[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
OVERSIGHT OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF
PRISONS AND THE U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM, AND HOMELAND SECURITY
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 2020
__________
Serial No. 116-92
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via: http://judiciary.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
44-392 WASHINGTON : 2021
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
JERROLD NADLER, New York, Chair
MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania, Vice-Chair
ZOE LOFGREN, California DOUG COLLINS, Georgia, Ranking
SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas Member
STEVE COHEN, Tennessee F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr.,
HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr., Wisconsin
Georgia STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas
KAREN BASS, California JIM JORDAN, Ohio
CEDRIC L. RICHMOND, Louisiana KEN BUCK, Colorado
HAKEEM S. JEFFRIES, New York MARTHA ROBY, Alabama
DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island MATT GAETZ, Florida
ERIC SWALWELL, California MIKE JOHNSON, Louisiana
TED LIEU, California ANDY BIGGS, Arizona
JAMIE RASKIN, Maryland TOM McCLINTOCK, California
PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington DEBBIE LESKO, Arizona
VAL BUTLER DEMINGS, Florida GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
J. LUIS CORREA, California BEN CLINE, Virginia
SYLVIA R. GARCIA, Texas KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota
JOE NEGUSE, Colorado W. GREGORY STEUBE, Florida
LUCY McBATH, Georgia
GREG STANTON, Arizona
MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania
DEBBIE MUCARSEL-POWELL, Florida
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
PERRY APELBAUM, Majority Staff Director & Chief of Staff
CHRIS HIXON, Minority Staff Director
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME, TERRORISM, AND HOMELAND SECURITY
KAREN BASS, California, Chair
VAL DEMINGS, Florida, Vice-Chair
SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Ranking Member
LUCY McBATH, Georgia F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr.,
THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida Wisconsin
CEDRIC RICHMOND, Louisiana STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
HAKEEM JEFFRIES, New York LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas
DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island TOM McCLINTOCK, California
TED LIEU, California DEBBIE LESKO, Arizona
MADELINE DEAN, Pennsylvania GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
DEBBIE MUCARSEL-POWELL, Florida BEN CLINE, Virginia
STEVEN COHEN, Tennessee W. GREGORY STEUBE, Florida
JOE GRAUPENSPERGER, Chief Counsel
JASON CERVENAK, Minority Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
December 2, 2020
Page
OPENING STATEMENTS
The Honorable Karen Bass, Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime,
Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of California.. 1
The Honorable Jim Jordan, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on
Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of Ohio. 4
WITNESSES
Michael Carvajal, Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons, United
States Department of Justice
Oral Testimony................................................. 6
Prepared Statement............................................. 8
The Honorable Donald W. Washington, Director, United States
Marshals Service, United States Department of Justice
Oral Testimony................................................. 13
Prepared Statement............................................. 14
STATEMENTS, LETTERS, MATERIALS, ARTICLES SUBMITTED
Letter from Sentencing Project, Research and Advocacy for Reform
submitted by the Honorable Karen Bass, Chair of the
Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from
the State of California for the record......................... 20
Letter from Shane Fausey, National President, Council of Prison
Local 33, submitted the Honorable Karen Bass, Chair of the
Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from
the State of California for the record......................... 22
Letter to the Honable William P. Barr, Attorney General submitted
by the Honorable Jim Jordan, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee
on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of
Ohio for the record............................................ 48
APPENDIX
Statement from Donte Westmoreland submitted by the Honorable
Karen Bass, Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and
Homeland Security from the State of California for the record.. 62
Statement submitted by the Honorable Representative Sheila
Jackson Lee, a Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism,
and Homeland Security from the State of Texas for the record... 64
Article ``How Biden helped create the student debt problem he now
promises to fix,'' The Guardian, submitted by the Honorable
Matt Gaetz, a Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism,
and Homeland Security from the State of Florida for the record. 73
Article ``How Joe Biden helped inflame the student loan crisis:
Geoffrey Peterson,'' Ohio Local News, submitted by the
Honorable Matt Gaetz, a Member of the Subcommittee on Crime,
Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of Florida for
the record..................................................... 78
Article ``Joe Biden's Role in Creating the Student Debt Crisis
Stretches Back to the 1970s,'' The Intercept, submitted by the
Honorable Matt Gaetz, a Member of the Subcommittee on Crime,
Terrorism, and Homeland Security from the State of Florida for
the record..................................................... 85
Article ``What is a Women's Issue? Bankruptcy, Commercial Law,
and Other Gender-Neutral Topics,'' Harvard Women's Law Journal,
Vol. 25, Spring 2002, submitted by the Honorable Matt Gaetz, a
Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland
Security from the State of Florida for the record.............. 87
QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD
Questions for Director Michael Carvajal from the Honorable Karen
Bass, Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and
Homeland Security from the State of California for the record.. 128
Questions for Director Michael Carvajal from the Honorable Val
Demings, Vice-Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism,
and Homeland Security from the State of Florida for the record. 134
Questions for Donald W. Washington from the Honorable Karen Bass,
Chair of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland
Security from the State of California for the record........... 134
OVERSIGHT OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS AND THE U.S. MARSHALS
SERVICE
Wednesday, December 2, 2020
House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security
Committee on the Judiciary
Washington, DC
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:12 a.m., in
Room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Karen Bass
[chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Bass, Jackson Lee, McBath, Deutch,
Jeffries, Cicilline, Dean, Mucarsel-Powell, Jordan, Chabot,
Gohmert, Lesko, and Cline.
Staff Present: Madeline Strasser, Chief Clerk; Joe Graupen-
sperger, Chief Counsel, Subcommittee on Crime; Milagros
Cisneros, Detailee, Subcommittee on Crime; Veronica Eligan,
Professional Staff Member, Subcommittee on Crime; Chris Hixon,
Minority Staff Director; Jason Cervenak, Minority Chief
Counsel, Subcommittee on Crime; Ken David, Minority Counsel;
and Kiley Bidelman, Minority Clerk.
Ms. Bass. Good morning. The Subcommittee on Crime,
Terrorism, and Homeland Security will come to order.
Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare
recesses of the Subcommittee at any time.
I welcome everyone to today's hearing on oversight of the
Federal Bureau of Prisons and the U.S. Marshals Service.
Before we begin, I would like to remind Members that we
have established an email address and distribution list
dedicated to circulating exhibits, motions, or other written
materials that Members might want to offer as part of our
hearing today. If you would like to submit materials, please
send them to the email address that has been previously
distributed to your offices, and we will circulate the
materials to Members and staff as quickly as we can.
I would ask all Members, both those in person and those
appearing remotely, to mute your microphones when you are not
speaking. This will help prevent feedback and other technical
issues. You may unmute yourself anytime you seek recognition.
I will now recognize myself for an opening statement.
We welcome everyone to this morning's hearing, entitled
``Oversight of the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the U.S.
Marshals Service.'' Welcome, also, to those who are joining us
virtually for this extremely important hearing.
The last time this Subcommittee held a hearing bringing
together the Bureau of Prisons and the U.S. Marshals Service
was in the spring of 2017, and, in October of last year, Dr.
Kathleen Hawk Sawyer discussed the implementation of the FIRST
STEP Act. This included Antoinette Bacon from the Department of
Justice regarding the roll-out of the risk and needs assessment
tool known as PATTERN.
Today, with the onset of COVID-19, we must address bigger
challenges. COVID-19 is a worldwide pandemic that is escalating
in the United States, and of course this includes our prisons
and jails, which have become hotbeds for the virus. As of this
past weekend, the BOP reported that over 23,000 prisoners have
tested positive for the virus. That is out of 125,000 inmates
in BOP. By our count, at least 161 people have died from COVID
while in custody.
Many of these infections and these deaths might have been
preventable. Early in the pandemic, anticipating the severity
of what was to come, Chairman Nadler and I wrote several
letters to the Attorney General and also to you, Director
Carvajal, asking you to take aggressive measures to protect the
many thousands of individuals in your custody.
We knew that men and women in tightly confined spaces were
uniquely vulnerable to this virus, and we are instituting
measures for nursing homes across the country. Correctional
facilities were not properly providing for social distancing--
and how can they?--testing, quarantining, or even providing
those in custody with masks.
In late March, Congress passed the CARES Act, giving the
Attorney General and the BOP expansive authority to decarcerate
those most vulnerable to COVID-19, but this authority has been
underutilized.
The BOP website may very well say that it has placed over
18,000 people on home confinement during these 9 months of the
pandemic--we do wonder whether they were tested before they
were released, however--but how many of those people would have
been released to home confinement under normal circumstances?
In other words, were extra people released because of COVID,
which is what the authority was suggesting. How many people has
BOP released under the direct authority of the CARES Act is the
point?
We have asked these questions, others have asked these
questions, but we have not been given any satisfactory answers.
Less than a month after BOP received the authority to
release individuals to home confinement and the first of our
letters were sent to you, I visited Terminal Island in San
Pedro, California. I met with the warden, correction officers,
and those serving their sentences. I received messages from
constituents, family Members, advocates, and the prisoners
themselves that they were all concerned about the risk of
exposure to COVID-19 in the facility.
I do want to commend the warden and the staff for their
openness, but, frankly, I am concerned that they don't have the
support they need. Now, they didn't raise this concern to me,
however, but I am raising the concern. My concern is for the
staff. It was clear that the inmates are tested but the staff,
who come and go every day, were not tested.
At other institutions, we have heard stories of prisoners
alleging that individuals were being grouped together to
develop herd immunity. Another was concerned that he was being
bunked with someone who had clear symptoms of COVID-19. Yet
another was concerned he was not receiving adequate medical
care. BOP officers themselves did not have access to adequate
on-site testing. The incarcerated men from this particular
institute did not have the right PPE and other needed
resources.
We continue to hear from our constituents, distraught
family Members, those on the inside, and their lawyers. They
tell tales about what is going on, tales of rolling lockdowns,
of sick calls that get ignored, of prisoners who haven't seen
or spoken with their loved ones in months. As facility after
facility experiences outbreaks, it gives further credence to
their concerns.
Particularly troubling is a report from the Council on
Criminal Justice, which found that incarceration facilities
represented 19 out of the 20 clusters of confirmed cases of
COVID-19 in the U.S. as of August. The council highlighted that
this is of particular concern because the U.S., of course, has
the largest incarcerated population in the world, with
approximately 2 million people behind bars. More than 1.3
million individuals are in State or Federal prisons, and the
remainder are in county jails.
So, today, people in custody are five times more likely to
contract COVID-19 than the general population. Even with
insufficient testing, there are reports that 252,000 people
have contracted COVID-19 while in Federal, State, and local
custody. Over 1,400 of them have died.
You may have heard about the preventable death of Andrea
Circle Bear. Ms. Circle Bear, a pregnant mother of five,
contracted COVID while in BOP's care. She gave birth
unconscious and on a ventilator. Ms. Circle Bear didn't survive
and never met her child.
This tragedy occurred in April. Less than 4 months later,
nearly half of the 1,300 prisoners at the same facility in
Texas would test positive for COVID-19. This facility would
become the largest outbreak of COVID-19 in a Federal facility
in the country.
Director Carvajal, these prisoners and their families
rightfully feel abandoned, and they are scared. You are here
today hopefully to provide us with answers on how you plan to
address these and many other concerns and also what resources
you are lacking. What assistance can we provide to you?
As for the U.S. Marshals Service, Director Washington, we
continue to hear similar testimonials. The vast majority of the
individuals under Marshals' care and custody are pretrial
detainees, who are innocent until proven guilty. I understand
that you don't have direct control over the facilities with
which you have contracts, but I would like to understand what
oversight you are conducting over these facilities and,
frankly, for many, question whether you should consider
renewing the contracts, depending on how things are being
handled.
We understand from news reports that well over 6,500
detainees in the U.S. Marshal custody have tested positive for
the coronavirus and that the latest death toll among Federal
pretrial detainees is 20. I underscore that we have heard this
from news reports for a reason, because, unlike the BOP, it is
our understanding that the Marshals Service does not publicly
report any of this information.
When Chairman Nadler and I wrote to you in May, we
requested that you immediately begin to provide this
information on the U.S. Marshals' website. We eventually
received a response in October but with no commitment to report
that information online. To this day, the information about
infection rates and deaths in U.S. Marshals' custody is a
virtual mystery to the public.
In addition, we have heard multiple reports that, even
though the official BOP policy was to halt prisoner transfers
among facilities, the Marshals Service has nevertheless
continued to transfer prisoners from facility to facility. In a
nationwide OSHA complaint, the union representing correction
officers in the Bureau of Prisons has alleged that the U.S.
Marshals do not properly test prisoners before they transport
them, spreading the virus from facilities with high rates of
infection to facilities with no infections.
