Prepared Statement of Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa

Ranking Member, Senate Judiciary Committee
Executive Business Meeting
I. Nominations
Robin Rosenbaum, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Eleventh Circuit
Bruce Hendricks, to be United States District Judge for the District of South Carolina
Mark Mastroianni, to be United States District Judge for the District of Massachusetts
Leslie Caldwell, to be Assistant Attorney General
II. Bills
S.1675, Recidivism Reduction and Public Safety Act of 2013 (Whitehouse, Portman)
Thursday, March 6, 2014

Mr. Chairman,

I understand that we are prepared to consider S. 1675 today. With respect to the nominees, we can do a voice vote on Rosenbaum, Mastroianni, and Caldwell, but we may ask for a roll call on Hendricks.

I am pleased to see that S.1675 will be taken up today.  This bill deals with prison reform in a responsible way.  It encourages inmates to successfully complete programs that are proven to reduce the likelihood that the prisoner will commit further crimes once released.  It applies to most prisoners, but does not include violent or sex offenders or terrorists among others.

Like so many states, it requires that eligible prisoners be subject to validated risk assessments, according to their likelihood of committing new crimes.  It contains many safeguards so that eligible prisoners will not pose a threat to public safety.  It will save money by giving nonviolent offenders who can earn the credits the ability to serve some of their sentence out of prison.

I appreciate that Senators Whitehouse and Cornyn were able to work together in a bipartisan fashion to reach this agreement.

This bill has generated much greater support in this committee than did the earlier sentencing bill.

This is the sentencing bill that the Senate should therefore consider on the floor.

This bill differs from the earlier bill in significant ways.  First, it operates based on individual factors after the inmate has proven to be less likely to be a threat.  The other bill cuts mandatory sentences for a wide range of serious offenses, without regard to the circumstances of the criminal, how he behaves in prison, or the likelihood that he will reoffend.

Second, the earlier bill gives judges total discretion in any case to sentence below the current mandatory minimum.  That creates more disparity in sentencing, depending on the draw of which judge happens to sentence.

This bill draws on objective risk assessments, uniformly applied to any inmate with the same circumstances, to inmates who have worked to reduce their chances of harming public safety.  This will mean fewer unwarranted disparities.

I am pleased to support this bill.

-30-