Unconstitutionally Effective: Shutting Down a Program that Works

Breakpoint with Chuck Colson ^ | 6/13/2006 | Mark Earley

[Mr. Silverback]

Note: This commentary was delivered by Prison Fellowship President Mark Earley.

Just six days after a federal judge in Iowa declared an effective, faith-based program for prisoners unconstitutional, a private commission of leading criminal justice experts released a report detailing the sad state of America’s prisons.

The Commission on Safety and Abuse in America’s Prisons observed that “what happens inside jails and prisons does not stay [there]. It comes home with prisoners.” To combat violence inside the prisons, the Commission says, we need effective programming because “[h]ighly structured programs are proven to reduce misconduct in correctional facilities and to lower recidivism rates after release.”

So why in heaven’s name would a federal judge shut down a highly structured program for prisoners that has been proven to lower recidivism? Why? Because that program, the InnerChange Freedom Initiative, or IFI, a program launched by Prison Fellowship ten years ago, is based on the teachings of Jesus Christ.

You’ve heard me talk about IFI on “BreakPoint” in the past couple of weeks, how prisoners volunteer to participate, how they take educational classes and perform community service. I’ve also told you how independent studies have found that IFI drastically reduces recidivism rates.

None of that mattered to the federal judge, who ruled against Iowa, Prison Fellowship, and IFI in a lawsuit brought by none other than Barry Lynn and Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Instead, the judge decided that IFI “coerced” prisoners into enrolling essentially because it offered them a quality program and the tools they need to succeed on the outside. As if drug treatment, job preparation, and general education are some kind of bait to lure unsuspecting prisoners into an evangelical Christian program where they could be converted!

But every single prisoner who testified at the trial admitted that he was not coerced into enrolling in the program. Nor are they coerced into staying in it or converting to Christianity.

To add injury to insult, the judge also ordered Prison Fellowship and IFI to repay Iowa $1.5 million—funds the state paid to IFI pursuant to a valid contract to perform needed services such as education and drug treatment.

Prison Fellowship and IFI will appeal the judge’s ruling, and we certainly hope to be vindicated. And I should mention that the program will stay open during the appeals process.

But make no mistake—the judge’s extreme and punitive ruling sends a clear message to any faith-based organization or church that provides needed social services: “Go away. Go away, even if your program is working and inmates are volunteering and asking for the services.” That’s the worst message any government could possibly send, especially as we look at our prison system and its 2.3 million inhabitants in need of transformation.

The Commission on Safety and Abuse in America’s Prisons concludes by saying, “We all bear responsibility for creating correctional institutions that are safe, humane, and productive. This is the moment to confront confinement in the United States.”

Well, then it is certainly not the moment to exclude programs—faith-based or not—that offer “safe, humane, and productive” solutions.

And right now we desperately need your financial help to fight and win this battle. Can I count on you to help us today? Every gift you give today will go toward this court battle as together we take a stand for religious liberty here in this nation. Please call today with your donation at 1-877-322-5527. Or you can give a gift online. Thank you and God bless you for standing with us and for praying for us at this critical time.

[Mr. Silverback]

This judge should have to take home a few of the prisoners who won't be able to get access to this program now. I'm sure they'll be great housemates.

There are links to further information at the source document.

If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

[Mr. Silverback]

BreakPoint/Chuck Colson Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my Chuck Colson/BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

[Gordongekko909]

I don't think they'd have a problem with Moose Limb programs.

[Mr. Silverback]

Probably not.

[Joe Republc]

prayer bump for Mark Early, Chuck Colson, and for their prison ministry.

I'm having a very hard time understanding how this volunteer program endangers anyone's Constitutional rights.

Fine example of a perversion of what are courts are meant to be.

-- Joe

[Brad from Tennessee]

I worked for more than three years in medium security prisons in Tennessee and Colorado running therapeutic communities--behavior modification programs segregated from the general inmate population and based on Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous's 12 Steps. Inmates spent from eight months to two years inside these micro communities which demanded self-discipline and strict and immediate accountability for infractions. Their motto was: "I am my brother's keeper." Spirituality, whatever form it comes in--religious or a more secular version--has gained an increasing respectability in the national psychotherapeutic community. It works on drunks, junkies, inmates, and patients with a wide variety of psychiatric and emotional maladies. Colson is exactly right. The mere presence of our programs in a penal institution would statistically reduce the level of all forms of inmate violence, as well as reduce the recidivism rate for convicts being discharged from those prisons. I hope this case goes to the Supreme Court because it affects a number of facilities around the country. Liberals are opposed to any form of religion in government programs unless it is dialectic materialism.

[coconutt2000]

The judge's order should be vactated or placed on hold to await the institution of a valid, non-religious program that achieves the same or better results.

[DieHard the Hunter]

Sheer madness. The Judge will be after the Salvation Army next. Let's hope they win on appeal. I'm all for separation of church and state as a general principle. This reducto ad absurdam approach seems petty to the point of being silly.

[LibertarianInExile]

I don't necessarily agree with the decision. But I certainly don't agree with the argument implied by the headline.

If it is unConstitutional and effective, that does not mean we should make it Constitutional for pragmatism's sake. Banning free speech would certainly make it a lot easier for government to build roads, schools, and dumps. It would be very effective. Yet we're not going to amend the Constitution for it.