Yesterday, I received information from a report produced by
the BOP. On October 29, BOP reported 1,800 inmates and 888
staff tested positive for COVID-19. By November 30, there were
4,000 inmates and 1,400 staff who tested positive. That is a
162-percent increase in inmates and a 60-percent increase in
staff in just 30 days. This is a pretty stark increase and
seems to be correlated to the resumption of transfers and
social visiting.
I have spoken with children who were terrified that their
parent will die of COVID while in custody, husbands and wives
who were seeking our assistance to gain the release of their
sick spouses, mothers and fathers who were pleading on behalf
of their children. As COVID-19 spikes for the general
population, we know this translates to more cases in
correctional facilities.
Today, I am thinking of the death of Andrea Circle Bear and
that of Marie Neba. Ms. Neba was sick with stage IV cancer and
pleading to be released at home. Instead, she would die from
COVID-19 in custody. I really want to understand, especially
with inmates who are very elderly or have terminal illnesses or
multiple risk factors, why they can't be released.
So, it is now my pleasure to recognize the Ranking Member
of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Ohio.
Mr. Jordan. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Dr. Washington and Director Carvajal, welcome, and thank
you both for your service to our country.
The Federal Bureau of Prisons is tasked with protecting
society by confining offenders in the controlled environments
of prisons and community-based facilities. BOP's duty is not
merely to provide housing, food, and security for Federal
inmates but also to help them become eventually law-abiding
citizens. Every American has an interest in BOP's mission
because the vast majority of Federal inmates, well above 90
percent, will someday, in fact, be released.
BOP's job is not an easy task and has only become more
complicated due to the COVID-19 virus. In response to COVID-19,
BOP undertook a number of steps to safeguard the health and
safety of staff and the public. They prioritized inmates for
home confinement who did not pose a significant risk to the
public, restricted the number of visitors, and limited the
movement of inmates among their detention facilities. These are
reasonable measures.
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to go
much further. They have tried to use the COVID-19 pandemic as a
reason to let more criminals back on our streets. They even
wrote to the Attorney General, Attorney General Barr, urging
him to, quote, use every tool at his disposal to release as
many prisoners as possible, regardless of whether they had
completed their process and what the plan for each inmate to
actually have reached what the experts would call
rehabilitation.
They even passed legislation in the House that would pay
States to release inmates in State prisons and local jails.
Think about that. Democrats want to use your tax dollars to
incentivize States to put more criminals back on the streets.
The consequence of these actions has deadly real-world
results, as we have unfortunately seen. A Colorado inmate
released pursuant to an executive order signed by the Governor
related to COVID-19 was arrested in a fatal Denver shooting
less than a month after his release. In Florida, a 26-year-old
man charged with second-degree murder in connection with a
fatal shooting in March, he was released from custody by the
sheriff the previous month to contain the spread of COVID-19.
Just a few miles from here, in Alexandria, Virginia, a man who
was in custody for breaking into a woman's apartment and
attacking her in 2019, due to COVID-19 concerns, this man was
released by a local judge over the objection of the prosecutors
in April. Three months later, he shot and killed the very woman
he attacked the year before.
In the spite of these and numerous other crimes that have
been committed by inmates released early, Democrats are calling
for more inmates to be released, regardless of their crime or
prison sentence.
To be clear, Democrats on the Committee want to open the
jails. Don't forget, they also want to defund the police. They
want to turn a public health crisis into a public safety
crisis. These are not responsible policies, and I hope our
witnesses today will explain why they are not.
Like the Bureau of Prisons, the United States Marshals
Service has faced challenges stemming from the COVID-19
pandemic. As our Nation's oldest Federal law enforcement
agency, the Marshals Service's duties are vast: Protecting the
Federal judiciary, apprehending Federal fugitives, managing and
selling seized criminal assets, housing and transporting
Federal prisoners, and, of course, operating the Witness
Security Program.
This past summer, we saw the husband and son of a Federal
judge in New Jersey become the victims of murder after they
were ambushed feet from the front door of their home. I look
forward to exploring with our witnesses today ways we can help
to keep our judges safe. As we discuss the BOP and the Marshals
Service, we cannot forget the men and women around the country
who put their lives on the line to keep us safe.
I also want to tell Director Washington and Director
Carvajal to please pass on our appreciation to your officers
and employees. They have a tough job. Especially in the recent
months, with all the violence around the country, they should
know that they have our support.
Finally, President Trump has been a leader in criminal
justice reform through the Second Chance Act and his wise use
of the Presidential pardon power. President Trump also been a
champion for law enforcement around the country. This hearing
would not be complete without discussing and appreciating the
job the President has done leading in these important areas.
Thank you, Madam Chair, and I yield back the balance of my
time.
Ms. Bass. Thank you.
It is now my pleasure to introduce today's panel.
Michael Carvajal is Director of the Federal Bureau of
Prisons. He began his career with the Bureau of Prisons in 1992
as a correctional officer in Texas. The Attorney General
appointed him as the Bureau's 11th Director on February 25,
2020.
As Director, he oversees the operation of 122 Bureau of
Prisons facilities, 6 regional officers, 2 staff training
centers, 12 contract facilities, 22 residential re-entry
management offices, with oversight and management of
approximately 37,000 staff and 156,000 prisoners.
The Honorable Donald Washington was confirmed by the Senate
and sworn in as the 11th Director of the U.S. Marshals Service
on March 29, 2019. He directs a force of more than 5,000
operational and administrative employees spanning 94 districts,
218 sub-offices, and 4 foreign field offices. He is a graduate
the U.S. Military Academy at West Point and South Texas College
of Law in Houston, Texas.
We welcome our witnesses and thank them for participating
in today's hearing.
Please note that your written statement will be entered
into the record in its entirety. Accordingly, I ask that you
summarize your testimony in 5 minutes. To help you stay within
that time, there is a timing light on your table. When the
light switches from green to yellow, you will have 1 minute to
conclude your testimony. When the light turns red, it signals
that your 5 minutes have expired.
Before proceeding with testimony, I hereby remind each
witness that all your written and oral statements made to the
Subcommittee in connection with this hearing are subject to
penalties of perjury pursuant to 18 U.S.C., which may result in
the imposition of a fine or imprisonment up to 5 years or both.
Mr. Carvajal, please begin.
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL CARVAJAL
Mr. Carvajal. Good morning, Chair Bass, Ranking Member
Jordan, and Members of the subcommittee. It is my privilege to
speak today on behalf of the Bureau of Prisons' over 37,000
corrections professionals who work day-in and day-out to
support our critical law enforcement mission. I am committed to
ensuring these dedicated men and women are guided by the values
of respect, integrity, courage, and correctional excellence.
The Bureau receives a great deal of scrutiny with respect
to our mission, and much of this is based on misinformation or
misunderstanding of what we do to keep America safe. I
appreciate this opportunity to discuss what the Bureau does to
maintain safety and security while providing inmates the
programming they need to return to our communities and their
families.
I have spent the majority of my professional life in career
service to this agency. After serving in the United States
Army, I joined the Bureau as a correctional officer, moving up
through the ranks as a captain, warden, regional director,
assistant director, and now director. I care deeply about our
work and the personal sacrifices that the Bureau's law
enforcement officers make.
The Bureau currently confines 154,000 inmates in our 122
Federal prisons nationwide as well as 11 private prisons and
nearly 200 community-based facilities. Almost 80 percent of
those inmates are serving terms for drugs, weapons, or sex
offenses, with 41 percent of those being medium- and high-
security offenders. The safe management of those offenders is
challenging, but we continue to maintain low levels of serious
assaults while ensuring that inmates engage in programs that
address their re-entry needs.
The FIRST STEP Act provided further incentives for inmates
to participate in re-entry opportunities, and we successfully
met the very aggressive implementation deadlines that it
included.
Essentially, the FIRST STEP Act required assessment of
recidivism risk and programming needs for all inmates in our
custody. After the Department of Justice developed and released
their risk assessment tool, we immediately began scoring all
inmates with the new tool. Effective January 22, all inmates in
our custody were scored, to include new commitments, who were
scored within 30 days of their arrival.
As the COVID-19 pandemic has harshly impacted our country,
it has also had a tremendous impact on the lives of our staff
and the inmates. Under normal circumstances, life in prison is
challenging, and even more so coupled with COVID-19.
Our pandemic response has often been mischaracterized in
public forums, which is unfortunate, since we have worked
closely with the Centers for Disease Control to develop the
best COVID-19 plan for correctional environments. We have
welcomed external stakeholders into our facilities for audits
and reviews as well as conducted unannounced inspections of the
vast majority of our institutions to ensure COVID-19 procedural
compliance. These internal reviews are ongoing.
Early on, we developed quarantine and isolation procedures
for inmates and mandated social distancing and use of face
coverings. Our procedures have proven effective, as this is
evidenced by the steep decline in our inmate hospitalizations,
inmates on ventilators, and deaths. As test supplies became
available, we put in place test-in/test-out procedures for
internal inmate movement to minimize the spread of the virus.
Since March, we have transferred more than 18,000 inmates
at risk for COVID-19 to home confinement to help keep them
safe. Many have asserted that the Bureau is spreading COVID-19
within our communities. However, contact tracing often revealed
that the virus entered our prisons from the community.
Although delayed, our institutions generally mirror the
community transmission rates. Therefore, it is vital that we
all work together, the Bureau and the public, to combat this
threat.
I am honored to speak on behalf of the Bureau staff
nationwide who are working the front lines tirelessly to
mitigate the spread of this virus as well as carrying on our
very important mission. This is challenging, but it is vital to
the safety and security of the public, our staff, and the
inmates entrusted to our care.
Chair Bass, Ranking Member Jordan, and Members of the
subcommittee, this concludes my statement.
[The statement of Mr. Carvajal follows:]
STATEMENT OF OF MICHAEL CARVAJAL
Good morning, Chairwoman Bass and Members of the
Subcommittee. You have asked me to come before you today to
discuss the Bureau of Prisons' (Bureau's) mission and
operations. It is a privilege to speak today on behalf of the
Bureau's over 37,000 staff--corrections professionals who
support the agency's critical law enforcement mission. I am
committed to ensuring that Bureau staff are guided by the
values of respect, integrity, courage, and correctional
excellence, and that we carry out our mission with the highest
competencies as we serve our stakeholders: Inmates, the public,
and not to be forgotten, the crime victims whose voices are
often unheard.
I was honored to be selected to lead the Bureau and to work
alongside the finest corrections professionals in the world. I
have spent 28 years in the Bureau, starting as a Correctional
Officer, moving up through the ranks of Correctional Services
to become a Warden, Regional Director, Assistant Director, and
now Director. I was appointed to serve as the Bureau's eleventh
Director on February 25, 2020, approximately four weeks before
the Bureau's first inmate COVID-19 positive case.
It is impossible to fully discuss the Bureau's current
mission and operations without recognizing the impact of the
COVID-19 pandemic and the diligent work of the Bureau's
professionals in response. In these past months, I have seen
the Bureau's professionals work tirelessly and with dedication
toward their mission to protect the health and safety of
inmates, fellow staff, and the public. I am keenly aware of the
personal sacrifices these law enforcement officers make in
fulfilling our important public safety mission. The great work
they do every day goes largely unseen by the general public.
Yet this inherently dangerous work helps keep our communities
safe.
Our Mission--A History of Public Safety and Re-entry
The Bureau confines over 154,000 inmates in 122 federal
prisons, 11 private prisons, and nearly 200 community-based
facilities nationwide. Incarceration is a valuable crime-
reduction strategy and an important law enforcement tool that
holds individuals responsible for their actions and deters
others from committing similar crimes. But equally important,
it provides a means for individuals to address their
criminogenic risks (such as gang involvement and substance
use). As the Subcommittee recognizes, it is imperative that we
effectively reintegrate individuals back into the community
following release from prison to reduce the likelihood of
future criminal behavior and associated victimization. To that
end, the mission of the Bureau is to confine offenders in
prisons and community-based facilities that are safe, humane,
cost- efficient, and secure, and to assist inmates in becoming
productive, law-abiding citizens when they return to our
communities.
The Bureau has had great success with respect to both parts
of our mission: We have low rates of inmate on staff and inmate
on inmate assaults, disturbances, and escapes, and our
recidivism rate is lower than that found in most studies of
State prisons using comparable definitions and
methodologies.\1\ These results are a testament to the hard
work of our dedicated professional staff who support public
safety and promote re-entry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ An estimated 68% of prisoners released from 30 State prisons
were arrested within 3 years. Source: BJS, Office of Justice Programs
``2018 Update on Prisoner Recidivism: A 9-Year Follow-up Period (2005-
2014)'' May 2019. The BOP's 2018 Second Chance Act study (of inmates
released FY 2011-13) shows that approximately 45% were re-arrested or
had their supervision revoked over a three-year period; see also U.S.
