods and services cost more for customers, even though quality doesn’t always improve. The Federal Trade Commission issued a report in 1990 that found occupational regulations frequently increase prices and impose significant costs on consumers without improving the quality of professional services. This can cause a “Cadillac effect,” where people either pay a higher cost for services or refuse to consume the service at all – which can bring about life-threatening consequences. For example, research from Sidney Carroll and Robert Gastonshows that stricter licensing requirements for electricians reduces the number of electricians in a given area, and that areas with a lower density of electricians are home to higher levels of accidental electrocution. The findings suggest homeowners without access to cheaper options attempt to do electrical work themselves, with tragic results.

These are just a couple of the side effects of poorly written and unnecessary licensing laws that are harming workers and consumers under the guise of protecting public health and safety.

As the White House report points out, licensing schemes are inconsistent in numerous ways, with some states imposing strict regulations on a profession while others don’t require licensing at all.

For example, only three states – Florida, Nevada and Louisiana – impose harsh “practice acts” on interior design, limiting who can pursue the profession. To become licensed in these states, prospective designers have to pass the National Council for Interior Design Qualification, or NCIDQ exam. Before you can sit for the test, however, you must have a degree in interior design, complete an internship for two to five years (or more) and pay $1,265 just to take the exam. These time and cost constraints price people out of the market, but in the rest of the country interior designers don’t face such strict barriers to work.

In addition to the variation in policy state to state, licensing requirements don’t always make sense from position to position. In Wisconsin, becoming a cosmetologist takes 15 times the amount of training that it takes to become an emergency medical technician, or EMT, according to the Institute for Justice. Nationwide, cosmetologists spend an average of 372 days to get a license, whereas the average EMT spends just 33 days. This example also shows that the rules for each profession don’t match up with the level of safety required to perform the job well.

“Fundamentally, licensing affects who takes what job,” the White House report authors wrote. “If licensing places too many restrictions on this allocation of workers, it can reduce the overall efficiency of the labor market. When workers cannot enter jobs that make the best use of their skills, this hampers growth and may even lessen innovation.”

Not everything in the White House report is praiseworthy – the authors suggest that, in some instances, regulations that promote better-educated professionals are good (the example the report cites is accountants). In reality, however, continuing-education requirements are best left to professionals and the businesses that hire them. Degree inflation has already kicked out the ladder of economic opportunity for many Americans who formerly had access to occupations that now require a postsecondary education, regardless of whether the skills learned in college are applicable.

Overall though, it’s commendable that the White House has taken up the cause of reducing barriers to entry for people who want to make a living in the job of their choice. States should take the time to reexamine the licensing laws on their books, profession by profession, and be honest about whether the rules benefit the many (consumers and workers) or the few (special interests who gain from decreased competition).