[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E32]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       INTRODUCTION OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PRISON SAFETY ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON

                      of the district of columbia

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, January 6, 1999

  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, today, I introduce the District of Columbia 
Prison Safety Act, a bill to assure the safety of the District of 
Columbia and other Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) inmates, who may be 
placed in private prison facilities, as well as the communities where 
the prisons are placed. This provision has become necessary as a result 
of Sec. 11201 the 1997 District of Columbia Revitalization Act (P.L. 
105-33). That bill requires that BOP house in privately contracted 
facilities at least 2000 D.C. sentenced felons by December 31, 1999 and 
at least 50 percent of D.C. felons by September 30, 2003. Under the 
Revitalization Act, the Lorton Correctional Complex is to be closed by 
December 31, 2001, and the BOP is to assume responsibility for the 
maintenance of the District's inmate population. My bill would give the 
Director of BOP the necessary discretion to decide whether to house 
D.C. inmates in private prison facilities, and if so, when and how 
many. This mandate would mark the first time that BOP has contracted 
for the housing of significant numbers of inmates in private 
facilities. The extremely short time frames were placed in the statute 
without any reference to the BOP capabilities, but rather, in order to 
meet the 6 year limit for the closure of Lorton. I am introducing this 
bill because recent events have driven home the necessity for informed 
expert judgement before decisions to contract out inmate housing are 
made.
  On December 3, 1998, the Corrections Trustee for the District of 
Columbia released a report on the investigation of problems arising 
from the placement of D.C. inmates in the Northeast Ohio Correctional 
Center (NEOCC). This highly critical report followed numerous violent 
confrontations between guards and inmates, an escape by six inmates, 
and the killing of two other inmates. The Trustee's report strongly and 
unequivocally criticized virtually all aspects of the operations of 
NEOCC. The company that runs this facility, Corrections Corporation of 
America (CCA), is the most experienced in the country.
  The industry is a new one with relatively few vendors. The NEOCC 
experience is fair warning of what could happen if BOP proceeds on the 
basis of an automatic mandate in spite of the evidence that has 
accumulated here and around the country. The mounting troubles have 
been so great that the BOP was forced to revise the original request 
for proposal (RFP). The new process employs two RFPs, thereby 
separating low security male inmates from minimum security males, 
females and young offenders. Furthermore, the RFP for low security 
inmates now requires the BOP to consider prior performance of the 
vendors before awarding the contract.
  However, this action puts BOP behind schedule for privatization 
mandated by the Revitalization Act. The experience of the private 
sector argues for a much more careful approach than Congress was aware 
of at the time the 1997 Revitalization Act was passed. Whereas 50 
percent of D.C. inmates are to be privatized in 5 years time, the 50 
percent far exceeds any comparable number of inmates currently housed 
in any private facility.
  My provision does not bar privatization, but it could bar further 
disasters that have surrounded such privatization contracts. BOP may 
still decide to house the same, or different number in private 
facilities. The only point in this provision is to keep the BOP from 
believing it must go over the side of a cliff even if there would be a 
more sensible path.

                          ____________________