Sentencing Commission, Recidivism Among Federal Offenders: A
Comprehensive Overview, 16 (Mar. 2016), https://www.ussc.gov/sites/
default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-publications/2016/
recidivism_overview.pdf (finding that 33.7% of federal offenders
recidivated within three years of release (Table 2)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our Population
During the first five decades of the Bureau's existence,
the number and type of inmates we housed remained fairly
stable. Beginning in the 1980s, however, federal law
enforcement efforts and legislative changes led to a
significant increase in the federal prison population; the
Bureau's inmate population doubled in the 1980s and doubled
again in the 1990s. Between 1980 and 2013, the population grew
by approximately 800%, topping out at nearly 220,000. This
increase was a significant challenge, and our staff responded
accordingly and continued to serve the public by maintaining
safety, security, and providing re-entry programming to our
inmates.
Over the past few years, the inmate population has
decreased significantly, such that today our crowding and
staffing levels are more manageable. Particularly in the wake
of COVID-19, this recent decrease has given us important
latitude to respond to the pandemic.
Our Programs--Re-entry Begins on Day One
Re-entry programing is a critical component of public
safety; individuals are much less likely to return to a life of
crime and victimization if they leave prison with an education,
job training, treatment for mental illness and/or substance use
when needed, and a general understanding of what it means to be
a productive, law-abiding citizen. Inmates also need an
opportunity to develop employable skills. It is imperative we
work in conjunction with our criminal justice partners and
community stakeholders to do everything possible to ensure the
nearly 44,000 inmates who are released back into our
communities each year do not reoffend.
Inmate programs in federal prisons include work,
occupational and vocational training, education (including
literacy), substance abuse disorder treatment, psychological
services and counseling, observance of faith and religion, and
other programs that impart essential life skills. These
programs are a critical part of the Bureau's mission to keep
our communities safe by improving an inmate's mental health
and/or providing employable skills and addressing critical
criminogenic needs. The Residential Drug Abuse Program (RDAP),
vocational and occupational training, education, and Federal
Prison Industries (FPI) have been shown to reduce recidivism.
In previous research studies, RDAP participants were 16 percent
less likely to recidivate and 15 percent less likely to have a
relapse in their substance use disorder within three years
after release. Inmates who participate in vocational or
occupational training were 33 percent less likely to
recidivate, and inmates who participate in education programs
were 16 percent less likely to recidivate
Our Goal--Effective Transition to the Community
The Bureau relies on Residential Re-entry Centers (RRCs;
also known as halfway houses), and home confinement to assist
inmates reintegrate into their communities prior to completing
their prison terms. Typically, approximately 75% of inmates
annually transfer to an RRC or home confinement prior to their
release. RRCs provide inmates with a structured, supervised
environment, and assistance in finding employment and housing;
completing necessary programming (e.g., community-based
treatment services); participating in counseling; and
strengthening ties to family and friends.
COVID-19 Pandemic
The COVID-19 pandemic that is impacting our entire country,
and indeed the world, has had a significant impact on our
operations. The Bureau's response to and management of COVID
has received a great deal of Congressional, media, and
stakeholder interest and scrutiny. I appreciate the opportunity
to discuss in person all that the Bureau has done, and
continues to do, to reduce risks and mitigate the impacts of
the pandemic, and to keep our staff, inmates, and communities
safe.
The Bureau has a sound pandemic plan in place and a well-
established history of managing and responding to various types
of communicable disease outbreaks. We used this pandemic plan
as a springboard for our COVID response planning beginning in
January, when our medical leadership began consulting with
relevant experts, including the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), the U.S. Public Health Service, the Office of
Personnel Management (OPM), and the Office of the Vice
President. We leveraged and implemented guidance from these
experts and used it to develop protocols for screening inmates
and staff with potential COVID exposure risk factors. We have
continued this strong collaboration throughout the pandemic and
have invited the CDC and public health officials into our
facilities to evaluate our work. They have praised our planning
and implementation in the wake of a vexing virus. To be
transparent about our plans, operations, and statistics, the
Bureau has published one of the most detailed and thorough
COVID pandemic resource areas in the Federal Government on our
public website at www.bop.gov/coronavirus. As a further
commitment to transparency, the Bureau updates the statistics
on this site daily.
Institution Operations
On March 13, 2020, in response to an increasing number of
people with COVID-19 positive infections in various
communities, the Bureau implemented a decisive and
comprehensive action plan to protect the health of the inmates
in our custody, the staff, and the public, to the greatest
extent possible, consistent with sound medical and corrections
principles. This plan included significantly limiting movement
in and out of our federal prisons. Almost all internal inmate--
or Bureau-controlled--movement was suspended. There was some
very limited inmate movement that was required, including
movements for forensic studies, writs, Interstate Agreements on
Detainers, necessary medical and mental health treatment, and
transfer to RRCs or home confinement. Some new admissions to
the Bureau from the United States Marshals Service (USMS)
continued, as legally required. While we received criticism for
that limited but continued movement, it is critical to note
that the criminal justice system has not stopped processing
criminal cases during the pandemic. Individuals in the
community continue to commit crimes, arrests continue to be
made, federal courts continue to adjudicate and sentence
offenders, and thus detainees and sentenced inmates continue to
enter our system. We are obligated to take these individuals
from the courts and cannot control who the courts place into
our system. Working closely with the Department of Justice
(Department) and the USMS, we attempted to slow the entrance of
some of these new admissions until additional testing
capability was acquired.
With the March 13, 2020 guidance, we implemented social
distancing procedures, to the greatest extent appropriate
within the prison environment. As is widely noted, prisons are
not designed for social distancing. Nonetheless, we modified
our operations to the extent we could minimize co-mingling and
group gatherings. We suspended social visiting, tours, and the
admission of volunteers to decrease the flow of individuals
from the community into the prison, particularly at the height
of the pandemic. Understanding the importance of visitation to
the inmate population, we significantly increased telephone
minutes for the inmates from 300 to 500 minutes on March 13,
2020, and later, on April 8, 2020, in accordance with the CARES
Act, we made telephone calls free for the inmate population. We
also made video-visiting, also available at our female
facilities, free of charge. The impact of this program has been
great--telephone minutes use increased by nearly 50% the next
day. This program is expected to continue over the course of
the Presidentially-declared emergency.
On March 26, 2020, over eight months ago and early in the
pandemic, we implemented enhanced daily monitoring, to include
the cessation of movement for any inmate who screened positive
for COVID-19, and established quarantine and medical isolation
procedures for inmates. On March 31, 2020, enhanced modified
operations were introduced to further limit movement within the
institution such as eating meals in their rooms or cells, or in
small groups within housing units, and limiting programmatic
offerings to individualized or small group activities.
Despite movement limitations, all critical services have
continued, and Chaplains and Psychologists visit inmates in
their housing areas when inmates cannot leave that space. In
early April, to maintain the safety of inmates leaving our
facilities and the public, we instituted requirements for all
inmates releasing from the Bureau or transferring to a
Residential Re-entry Center (RRC) or Home Confinement to be
placed on 14-day quarantine prior to their anticipated release
or transfer.
The Bureau recognized early on that COVID testing for the
inmate population was critical, but as was the case for the
country as a whole, testing supplies were initially very
limited. Working closely with the Department, the Bureau was
able to obtain testing resources for all our prisons and
established a national contract with outside laboratories for
COVID testing. With that availability, we have instituted a
test-in/test-out and 14-day quarantine protocol for any
necessary inmate movement.
Further, regardless of our diligent COVID-19 planning and
protocol, emergencies have and will continue to arise that
require us to adapt changes to our procedures. For example, in
the midst of the diligent work Bureau staff were undertaking
nationwide to counter the pandemic, on April 13, 2020, Federal
Correctional Institution (FCI) Estill, South Carolina, was
struck by a tornado causing extensive damage to both the
medium- and minimum-security institutions. Over the ensuing
four days, we were able to move 842 inmates safely and
securely, relocating them to a prison in Pennsylvania that had
available capacity. Subsequently, three facilities sustained
significant damage from Hurricane Laura. The Bureau has plans
in place to deal with situations such as these, and despite the
complexities that the COVID-19 pandemic adds to the
implementation of those plans, these experiences reflect just
how well-trained and prepared our staff and leadership are to
handle whatever the next challenge may be.
Home Confinement
As the pandemic grew more widespread, the Bureau began
aggressively screening the inmate population for inmates who
were appropriate for transfer to an RRC or Home Confinement for
service of the remainder of their sentences. Additionally, the
Bureau authorized the use of inmate furloughs to move qualified
offenders out of the facilities, to reduce populations, and to
increase ability for inmates to socially distance.
On March 26, 2020 and April 3, 2020, Attorney General Barr
issued memoranda to the Bureau directing us to maximize the use
of Home Confinement for vulnerable inmates, particularly at
institutions that were markedly affected by COVID-19. The CARES
Act, signed into law on March 27, 2020, further expanded our
ability to place inmates on Home Confinement by lifting the
statutory limitations contained in title 18 USC 3624(c)(2)
during the course of the pandemic. I am pleased to report that
since March 26, 2020, BOP has transferred 18,112 inmates to
Home Confinement, and there are an additional 175 who are
scheduled to transfer to Home Confinement in the coming weeks.
These assessments remain ongoing and will continue for the
duration of the pandemic.
It should go without saying that, while we are always
dedicated to the protection of our inmates' health and safety,
public safety must also be considered when evaluating community
placements, and, as the Attorney General's guidance emphasized,
it is not appropriate for inmates who present a risk to the
public, because of their criminal acts or other factors, to be
transferred to home confinement. Nor can we transfer inmates,
who do not have safe housing for themselves or housing with
appropriate safeguards, to home confinement. As home
confinement is still, after all, a form of incarceration for
persons convicted of crimes who are still serving a federal
sentence, these public safety factors must be considered, and
these decisions are made using sound correctional judgement and
our many years of experience overseeing such transfers.
First Step Act
Despite the challenges COVID brings, the Bureau continues
to provide robust and effective programming, and it is
diligently implementing the First Step Act (FSA).
Assessment of Inmates' Risk to Recidivate
As of January 15, 2020, which is the FSA statutory
deadline, all sentenced inmates had received individual risk
scores and identified need areas. Also in January, the approved
catalog of more than 70 Evidence-based Recidivism Reducing
Programs (EBRR) and Productive Activities (PA) was published on
our public website. These EBRRs and PAs are recommended to
inmates, to address their specific needs. When an inmate
successfully completes a recommended program in an identified
need area, he or she may be able to earn FSA time credit or
other incentives.
FSA Programming
The Bureau has a variety of programs, the most robust of
which are Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) interventions for
mental health and substance use disorders, anger management,
and criminal thinking elimination. Literacy and occupational
training programs are also widely available, and re-entry-
focused programs, such as parenting, are offered at all sites.
Because the agency has such a large menu of programs covering
all need areas, the Bureau has put forth considerable effort to
ensure adequate capacity in our existing programs and has been
able to give access to more inmates by hiring staff into the
positions authorized by Congress under FSA. We have also worked
toward program fidelity, standardizing service delivery so that
every program comports with the evidence that supports its use.
We identified gaps in services for women and were able to
enhance our offerings. We also recently contracted for women's
college programming. Although we have many strong programs,
external vendors or program developers may submit established
programs for initial review by an independent research
organization engaged by the Bureau; this review analyzes and
determines if the program satisfies the requirements of the
FSA, and that determination is later reviewed by the Bureau. We
also develop programs internally. As one of the largest
employers of doctoral level psychologists--as well as an
employer of chaplains, teachers, and medical professionals--the
agency is well- suited to identify gaps in programming and
create services grounded in evidence that fit federal
population parameters.
Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT)
The Bureau's MAT program was established in 2018 and
expanded as a result of the FSA. By May 2019, the Bureau was
screening all inmates nearing transfer to community placement
for MAT, in an effort to treat addiction and reduce the risk of
overdose deaths among releasing offenders. Treatment options
for newly-committed inmates, who entered Bureau custody with
existing MAT treatment plans, were expanded to include all
three Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved medications
for MAT, using a combination of community providers and
appropriately trained Bureau providers. The Substance Abuse and
Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), within the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), provides the
regulation and oversight of substance use disorder treatment.
The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and SAMHSA work
together to provide the licensing and accreditation of Opioid
Treatment Programs. The Bureau currently has one opioid
treatment program at MCC New York and is working with the DEA
and SAMSHA to stand up three more at Federal Medical Center
(FMC) Butner, North Carolina; FMC Springfield, Illinois; and
FMC Carswell, Texas. These will enable the Bureau to
internalize even more MAT services and expand our ability to
treat all inmates in our custody who demonstrate a clinical
need for MAT. The Bureau continues to work towards establishing
an internal infrastructure for all MAT-related services and
medications, with primary focus on consulting with external
subject matter experts, training staff in all divisions,
implementing clinical guidance for treatment standardization,
and monitoring/tracking/reporting MAT utilization.
FSA Second Chance Act Provisions
The FSA also contains enhancements to the Second Chance
Reauthorization Act of 2018, which, among other changes,
reauthorized and modified a pilot program that allows the
Bureau to place certain elderly and terminally ill inmates on
home confinement, to serve the remainder of their sentences.
The program was fully implemented in April 2019. To-date,
approximately 534 inmates have been placed into home
confinement pursuant to this five-year pilot program.
FSA Criminal Justice Provisions
The FSA includes a series of other criminal justice-related
provisions. These provisions include a statutory prohibition on
the use of restraints on pregnant inmates; a change to the way
good conduct time credit is calculated (directing that inmates
earn 54 days of good time credit for each year of imposed
sentence, rather than for each year of time served); a
requirement for the Bureau to provide a way for employees to
safely store firearms on Bureau grounds; a requirement for the
Bureau to try to place inmates within 500 driving miles of
their primary residences; a prohibition against the use of
solitary confinement for juvenile delinquents in federal
custody; and an expanded requirement that the Bureau aid
inmates with obtaining identification before they are released.
In each of these areas, the Bureau either was already in
compliance with the mandate when the FSA was enacted or has
since updated its policy or procedures to come into compliance
with the new provisions.
Conclusion
I am honored to speak on behalf of the Bureau, its staff in
our 122 institutions, and our administrative offices
nationwide. Our mission is extremely challenging, but critical
to the safety and security of the public, our staff, and the
inmates we house. I thank the staff who, like first responders
everywhere, are working long hours to prevent or mitigate the
spread of COVID-19 in our facilities. The Bureau can be proud
of this hard work, but we understand there is still more to do.
Chairwoman Bass and Members of the Subcommittee, this
concludes my formal statement.
Ms. Bass. Thank you.
Mr. Washington?
TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE DONALD W. WASHINGTON
Mr. Washington. Good morning, Chair Bass, Ranking Member
Jordan, distinguished Members of the committee. Thank you for
the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the
United States Marshals Service.
As my statement for the record reflects, the Marshals
Service has an array of critical law enforcement missions, all
of which we have continued to accomplish despite the challenges
presented this year.
My complete statement is available to you all, so I just
want to briefly highlight two current areas of operation that
reflect our diversity and importance as a law enforcement
entity.
First, not many people realize that, in addition to our
core missions of apprehending fugitives, transporting, and
housing prisoners, protecting the judicial process, and running
the Federal Witness Security program, we are also responsible
for the Strategic National Stockpile security operations
program.
Enhanced after 9/11, the national stockpile fills an
important need to have pharmaceuticals and other medical
materials available for quick dissemination to the American
people in times of national need, such as a manmade or natural
disaster or a pandemic. The Marshals provide a variety of
security controls for the stockpile, including storage and
transportation of medical materials.
I am very pleased to report that our deputies are already
working hand-in-hand with Operation Warp Speed to provide
security for COVID-19 vaccines from the facilities where they
are manufactured to distribution sites. We have teams of highly
trained Marshals Service deputies who are executing this
mission, and this demonstrates yet another way this agency
provides for the safety and security of our Nation's citizens.
The second area I want to highlight relates to critically
missing children. While we are recognized as the preeminent
agency for locating and apprehending fugitives, we have found
an equally important application for our people-finding skills.
In 2015, Members of this Subcommittee gave the Marshals
Service an added statutory authority as part of the Justice for
Victims of Trafficking Act. This authority enhanced our ability
to use our resources to assist Federal, State, and local law
enforcement entities with the recovery of missing, endangered,
and abducted children.
Previously, we could only help find critically missing
children when there was a connection to a fugitive or a sex
offender investigation. Under this new authority, we
established a Missing Child Unit in 2016, and, ever since, we
have been partnering with our Federal, State, and local
authorities to recover missing children, many of whom are older
runaways who are at a very high risk of child sex trafficking,
child exploitation, sexual abuse, and physical abuse.
Since August alone, this agency's Missing Child Unit has
conducted six operations in districts around the country aimed
at locating and recovering local missing children. The results
speak for themselves. In these 6 operations, we recovered or
located 181 children, 22 of which were known victims of sex
trafficking.
Now, beneath those numbers are real people. A few weeks
ago, the foster parents of a child we recovered in New Orleans
sent me this email. It reads: ``Dear Director Washington, thank
you for saving our foster son. When 13-year-old Malik was
abducted in New Orleans in mid-October, we were put in touch
with your Missing Children Unit team here. Their coordinated
efforts, calm energy, vigilant search tactics, and quick
communication provided both relief and results. They stayed in
touch with us at every turn, giving us hope when we had little.
We cannot thank you enough for the great work your team down
here does. If we can impress upon you anything, it is that this
program should continue to be funded and provided resources.
Without these efforts, we fear where our son may be today.
Thank you again for the commitment you have instilled in your
NOLA team. We are forever grateful. Best, Chelsea and Eric
Nelson.''
Committee Members, these two mission areas I have
highlighted demonstrates this agency's diverse missions and
commitment to public safety. I thank you for the opportunity to
be here today, and I look forward to answering your questions
or any questions that you might have.
Thank you.
[The statement of Mr. Washington follows:]
STATEMENT OF HONORABLE DONALD W. WASHINGTON
Good morning Chairwoman Bass, Ranking Member Sensenbrenner,
and other distinguished Members of the Subcommittee. I am
honored to appear before you today to discuss the missions of
the United States Marshals Service (USMS).
I would like to start by thanking you for your strong
support of the USMS and providing us the resources that allow
us to reduce violent crime and protect, defend, and enforce the
American justice system.
Overview
In 2019, the USMS celebrated its 230th anniversary. For
over two centuries, the USMS has held a unique role in the
American judicial system. Since 1789, when George Washington
appointed the first 13 Marshals, we serve as the enforcement
arm of the federal courts and are involved in virtually every
federal law enforcement initiative. From the Nation's
inception, through our 19th century westward expansion, our
role in the iconic 20th century civil rights struggles, and
into the present, USMS has proudly contributed to the Rule of
law.
Even for an organization as storied as ours, 2020 has been
a year with unique challenges. Like every American institution,
the USMS has adjusted to the realities imposed by the COVID-19
pandemic and accompanying economic disruption, while still
conducting our critical law enforcement missions. As a federal
law enforcement organization, we have a keen interest in the
policing issues raised by the death of George Floyd and other
highly publicized cases this summer. The USMS has been affected
by the violent unrest in some American cities that put the
federal judiciary directly at risk. Finally, on July 19, a
deranged gunman attacked the family of federal judge Esther
Salas at her home, killing her 20-year-old son and severely
injuring her husband. This tragic incident brings to the
forefront our sacred duty to protect the federal judiciary from
threats to the Rule of law and raises important issues about
the availability of technology that criminals and disturbed
individuals use to target protected individuals like judges.
Despite these challenges, the USMS continues to accomplish
our varied and critical missions. I am proud of the way our
workforce of approximately 5,500 Marshals, Deputy Marshals, and
administrative employees has risen to meet this year's
adversity. Courthouse operations have been reconfigured because
of COVID-19, often under short deadlines.
Enforcement operations are precisely focused on arresting
the most violent criminals who need to be off the streets in
order to make our communities safer, pandemic or not. We have
reconfigured our prisoner operations to ensure the safety of
the prisoners, our staff, and the court family. Deputies have
been shifted from one part of the country to another to help
defend federal property. Many of our employees are teleworking
from home, juggling work, family, and their own concerns about
safety. Others are out on the streets of our nation, risking
themselves and their health in order to find and apprehend
violent fugitives, wherever they may be. I am incredibly proud
of our workforce and hope you are as well.
A recent example of our dedication is Operation Not
Forgotten, where our Missing Child Unit worked with numerous
other agencies to locate 26 missing and endangered children in
Georgia and arrested nine criminals in the process. Using our
renowned skills to locate wanted fugitives, we used relatively
new authorities granted to us by Congress in 2015 to find these
children, who were considered to be some of the most at-risk
and challenging recovery cases in the area, based on
indications of high-risk factors such as victimization of child
sex trafficking, child exploitation, sexual abuse, physical
abuse, and medical or mental health conditions. One child was
recovered in the company of a convicted child molester, who was
promptly arrested and is now incarcerated.
Without the continued support of this committee, successes
like these would not be possible. As the Director of the USMS,
my priorities are to ensure the safety of USMS employees and
protectees; reduce violent crime; and increase the professional
development of our workforce.
The Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 President's budget request
supports a robust addition to our workforce, specifically 363
positions, including 280 deputies, which are all carefully
justified. The number one concern I hear from deputies, from
the judiciary, and from the various Marshals and leaders who
report to me is that we do not have enough people to execute
the missions that we have been assigned. With your support,
funding of these positions will improve the USMS's capabilities
to meet our mission responsibilities in the years to come. I
appreciate the chance to speak with you today about the many
missions of the USMS, which include protecting the federal
judiciary, apprehending fugitives, housing and transporting
federal prisoners, managing and selling seized assets acquired
by criminals through illegal activities, operating the Witness
Security Program, and ensuring that convicted sex offenders are
complying with their obligations. Many of our missions are
accomplished working side by side with other federal, state,
and local law enforcement agencies, a force multiplier that we
believe is a hallmark of effective federal law enforcement.
COVID-19
From the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the USMS has
taken proactive measures to contain the spread of COVID-19
amongst prisoners in its custody and began monitoring its
detention population for COVID-19, formulating COVID-19 related
guidance, and providing COVID-19 related resources addressing
the USMS's prisoner detention mission.
The USMS does not own or operate any detention facilities.
While some USMS detainees are housed in Bureau of Prisons (BOP)
and private detention facilities, the majority of those in USMS
custody are housed in facilities operated by State or local
government facilities where we have an established
intergovernmental agreement to house federal prisoners. All
decisions concerning infectious disease treatment, including
decisions to isolate and quarantine prisoners, are made by
medical and correctional staff working at each facility.
Nevertheless, we have worked from the beginning of the pandemic
to minimize the risk of COVID-19 to prisoners and staff, and
have adjusted our processes from the beginning of the pandemic
to account for our growing understanding of the disease and its
transmission. For example, we have authorized COVID-19 testing
at any facility where the USMS houses prisoners; and we are now
testing many prisoners who are leaving our custody before they
move to the BOP to serve their sentences. We also have widely
distributed personal protective equipment (PPE) to our
operational workforce who are arresting and interacting with
prisoners, and we also provide PPE to prisoners in our custody
upon their arrest.
The USMS currently houses prisoners in nearly 800
facilities located throughout the country, which reflects our
legal requirements to house prisoners in proximity to their
legal proceedings. Depending upon the needs of each judicial
district, we might use some facilities to house just a few
prisoners while others routinely house more than 1,000. In more
than two-thirds of the facilities with USMS prisoners, we house
fewer than 50 prisoners, representing a fraction of their total
population.
Judicial Security
Protecting federal judicial officials, which include
judges, attorneys, and jurors, is a primary mission for USMS.
Each year, Deputy U.S. Marshals investigate thousands of
communications that are vetted into hundreds of significant
threats against judges, prosecutors, and other Members of the
court family. Our investigations have been complicated by the
exponential growth of social media communications in recent
years, and we see an increasing need to monitor public social
media so that we have a better chance of detecting disturbed
people who may be contemplating crimes against protected
officials. Senior inspectors and deputies, as well as contract
court security officers, provide security and screen visitors
at more than 700 judicial facilities across the country.
Because of COVID-19, we have instituted safety precautions in
courthouses across the nation, including masking requirements,
use of video conferencing for some judicial appearances, and
increased screenings and protections for in-person prisoner
appearances. In addition to providing security to judicial
proceedings, Deputy
U.S. Marshals also provide protective security details for
certain governmental officials when required. The USMS also
oversees the security aspect of courthouse construction
projects, from design to completion. These protective measures,
although not always visible to the general public, are critical
to ensuring the security and stability of our federal judicial
system.
Fugitive Operations
The USMS is the Federal Government's primary agency for
fugitive investigations and apprehensions. Deputy U.S. Marshals
arrest or clear more than 30,000 federal fugitives each year,
and Marshals-led fugitive task forces, made up of federal,
state, and local law enforcement partner agencies, arrest or
clear more than 70,000 State and local fugitives every year.
Many of these fugitives are the ``worst of the worst'': Violent
repeat offenders whose capture immediately makes local
communities safer. The USMS leads 56 district fugitive task
forces and operates eight regional fugitive task forces
dedicated to locating and arresting wanted felons. We are the
primary agency tasked with arresting foreign criminal fugitives
believed to be hiding in the U.S., as well as working with law
enforcement partners and governments worldwide to track,
arrest, and extradite fugitives hiding in foreign countries.
This year we began piloting the use of Unmanned Aerial Systems
(UAS) in some of our fugitive apprehension operations, marking
a carefully implemented, years-long development effort
consistent with DOJ policy. We are excited about the ability of
UAS to provide cost effective overwatch capabilities to our
fugitive task forces that reduce risks to law enforcement
personnel.
The USMS is the lead federal law enforcement agency
responsible for investigating sex offender registration
violations. Following passage of the Adam Walsh Act in 2006,
the Marshals Service has partnered with law enforcement
personnel from thousands of State and local agencies to
coordinate and conduct sex offender compliance/enforcement
operations throughout the country. In FY 2020, USMS conducted
2,759 non-compliant sex offender investigations and assisted
with 52,738 compliance checks of known registered sex
offenders.
Prisoner Operations
The USMS is responsible for the custody of more than
200,000 federal detainees each year, beginning at the time of
arrest by a federal agency (or remand by a judge) until
acquittal, commitment to a designated Federal BOP institution,
or otherwise ordered release from our custody. The USMS ensures
the safe, secure, and humane care of prisoners in its custody.
We currently provide housing, medical care, and transportation
for an average daily population of about 63,000 federal
prisoners located throughout the United States and its
territories and escort prisoners to and from their court
appearances. Our prisoner operations have been significantly
affected by the sudden COVID-19 pandemic this year. Many court
appearances have been substantially curtailed in certain parts
of the country, depending on the severity of the disease
outbreak there. The USMS does not own or operate detention
facilities but partners with State and local governments to
house approximately 70 percent of our prisoners. Additionally,
the agency houses approximately 16 percent of its prisoner
population in private detention facilities under direct
contract and approximately 14 percent in Federal BOP
facilities. In regular times, the detention of federal
prisoners presents diverse and complex challenges, including:
(1) Locating detention space near federal courthouses; (2)
coordinating with federal, state, and local authorities
regarding the execution of writs, court orders, and the
transfer of prisoners; (3) separating multiple co-defendant
prisoners from each other to ensure their safety and security
and the effective operation of the judicial system; and (4)
managing prisoners with contagious diseases and chronic
illnesses. These factors have all been complicated by the
COVID-19 pandemic. Jails and detention facilities are a
particularly challenging environment for communicable diseases
like COVID-19, and we have been taking appropriate and prudent
measures to protect prisoners, staff, and the community while
executing the lawful orders set by the federal judiciary. USMS
is actively mitigating the COVID-19 threat for all new
detainees. After arrest, all new intakes are screened for
COVID-19 symptoms at the sally port prior to entering the
courthouse facility. Prisoners are also screened when leaving
the facility. Screening includes verbal COVID-19 screening
questions, as well as temperature checks. Detainees are given
facemasks upon arrest and must wear masks within the courthouse
and during transportation. Inmate restraints are cleaned
between uses. We are following guidance from the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on handling prisoners;
this guidance has changed several times since the outbreak, and
we will continue to evolve our prisoner operations as CDC
guidance changes. We also have surveyed the approximately 800
State and local facilities actively housing USMS prisoners to
determine if they are following CDC guidelines for managing
COVID-19 in correctional and detention facilities. We observed
that the vast majority are following most of CDC's guidelines.
Prisoner Transportation
The USMS Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System
(JPATS) transports prisoners between judicial districts and
correctional institutions in the U.S., including Puerto Rico
and the U.S. Virgin Islands. During normal times, JPATS handles
more than 1,000 movements per business day on average, or about
a quarter million movements a year. Since the arrival of COVID-
19, prisoner movements have been sharply reduced as a safety
measure.
Between March 2020 and July 2020, there has been a 70
percent decrease in JPATS movements when compared to the same
timeframe last year. JPATS uses all CDC recommended protocols
including full personal protective equipment (PPE) for crews
and face coverings for prisoners. JPATS has also implemented
increased equipment and aircraft cleaning as well as crew/
prisoner social distancing on flights.
Asset Forfeiture
The Department of Justice Asset Forfeiture Program is a key
component of the Federal Government's law enforcement efforts
to combat major criminal activity by disrupting and dismantling
illegal enterprises, depriving criminals of the proceeds of
illegal activity, deterring crime, and restoring property to
victims. The USMS plays a critical role in identifying and
evaluating assets that represent the proceeds of crime as well
as efficiently managing and selling assets seized and forfeited
by DOJ. Proceeds generated from asset sales are used to operate
the program, compensate victims, and support various law
enforcement and community initiatives. We manage a wide array
of assets, including real estate, commercial businesses, cash,
financial instruments, vehicles, jewelry, art, antiques,
collectibles, vessels, and aircraft.
Witness Security
The USMS operates the federal Witness Security Program
(WITSEC), which is sometimes referred to colloquially as the
``Witness Protection Program.'' WITSEC provides for the
security, safety, and health of government witnesses and their
authorized family Members, whose lives are in danger as a
result of their cooperation with the U.S. government. The
program has successfully protected an estimated 19,000
participants--including innocent victim-witnesses and
cooperating defendants and their dependent family Members--from
intimidation and retribution since it began in 1971. No
participant following program guidelines has ever been harmed
while under the active protection of the USMS. The program is a
vital and effective tool in the U.S. government's battles
against organized crime, drug trafficking, terrorism, and other
major criminal enterprises. WITSEC personnel are the leading
authorities and foremost experts on witness security matters,
providing guidance and training to many government officials
throughout the world.
Tactical Operations
The USMS performs tactical operations for sensitive
missions involving homeland security, national emergencies, and
domestic crises. The Special Operations Group (SOG) is a
rapidly-deployable, highly-trained force of tactically-trained
deputies whose Members are deployed in high-risk and sensitive
law-enforcement situations, national emergencies, civil
disorders, and natural disasters. SOG is comprised of 80-100
volunteer Deputy U.S. Marshals who complete rigorous training
in specialties such as high-risk entry, explosive breaching,
weapons employment, rural operations, evasive driving, less-
than-lethal weapons, waterborne operations, and tactical
medical support. SOG deploys specialized people and equipment
in support of domestic operations such as 15 Most Wanted
investigations, fugitive task force support, and high-threat
judicial proceedings such as terrorist and drug kingpin trials.
Officer Safety
The USMS's fugitive apprehension mission is among the most
dangerous in federal law enforcement, and officer safety is our
top priority. Born of hard lessons learned, we developed
Officer Safety Training that includes a 40-hour High Risk
Fugitive Apprehension Course, which focuses on the real dangers
of the fugitive mission. This course focuses on topics
including: Deputy Trauma Medicine, Use of Force, Building
Entries, Firearms Training, Vehicle Stops, and Leadership. We
also ensure that all personnel receive officer safety training
on a continuous basis, including a program to ensure every
district has a highly trained Tactical Training Officer able to
provide officer safety training on a continuous basis. Finally,
we developed a program in recent years for the cyclical
replacement of body armor, which ensures that all body armor is
replaced on a 5 year cycle to take advantage of advances in
protective technologies.
Conclusion
Chairwoman Bass, Ranking Member Sensenbrenner, and Members
of the Subcommittee, on behalf of the men and women of the
United States Marshals Service, thank you for your ongoing
support of the Agency's programs. I am committed to ensuring
that we are efficient stewards of the resources you have
entrusted to us. I look forward to working with you to ensure
we meet our obligations to the Department of Justice, the
federal judiciary, and the American people.
Ms. Bass. Again, let me thank both witnesses for being here
today and for your service.
I would like to ask unanimous consent to enter two
documents into the record, one from The Sentencing Project and
the other one from the American Federation of Government
Employees.
[The information follows:]
KAREN BASS FOR THE RECORD
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Ms. Bass. Thank you.
We will now proceed under the 5-minute Rule with questions,
and I will begin by recognizing myself for 5 minutes.
The Justice Department's inspector general has reported
that the Federal Correctional Complex in Oakdale, Louisiana,
failed to isolate or quarantine prisoners who were exposed or
who tested positive to COVID-19.
The report found that some inmates who had tested positive
were left in their housing units for up to 6 days without being
isolated. In the BOP's COVID-19 Pandemic Response Plan, the BOP
requires that a person who tests positive for COVID-19 be
immediately placed under medical isolation.
So, I would like to ask Mr. Carvajal, what is your response
to this? Why are COVID-positive prisoners not immediately
isolated from the general population in all Federal facilities?
Mr. Carvajal. Thank you, Chair Bass.
They are. We do have procedures. They are good procedures
when they are followed.
In a nutshell, we had some leadership issues there. We sent
an outside team in. Attorney General Barr actually sent a
couple of his staff over. We sent a review team. Our regional
director had some concerns about the procedures not being
enforced or followed.
In essence, without getting into details, I removed the
leadership. The warden was removed from his position.
Ms. Bass. Okay. Good. I appreciate that.
So, in your facilities, are inmates and staff provided with
masks, gloves, and the ability to practice good hygiene?
Mr. Carvajal. Chair Bass, that is absolutely correct; they
are.
We do have the same challenge that everyone else, I
believe, in the country, in the world does, is that people have
a personal accountability here also. We must enforce the rules,
but people have to make a conscious effort to follow the rules
and procedures.
They are in place for a reason, and we have been in
lockstep with CDC guidance from day one. It is well-published.
There are links. I have done informational messages. We have
COVID review compliance teams, unannounced. Prior to me being
the Director, an announced visit in a Federal correctional
institution was unheard of. We have reviewed almost 100 percent
of our facilities. That doesn't include outside stakeholders
coming in.
So, it is a matter of enforcement, and it is a matter of
people following the rules, both inmates and staff.
Ms. Bass. Okay.
I want to ask you about staff being provided access to
testing. I mentioned my visit to Terminal Island, and I did
appreciate they were very open. They did not raise the issue,
but I am.
So, it made no sense at all to me--it was wonderful that
the inmates were tested and tested regularly. The inmates are
there. The staff come and go every day and the staff had no
access to testing.
So, has this been remedied in not just that facility but
throughout?
Mr. Carvajal. Yes, it has, Chair Bass.
I do recall your visit over there. I don't remember the
particular date or the time. I will tell you that, early on, as
with the rest of the world and the country, testing resources
were unavailable.
Ms. Bass. Right.
Mr. Carvajal. They were hard to get--
[Audio interruption.]
Ms. Bass. --is not picking up your voice. There you go.
Mr. Carvajal. Yes, ma'am. It was on.
Ms. Bass. Great.
Mr. Carvajal. Okay. Testing resources, as they have become
available, we have gained access to them. If I remember
correctly, in California, we partnered with the local community
public health care, we partnered with other entities. The union
has helped us at times gain resources. Bow I am happy to say
that we have a contract, a high-volume testing contract.
I would also like to mention, Chair Bass, that we can offer
the testing, and in many places, we have offered availability
to 100-percent testing, people don't want to take it. We can't
make them--
Ms. Bass. ``People'' meaning who?
Mr. Carvajal. ``People'' as in staff. It is voluntary.
Ms. Bass. They don't want to take it?
Mr. Carvajal. It is voluntary. I will give you an example.
At Forrest City, we--
Ms. Bass. Actually, I am going to run out of time, so thank
you.
Mr. Carvajal. Yes, ma'am.
Let me ask Mr. Washington: We have heard accounts of people
in Marshals' custody being moved across State and county lines
and placed into local jails with no information on their
transfer paperwork about whether they have been tested for
COVID or not.
Could you respond to that?
Mr. Washington. Yeah, Chair Bass, I have not heard that
particular complaint. I can say that the good men and women of
the United States Marshals Service are very interested in
making sure that our inmates are healthy and safe and that--
Ms. Bass. Are they tested before they are transferred, and
are the people, the staff?
Mr. Washington. Yes. We are testing in--for example, all
our inmates that go off to the BOP facilities are being tested,
or at least a large portion of them are. We have authorized
funding for all State institutions in which our prisoners are
housed.
Ms. Bass. Are you aware of the breakouts that have taken
place from prisoners being transferred? Now, I don't know,
maybe you have rectified it, but--
Mr. Washington. Yes, ma'am. I have, of course, seen the
media reports and things of that sort. We also know when there
is an issue inside of a particular--
Ms. Bass. Are the media reports accurate?
Mr. Washington. Generally, so-so.
Ms. Bass. Okay.
Thank you. My time has expired.
Representative Chabot?
Mr. Chabot. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for holding
this hearing today.
I want to thank Director Washington and Director Carvajal
for appearing this morning. Thank you both for your service to
our country and to your respective agencies.
This year has been particularly difficult for everyone,
everywhere, due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We have all
had to stay home, socially distance, and otherwise--
Ms. Bass. Oh. Steve, your mike.
Mr. Chabot. Sorry. Otherwise follow CDC guidelines to help
reduce the spread of this deadly virus.
Similarly, you have had three challenges. You are tasked to
protect both your staff and the spreading populations that you
serve and make sure that they don't contract, both your
employees as well as the inmates, this deadly virus.
Now, in the Ranking Member's opening statement, Mr. Jordan
mentioned that Democratic leadership in this Committee sent a
letter to the Attorney General, Mr. Barr--I am sure that you
were aware of this--urging you to use every tool at your
disposal to release as many prisoners as possible. Now, that
would be completely irresponsible, as I think most people would
agree, and would put the public directly at risk.
Now, Director, how do you take into consideration the
seriousness of the inmate's crime, for example, and the risk of
recidivism before sending someone into home confinement, for
example? What do you look at when you are making those types of
determinations?
Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, there are several criteria. The
ones in particular that would refer to what you are talking
about, the seriousness of crime, is there are four criteria
that were listed that we follow that we don't deviate from: The
primary offense cannot be a violence, a sex offense, terrorism,
or they can't have a detainer.
There are numerous other criteria--I can certainly list
them if you would like--that are somewhat discretionary. We
absolutely take into consideration public safety. In fact, the
Attorney General's guidance to me in two separate memoranda
stated that, to maximize the use of this authority but that we
absolutely have a responsibility not to release and overburden
the community.
So, we take into consideration public health and public
safety. I assure you that anyone that is eligible under that
criteria have been reviewed and, if appropriate, transferred to
community custody, just as we were directed.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you.
What tools does the Bureau use to monitor inmates after
they are released into home confinement?
Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, under normal circumstances, I
think everyone needs to understand that home confinement, in
and of itself, is a transitional program. It is set up for
inmates at the end of their sentence, 6 months, or 10 percent
of their sentence, to transition into the community.
The CARES Act has us looking at inmates who otherwise may
not even meet that criteria. So, you are talking about long-
term placement in the community. We didn't have the resources;
we expanded it. Ninty-four percent of the inmates on home
confinement are monitored through contracts. Everybody needs to
understand that those contract staff that monitor these
inmates, they use GPS, electronic monitoring, things like that.
These are not law enforcement personnel.
We don't have the staff to monitor them. We contract out.
Ninty-four percent of them are monitored by contract staff. We
do contracts, but they are not law enforcement. They simply
keep track of and check on these people. The other 6 percent
are monitored by the United States Probation Office and the
Federal Location Monitoring.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you.
Finally, I have about a minute left, so let me touch on
something else.
I have been a longtime supporter and advocate for prison
industries. When we have these folks confined for a period of
time, the vast majority of them are going to get out at some
point. We would prefer the lowest recidivism as possible. We
don't want them to go out and commit more crimes. We know many
will, unfortunately, but those that have been involved in
getting a skill or something they can put to work in the
private sector at some point probably have a better chance of
not going out and committing more crime.
So how has COVID and the restrictions impacted the prison
industries program?
Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, it absolutely has impacted
prison industries.
We know that 24 percent less likely to recidivate if they
worked in prison industries, 14 percent more likely to have a
job when they get out if they worked in Federal prison
industries. It is actually our number-one evidence-based
recidivism-reducing program.
It has been impacted, like all other organizations. We are
down about 2,000 workers. We generally employ about 10,000
inmates in Federal prison industries. There is always a waiting
list. We are done to about 8,000.
UNICOR was projected to have $27 million earnings last
year, because our factories were doing well under the FIRST
STEP Act. We closed the year with a $3 million deficit. So, we
have to get that back on track so that we continue to give
people the opportunity to get those jobs out there.
Ms. Bass. Thank you.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you.
Ms. Bass. Thank you very much.
Representative Jackson Lee?
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you for yielding. Good morning.
Thank you to the Director for your service to the country, and
to the head of the U.S. Marshals as well.
My time is very short. I will try to shorten my questions.
I will go directly to you, U.S. Marshals. The chairwoman
asked a question that I would like to follow up, and that is
that those that you are able to secure--and let me also
acknowledge your work with finding children and congratulate
your men and women in that service--come from many different
facilities. There has never been a question of--or a source of
information about the COVID-19 protocols or the status of these
individuals coming from facilities that do not follow the
Bureau of Prisons protocol in testing.
Do you have the data of all the people you have in custody
and whether or not they have been tested whether or not their
facilities are following COVID-19 facility protocols, and also
whether or not you have had any to die from COVID-19 in your
custody?
If you could just quickly answer those questions, I need to
move to the Director, please.
Mr. Washington. Thank you, Congresswoman Jackson Lee.
Yes, we have some data. The difficulty we have, of course,
is that we have some 800 facilities, because, as Chair Bass
indicated, of the 2 million prisoners in the United States, we
have 63,000 spread out over 800 facilities. So, it has been
somewhat of a difficult exercise to make sure that we have
consistent, accurate data. The data that we have been able to
accumulate is not uniformly reported, and it is not reported at
the same time.
We do have some data, in terms of the numbers that have
tested positive and deaths and those that are on ventilators
and in hospitals and things of that sort.
Ms. Jackson Lee. So, let me make this request. I think it
has been made by Members of Congress before, House and Senate.
My official request is that you find the capacity for
collecting that data and submitting it to this committee,
particularly--as much as you can garner--particularly those
hospitalized and any that have died.
Whatever authority you have to the facilities--because we
pay those facilities--to send notice to them that you want them
to provide testing protocols or others, to those that you
have--that are under your Federal custody, meaning that you are
getting from them. I would like to hopefully have you look into
that, please, Mr. Washington, and see how much data you can
provide us with.
Mr. Washington. I will look into it, Representative.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Those individuals may go back into
society--family Members, et cetera. That is what we are trying
to stop, is that extensive community spread.
Thank you very much for your service.
Mr. Washington. Thank you.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Let me ask--Director, thank you again. As
you well know, the ACLU filed a lawsuit on October 27 regarding
the handling of COVID-19 at the Federal facility at Butner,
North Carolina. The complaint alleges that BOP has not
reconfigured housing units to allow for social distancing.
During a hearing, Director, in the Senate Judiciary
Committee, you committed to new efforts by the Bureau to create
alternate living. Let me ask you, what progress you have made
in dealing with social distancing? Let me also ask you, whether
or not you have continued the waiver of the copayment for
incarcerated persons that makes it very difficult for them?
Then my other question is to raise the question of why we
are allowing the mindset for individuals who are on the front
lines to deny or reject testing. That means--I know there are
unions inside. I want to respect--and I am not sure whether
they are representing individuals. I would like to question
them. I am a strong supporter of their work ethic. I don't
think you can come here and say to us that they don't want to
get tested. I am going to be asking people to get vaccinated,
and I know that is going to be a challenge. They don't want to
get tested?
I think you need to come up with--I would like to hear your
response of how you can more effectively deal with making sure
that all your staff are effectively tested, which I think is
extremely important. If you would share, in the short amount of
time, your best answers.
Thank you.
Mr. Carvajal. Thank you, Congresswoman.
Yes, we are still waiving the copay for COVID-related
illness.
We have expanded the use--because our population is lower,
two things we have done in those areas that were challenging:
The prisons aren't made for social distancing, as you are well
aware. They are completely the opposite, so we did have
challenges. With the reduction in our population, we have been
able to spread people out. We actually put target population
levels on our most vulnerable facilities so they are at about
50-percent capacity.
We also used some of the COVID funding to purchase tents
and things of that nature. We have temporary housing--we
borrowed tents from the military at one point until we were
able to get some--to distance people out and provide
alternative living areas. We have made use of every available
space we can to convert for housing so that we can get that in
place. Again, prisons aren't necessarily built for that.
The last portion of your question, about staff testing, I
can't mandate somebody to take a test, Congresswoman. If I
could, I would be doing it already.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Well, my time is up, but let me indicate
that your individuals who are on the front line, maybe we need
to help you with that. I understand civil liberties, civil
rights, the Constitution. You are talking about individuals
coming in contact with incarcerated persons, who can't walk
away, can't get out. That means they are endangering
themselves, their families at home.
Can you just answer the question of the numbers of your men
and women who may have lost their life to COVID-19? Do you have
a number on that?
Mr. Carvajal. When you say my men and women, are you
referring to inmates or staff?
Ms. Jackson Lee. Staff.
Mr. Carvajal. One-hundred-and-forty-five inmates and three
staff--two staff that were confirmed, one that was listed
posthumously as being COVID-positive but the cause of death was
not listed as that.
Ms. Bass. Thank you.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you.
I yield back. Thank you.
Ms. Bass. Representative Gohmert?
Mr. Gohmert. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you both, to our witnesses, for being here.
Mr. Carvajal, I know this is a difficult time, but I am--
back when I was a judge and when I was paying attention to
felony facilities, Federal and State, we had a problem called
AIDS. I am glad to see the majority's interest now. I was
shocked how little regard people had in Congress with regard to
AIDS spreading through Federal prisons. So, it looks like there
is more of an appropriate interest now, even though that was
much more of a deadly disease.
Do you have any idea what the percentage, the mortality
rate, is of those who are positive with COVID-19 within the
prison system?
Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, that is somewhat of a difficult
question to ask, because we have so many moving pieces,
releases, and everything. Even my medical experts are
challenged with that.
Here is what I will tell you. The way we look at this is
that we have a lot of positive cases, as does everyone. The
majority of those cases early on were asymptomatic. That is why
the testing is so important and the mass testing, is we have
been able to identify presymptomatic or asymptomatic cases and
use that to help us mitigate the spread of this virus.
So, we have been able to flatten that curve, as everyone
likes to say. Although our deaths were a higher rate early on,
we haven't had as many on ventilators, which is a key. It
averages about six to eight here lately, even with the last
spike. More importantly, at one point, we had over 145, 150
inmates in a hospital at one time. That stays at about 18 to
20, depending on these spikes.
Less people are dying now from this disease. Even though
our numbers show high positive rates, at least 50 percent, at
this point right now, are asymptomatic, and they aren't
actively sick. I know they are sick with the virus. That is why
we want to isolate them and quarantine them. We are able to do
that better with testing.
Mr. Gohmert. I would encourage your physicians, when you
talk about people being put on ventilators--Dr. Bartlett from
Midland has done some great research in the use of steroid
nebulizers to protect the alveoli from becoming mush. Because
once that happens, even when you put them on ventilators, it
doesn't seem to be helpful.
Do you know approximately what percentage of the prison
population are in the United States illegally?
Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, off my head, I remember the
number is about 15 percent non-U.S. citizens. I don't know the
exact number that were illegal entry, but I do know that we
have approximately 15 percent non-U.S. citizens.
Mr. Gohmert. Wasn't it higher than that at one time?
Mr. Carvajal. I believe so, Congressman.
Mr. Gohmert. I understood that that percentage have been
reduced because of the COVID crackdown on the border. Have you
seen that yourself?
Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, I don't want to misspeak. I
would have to ask somebody for that data. I don't have--
Mr. Gohmert. Would you mind getting that and--
Mr. Carvajal. Yes, I will.
Mr. Gohmert. Thank you.
Now, from my experience during the days as a judge, it
seemed that 70-plus percent of those incarcerated had either an
alcohol or drug problem, alcoholics, or drug addicts. Do you
have any idea what percentage you are looking at in our Federal
prison system?
Mr. Carvajal. Again, Congressman, I don't know the exact
percentages. I will tell you that we do have lots of
programming tailored towards alcohol and drug problems and
offenses, treatment programs. A lot of our programs are geared
towards that. I don't know the exact percentage.
Mr. Gohmert. Have those programs been impacted by COVID,
their ability to have the regular meetings?
Mr. Carvajal. Absolutely. We have been impacted by COVID
just like everyone else.
We did--early on, obviously, we suspended programming at
some point. We have since resumed. We are probably at--it
varies, depending on the infection at the facility, but I would
like to say we are at 50, 60, 70 percent programming back to
normal. We have found creative ways, just as the school systems
have, to resume programming.
Mr. Gohmert. All right.
We have military inmates confined in Federal facilities
using a program called Federal Transfer. Has that been impacted
by COVID?
Ms. Bass. A quick answer because you are out of time.
Mr. Gohmert. Yeah.
Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, I don't know particularly about
the military, again, our entire system has been impacted.
Mr. Gohmert. All right.
Ms. Bass. Thank you.
Mr. Gohmert. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Bass. Representative McBath?
Mrs. McBath. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you gentlemen for shedding some light on these very
important issues this morning.
As we continue to grapple with COVID-19, case after case
has shown us just how difficult it is to contain this virus.
Everyone must do their part to protect one another. We have
seen that a single unsafe environment or event has ripple
effects through our communities. Employers especially have a
responsibility to be provide safety measures for their workers,
because if they don't, lives are definitely on the line.
No one knows this more than the family of Robin Grubbs.
Robin was an Army veteran and a caseworker at a BOP facility in
Atlanta. I represent Georgia. In March, she was promoted to a
new role, where she would be helping those who had completed
their sentences to return to their families and to their
communities, and she would be helping them get a brand-new
start.
Despite her promotion, Robin never got to start her new job
or move to a new office in another building. Instead, she was
kept for an additional month in her old role, in her old
office, located in an area that BOP started using to house
those who were infected or exposed to COVID-19.
According to coworkers, Robin tried to buy her own masks
while she still waited for her office move and for BOP to
provide her sufficient PPE. Robin's parents knew that she was
at risk. They themselves had recently dropped off a care
package with cough suppressants, medicine, and hand sanitizer
to her.
Sadly, Robin was found dead in her home. She posthumously
tested positive for COVID-19, and her father says that he was
told the toxicology report did not reveal any alternative
causes of her death other than COVID-19.
According to a news report in April, and I quote, a BOP
spokesperson said that her official cause of death has not yet
been determined, as her autopsy is not yet complete, end quote.
Since then, according to later reporting, a spokesperson for
the Georgia Bureau of Investigation said an autopsy was not
performed on Robin because she tested positive for COVID-19,
which was listed as the probable cause of death.
As of today, BOP does not list any COVID-19 staff deaths at
the facility where Robin worked. In short, BOP has not
acknowledged that Robin Grubbs likely died of COVID-19.
Director Carvajal, does BOP disagree with the determination
that COVID-19 was Robin's possible cause of death? If so, what
evidence does it rely on to make that decision?
Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, what happened to Robin Grubbs,
as with anyone who dies, for that matter, is sad.
I don't know that we have ever disagreed with anything. I
don't know where you are getting your information. I am not a
medical expert, nor do I write the autopsy reports, and we are
simply saying what we are given. That last piece of information
you said, from the Georgia bureau, I don't have that
information. We have never disputed or debated; we just simply
call it like we see it.
The paperwork we were given did not determine a cause of
death. We are not disputing it. I would not do that. Robin
Grubbs was one of our staff.
Mrs. McBath. Okay. Well, thank for that answer. Also, too,
the Bureau of Prisons' website--we have just had a chance to
look at--doesn't actually show her death. It shows the death of
two staff Members.
So, are you planning on updating the website to identify
the fact that Robin did actually die and so there was a
prison--there was an inmate death?
Mr. Carvajal. You are correct, Congresswoman; our website
lists two. Again, I don't know all the specifics or the
legalities or whatever region that is, but I will tell you that
no one in the Bureau of Prisons is disputing whatever the
doctor says that that young lady passed away from.
Our website--we get criticized regardless of if we put it
out there. I will have you know that staff criticized us for
acknowledging her death at all early on. We were actually
scrutinized because we wanted to tell people about this. There
has been nobody trying to hide anything here.
Regardless of what we put on that website; somebody is not
going to like the information. We are not disputing--it is a
sad situation, and it bothers me that I am even talking about
this. Robin Grubbs was one of my staff.
Mrs. McBath. Sir, thank you so much.
So, despite what anyone thinks, would you be willing to
update the website to make sure that you are identifying that
an inmate actually died within the care of the Bureau of
Prisons?
Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, again, I will speak to
whatever reason that that website is not updated. I follow the
advice of people. There are reasons we do that. I will get back
with you, I assure you, and I will address that issue of our
staff member passing away.
Mrs. McBath. Okay. Thank you very much, and I appreciate
any updates that you can provide the Committee going forward.
I would like to give the balance of my time to Chair Bass.
Ms. Bass. I think you are out of time.
Let me say quickly that no one on either side of the aisle
is calling for the indiscriminate release of prisoners. Who we
are concerned about are prisoners that might be medically
compromised, including prisoners with terminal illnesses--why
would they be confined now? Prisoners who are elderly;
illnesses that put them at risk for COVID, respiratory or heart
conditions; and people who are in pretrial detention who are
not a risk to the public safety.
The other issue is that the majority of the inmates come
from communities that are already disproportionately impacted.
So, we want to make sure that they are tested and medically
cleared before they are released. This protects the inmates,
the prison staff, and the general public.
Representative Cline?
Mr. Cline. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank our witnesses for being here today.
This has certainly been a challenging year for our Nation,
and the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have been felt by
every American and institution. Much like everything else in
today's world, our criminal justice system has had to adapt to
ensure justice is served no matter the circumstances we are
facing.
As Members of this committee, we must continue to seek
improvements to our justice system and guarantee that victims
of crime and their families are never robbed of justice. At the
same time, we must ensure that there is fairness and
transparency throughout our criminal justice system.
I have appreciated hearing from our witnesses today and
getting their insight on how the pandemic has affected their
agencies and what must be done to ensure that our justice
system continues to operate safely and in the best interest of
the American public.
Director Washington, I want to first commend the U.S.
Marshals Service for their tremendous work in rescuing 33
children during an operation last month in Virginia that
included parts of my district. Protecting our Nation's children
from predators has been a top priority for me.
Can you expand on your earlier remarks about how the
pandemic has impacted Marshals' work in pursuing predators and
rescuing children who are being exploited and trafficked?
Mr. Washington. Yes. Thank you for that question,
Congressman Cline.
First, let me thank you for House Resolution 5706 and the
Danger Pay for U.S. Marshals Act. That is very meaningful for
my agency. It is something that we need.
The pandemic has taken its toll all over the country, as
you well know. Inside of our agency, we have had to adjust,
like anyone else has done. In terms of the number of fugitives,
as an example, in any given year, the United States Marshals
Service will arrest 100,000 of the Nation's worst criminals in
any given year. That number is going to be about 80,000 this
year, as an example.
So, we will see the impact in terms of workload and things
of that sort, but it has also impacted just the way we look and
feel about each other. For example, we took note, of course, as
everyone in the country did, of the death of George Floyd and
what happened there. We have had the opportunity to have
discussions about racial inequality and use of force and things
of that sort. That is the good side of it.
On the other side of it, workload has been tremendously
impacted. Although we have people who are at home, we have
deputies that must go to court every day, and that has caused a
tremendous strain on those deputies and their families.
In terms of courts, you know, we continue to ensure that
the Rule of law functions as it should in this country. I will
be honest with you; we need staff. I think you probably have
heard that before. We have asked for 280 additional deputy
United States marshal positions in the fiscal year 2021 budget.
That is not something that we take lightly, when we make those
kinds of requests.
It is vital for us to do whatever we can to increase those
kinds of resources so we can get back to do even more fugitive
operations and even more child rescues.
Mr. Cline. Let me follow up on that. Regarding recruiting,
the U.S. Marshals carry out operations not only here in the
U.S. but overseas in dangerous locations. However, unlike your
DOJ counterparts at the FBI and DEA, the U.S. Marshals Service
is not eligible for danger pay, as you mentioned. This is a
serious problem, and I appreciate your recognition of the
legislation that has been introduced on a bipartisan basis by
Members of this committee.
Can you talk about the impact on recruitment? If these men
and women are serving overseas in dangerous conditions, putting
themselves in harm's way, shouldn't they also be able to
receive danger pay? How does that lack of danger pay impact
your ability to recruit the best and brightest?
Mr. Washington. Yes. The pandemic has shone a light on that
issue. Let me back up just a little bit.
So, as you indicated, the FBI and the DEA have those
authorities to pay danger pay to their agents. We do not to our
deputy U.S. marshals, who do exceedingly, extraordinarily
dangerous work--in countries like Mexico, where we are going
after a drug trafficker and trying to bring them back to the
United States, where we are actually working with authorities
inside the country at levels that I don't think the other
agencies do. In fact, we have relationships in those countries
that give us a little bit of a leg up.
We have not only agents, but deputy U.S. marshals and their
families as well. So, this year, as an example, we had to, of
course, remove people from those four foreign field offices
because of the pandemic, and then we had to send them back. So,
we are sending them back into harm's way. They can look across
the table in Mexico City, as an example, and sit there next to
a DEA agent or an FBI agent and recognize that, even though
they may be the same grade level, they are not getting the same
kind of compensation for work that is equally as dangerous, if
not more dangerous, than what those other agents are doing.
So, it is just something that we need to kind of level out
and make sure that our officers are fairly treated.
Ms. Bass. Thank you.
Mr. Cline. Thank you.
Ms. Bass. Representative Deutch?
Mr. Deutch. Thanks very much, Madam Chair.
Director Carvajal, Director Washington, thank you for your
service to our country.
Prisoners confined in BOP facilities have two options to
seek additional protection from the pandemic. We have talked
about this; we have talked about seeking a remainder of their
sentence in home confinement or compassionate release.
Home confinement is a determination made solely by the BOP.
Director Carvajal, you have talked about the consideration of
public safety, something that all of us acknowledge needs to be
the primary driver here. Then we get to the criteria that are
used to determine whether a person is eligible to serve their
remainder in their home confinement.
The question I have for you, just for some context: On May
13, the former chair of President Trump's campaign, Paul
Manafort, was transferred to home confinement due to COVID-19
fears. He had served far less than half of his 7-year sentence.
On May 20, President Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen,
qualified for home confinement. He was released from BOP
custody.
Both Paul Manafort and Michael Cohen were released due to
concerns of the pandemic in prisons. These are valid concerns.
Since May of this year, only about 1.8 percent of prisoners in
the BOP have been moved to complete their sentence in home
confinement. Most have been denied a transfer.
So, my question, Director Carvajal, for you is: How many
prisoners have been approved by the Bureau of Prisons for
transfer to home confinement? Do you have that number?
Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, I believe, if I am understanding
your question correctly, it is 18,000--over 18,000 that we have
placed in home confinement since the passage of the CARES Act.
Mr. Deutch. How did--if you know, how did Paul Manafort and
Michael Cohen qualify to be transferred to home confinement? Do
you know the analysis that was used in those cases?
Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, what I can tell you is, anyone
that has been placed on home confinement, regardless of who
they are, have met the criteria outlined by the CARES Act and,
specifically, the criteria written by the Attorney General. He
issued two separate memorandums to me with guidance on there.
I don't personally review these. There is a reason I don't
get involved. They are done at the local level. When there is
anything discretionary to be reviewed outside of the criteria,
it rises to a Committee at the headquarters level that is
higher-level subject-matter experts. Everything is either--they
either meet the criteria or they don't.
There is some discretion on some of that criteria--
Mr. Deutch. Well, let me just follow up for a second. I
appreciate that. I am not sure that I understand what the
higher-level analysis or the expertise is required, but let me
just talk about two other cases, not Paul Manafort or Michael
Cohen.
In a letter requesting compassionate release from Marie
Neba, who was confined at the Federal Medical Center Carswell,
there was a description to the judge that she had not received
medication for treating her breast cancer since March 5 of this
year. She described how the lockdown at the facility due to the
COVID-19 pandemic had caused medical care at the facility to
deteriorate. Her condition worsened. She was concerned about
the spread of COVID-19. She was not released and ultimately
passed away from COVID.
In a letter requesting compassionate release, W. Young
Bird, who was confined at the Medical Center for Federal
Prisoners in Springfield, Missouri, described to the judge how
there were 30 cases of COVID in 3 different facilities. The
facility was on lockdown, and Mr. Young Bird was housed in a
24-hour medical care unit. Actively sought help from the warden
and the judge to protect himself from the spreading virus.
Ultimately, in that case, unfortunately, he passed as well.
Do you know, Director Carvajal, how many prisoners over the
age of 65 and medically vulnerable have been transferred to
home confinement? Is that all the 18,000 that you referenced?
Mr. Carvajal. Congressman, I don't have those exact
numbers. I will have to follow up with you.
I will tell you, there is a difference between the
compassionate release process--you are talking about releasing
someone, essentially undoing, or reducing a sentence imposed by
a criminal court.
Mr. Deutch. No, I understand.
Mr. Carvajal. The home confinement process is different.
Mr. Deutch. Director Carvajal, I understand. I do
understand the difference well. What I don't understand is the
seeming disparity in treatment that permitted two individuals
who may have had underlying conditions but were released to
home confinement with two individuals who clearly had
underlying challenges and wound up dying of COVID-19.
A Federal judge ordered the Bureau of Prisons to review
medically vulnerable prisoners at Elkton in Ohio, asked for a
list of prisoners age 65 and those who were medically
vulnerable, and the Bureau responded to a judge that there were
837, but only 5 would be transferred to home confinement.
All I ask, Director Carvajal, is that we go back and
analyze fully the steps that we can take to provide the same
protections for these inmates, who are not violent, as the
protections that were provided to these two individuals who
happened, coincidentally, to have close relationships with the
President of the United States.
I yield back.
Ms. Bass. Thank you.
Representative Lesko?
Mrs. Lesko. Thank you, Madam Chair.
First of all, I want to say thank you to both of you for
your service to our country, and also to your employees. They
have a difficult job, very dangerous job. I appreciate them,
and I believe the majority of Americans appreciate their hard
work.
I am going to read a letter dated March 30, 2020, and it
was a letter from Chairman Nadler and Chair Bass to Attorney
General Barr. It is on page 4, and I am going to go into page
5. It reads, ``Your memorandum,'' meaning Attorney General
Barr's memorandum, ``specifies that priority should be given to
inmates in low- and minimum-security facilities and that
serious offenses should weigh more heavily against
consideration for home detention.''
I think that is reasonable.
``These limitations unfortunately beg the question of what
you do with individuals who are at high risk for contracting
COVID-19 who are not in low- or minimum-security facilities,
who have been convicted of serious offenses, or have high
PATTERN risk scores. We urge you to consider that even
individuals in these categories should be assessed for release
because they may be elderly or particularly vulnerable.
``Pregnant prisoners in all circumstances should be
released to home confinement forthwith.
``We further urge you to assess the risk of contracting
COVID-19 of every individual in BOP custody regardless of the
type of institution in which they are housed, the seriousness
of their offense, or the potential recidivism risk they may
present.''
Well, I think that we can take reasonable measures,
commonsense measures of people that are low risk to the
society. I am concerned, I have to say, Madam Chairman and
others, I am very concerned if we are just encouraging the
prisons to release even people convicted of serious offenses.
Let me tell you why. This isn't a person that was in
Federal prison, but this is an example. This was a rape--this
man was indicted in rape of a woman last year and was released
in April because of the coronavirus and is accused of then
fatally shooting his accuser.
I mean, this is the picture of the man.
You know, to me, of course we must take reasonable measures
to protect not only the inmates but, of course, your employees.
I certainly do not think that the majority of Americans,
including myself, whether they are Republican, independent, or
Democrats, want dangerous criminals released into our
communities.
So, I just want to tell you that. Also, with the 1 minute
and 47 seconds left, do either one of you have anything that
you would like to add that you haven't had the opportunity to
talk about?
Mr. Carvajal. Thank you, Congresswoman.
I just want to say that anyone that was eligible under the
criteria we were issued at the direction of the CARES Act, that
met that criteria and was safe, met public safety factors, has
been released from our custody. We take this very seriously. We
want to keep people safe regardless.
Most people that aren't released, it is because they have
committed a crime of violence or a sex offense or they have a
detainer or an Act of terrorism.
I think that it goes back to what you were saying that we
have a responsibility. A court processed them; a judge found
them to come to our custody. We take seriously who we are going
to release back.
Again, I would like to remind everyone that we are
transferring people to home confinement. They are still in the
custody of the Bureau of Prisons. Compassionate release is an
actual reduction in sentence or release of that sentence that
was imposed by a court.
Thank you.
Mrs. Lesko. Thank you.
I yield back.
Ms. Bass. Representative Jeffries?
Mrs. Lesko. Unless the Marshals had something to say?
Ms. Bass. Oh. Well, we are done. You are out of time.
Mrs. Lesko. Okay. I thank you.
Mr. Jeffries. Thank you, Madam Chair, for yielding and for
your tremendous leadership in convening this hearing.
I thank our two witnesses for their service to the country.
Director Carvajal, COVID-19 is a serious disease; is that
correct?
Mr. Carvajal. Yes, Congressman, it is.
Mr. Jeffries. A potentially fatal disease in some
instances. Is that right?
Mr. Carvajal. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jeffries. I think there are about 24,000 individuals in
BOP custody who have tested positive for the virus. Is that
right?
Mr. Carvajal. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jeffries. Approximately 145 Federal inmates have died
as a result of COVID-19. Is that true?
Mr. Carvajal. That is correct.
Mr. Jeffries. Those individuals who died were in the Bureau
of Prisons' custody. Is that right?
Mr. Carvajal. The 145? Correct.
Mr. Jeffries. At a hearing before the Senate in June, you
stated that, quote, ``prisons, by design, are not made for
social distancing. They are, on the opposite, made to contain
people in one area.'' Is that correct, in terms of that being
your testimony?
Mr. Carvajal. Yes, sir, it is.
Mr. Jeffries. I think you reiterated earlier today that
prisons are not built for social distancing. Is that true?
Mr. Carvajal. That is correct.
Mr. Jeffries. The public health experts have indicated that
social distancing is an important tool to be used in combating
this serious and deadly COVID-19 virus. Is that right?
Mr. Carvajal. That is correct.
Mr. Jeffries. So, I think, given the circumstances that the
inmates and employees of the Bureau of Prisons find themselves
in, as you have testified, it seems like the presumption at the
Bureau of Prisons should be to utilize the tools available to
it to allow inmates relief from this potentially deadly virus.
Is that fair to say?
Mr. Carvajal. It is, Congressman, and that is what we are
doing.
Mr. Jeffries. So, part of my concern is that the tools that
have been made available to you include both the emergency
provisions and powers provided under the CARES Act as well as
the compassionate release provision that was a part of the
FIRST STEP Act. Is that right?
Mr. Carvajal. Correct.
Mr. Jeffries. In terms of the compassionate release
provision, I guess during the COVID-19 pandemic the Federal
courts have granted nearly 2,000 motions for compassionate
release. Is that true?
Mr. Carvajal. That sounds about right.
Mr. Jeffries. Now, the Bureau of Prisons can also initiate
a motion for compassionate release. Is that correct?
Mr. Carvajal. Correct.
Mr. Jeffries. Part of my concern is that, I guess during
the first 3 months of the pandemic, the Bureau of Prisons
approved approximately 0.1 percent of compassionate release
requests. Is that right?
Mr. Carvajal. Yes, sir. Again, I don't know the exact
numbers, but it was a low number.
Mr. Jeffries. In other words, 10,929 requests out of 10,940
requests were rejected. Does that sound right?
Mr. Carvajal. Again, Congressman, I don't have the exact
numbers.
Mr. Jeffries. So, you just testified earlier that we should
utilize the tools available to us, that have been made
available to you on a bipartisan basis in both the CARES Act
and the FIRST STEP Act, to alleviate the pain, suffering, and
death connected to the COVID-19 pandemic, but the numbers don't
suggest that you are actually doing that.
Can you explain why there has been such low utilization as
it relates to compassionate release?
Mr. Carvajal. Yes, I can, Congressman.
First, as I stated earlier, you are talking about reducing
a sentence or reversing a sentence imposed by a judge in a
court. That is not a process that should be rushed. We take
into consideration public safety. We review everyone for home
confinement because it is a quicker process to get them out.
An inmate has the right and the ability to go straight to
the courts. I also want to remind everyone that the Bureau of
Prisons doesn't make the final determination of whether or not
someone is approved for compassionate release. All we are doing
is simply recommending to the judge. So, there is a 30-day
window, and then the inmate can go directly to a court. That is
why the courts have released more.
It is a lengthy process. There is a lot of vetting and
verifying to go into that. So, it is a very thorough process.
Mr. Jeffries. Thank you for that.
I think the issue is that you have had at least two dozen
individuals who have died in prison waiting for a compassionate
release request to even be reviewed, if not signed off on, by
the Bureau of Prisons. That seems, to me, inconsistent with the
presumption that we should be doing all that we can to
alleviate the pain and suffering and death connected to COVID-
19 in the tight quarters of the Federal penitentiary.
The last observation I will make, as my time has expired,
is that you have mentioned consistently this notion that we
have individuals who may have engaged in serious crimes and
pose public safety risks. The example that we have been talking
about, Marie Neba, is someone who was in prison on a nonviolent
offense of Medicare fraud. In too many of these instances, it
is the same situation. That is a shame, because a prison
sentence should not be a death sentence.
I yield back.
Ms. Bass. Representative Jordan?
Mr. Jordan. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Director Washington, has violent crime increased this year
in major urban areas?
Mr. Washington. The data indicates it has increased.
Mr. Jordan. Aggravated assaults up 14 percent, homicide
rates up 53 percent in major urban areas.
In that environment, should big cities be defunding their
police? New York City has defunded their police a billion
dollars; Los Angeles, $150 million reduction in police force
and in police budget; Austin, Texas, $150 million; San
Francisco, $120 million; Philadelphia, $33 million; Baltimore,
$23 million; Portland, Oregon, $16 million.
Does that make sense to you, Director Washington?
Mr. Washington. Not to me, as the head of a law enforcement
agency that is charged with handling violent crime. In fact, in
many of those cities, of course, we have deployed deputy U.S.
marshals--
Mr. Jordan. Yep.
Mr. Washington. --to participate on various task forces to
address the increase in violent crime.
Mr. Jordan. In that overall environment, the increase in
violent crime, cities defunding their police departments,
should we be releasing more criminals early back into those
neighborhoods?
Mr. Washington. I don't think we should, Congressman.
Mr. Jordan. That is exactly what Democrats want to do.
It is not just--as the chairwoman said earlier, it is not
just those, Director Carvajal, that you go through and make
sure that they are not going to be a harm to the community.
That is not what they said in their letter.
As Congresswoman Lesko just pointed out, when they sent a
letter to Attorney General Barr back in March, they said,
assess all prisoners for release regardless of the type of
institution in which they are housed--here is the key part--
regardless of the seriousness of their offense or the potential
recidivism risk that they pose to the community.
So, they wanted everyone to get released, in an environment
where we already have a 53-percent increase in homicide rates,
a 14-percent increase in aggravated assaults, and big-city
mayors and big-city city councils, all run by Democrats, are
defunding the police department. That is exactly what they
wanted to do.
Do you think that makes sense, Director Washington?
Mr. Washington. Well, again, Congressman, from my agency's
perspective, we have been very busy addressing violent crime in
the United States.
As you well know, we have initiated an Operation LeGend as
a result of the death of young LeGend Taliferro in Kansas City,
Missouri. A 4-year-old, in bed, gets shot and killed is not a
thing that we want to happen in the United States.
So, what we have done, of course, is participate in various
cities around the country. Operation LeGend continues; I just
received the data yesterday on the 20th week of Operation
LeGend. For example, in Chicago, we have arrested 1,000 folks
who fit the categories of either homicide, sexual assault,
robbery, and things of that sort.
Mr. Jordan. Yeah.
I actually wanted to--I forgot one thing. It is worse than
I just described. They not only want to release criminals back
into communities where there is already an elevated State of
violent crime, where the police are being defunded. They not
only want to release people early, regardless of the
seriousness of their offense. They want the taxpayers to pay
for it. I forgot about that. They introduced legislation that
said, we want to pay States to do what I just described. Such a
deal for the taxpayer.
I mean, this is the part--no wonder they are--think about
the small-business owner in Portland, for example. You have a
small-business owner in Portland who has paid all their local
taxes, only to have their business in downtown Portland be
destroyed this summer when the mob took over the streets. Now
Democrats are saying, oh, now we want to use your Federal tax
dollars to put more criminals on the streets.
Does that make any sense to you at all, Director
Washington?
Mr. Washington. Well, Your Honor--``Your Honor''--
Congressman, I am not, of course, a politician. I just run a
Federal law enforcement agency. From a law enforcement
perspective, that doesn't make sense.
Mr. Jordan. Doesn't make sense.
Oh, there is one other step I--it gets better. There is one
other thing. We just learned that 15 percent of the inmates in
our Bureau of Prisons are illegal immigrants.
Is that right, Director Carvajal?
Mr. Carvajal. Non-U.S. citizens.
Mr. Jordan. Non-U.S. citizens. The Democrats want them
released as well. Regardless of the seriousness of their
offense, they want taxpayer money to be used to pay the States
to release illegal immigrants, regardless of their offense,
back into communities where we have seen a 53-percent increase
in violent crime and where those same cities are defunding
their police. That might be the craziest thing I have ever
heard, but that is exactly their policy.
Frankly, Madam Chair, I would ask for unanimous consent to
enter the letter you sent, along with Chairman Nadler, to the
Attorney General which spells out what I just described.
[The information follows:]
MR. JORDAN FOR THE RECORD
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Jordan. With that, I will yield back.
Ms. Bass. Representative Dean?
For the record, the letter says ``assessed,'' not
``released,'' I don't know of anyone on either side of the
aisle who calls for defunding the police, and I love the way
the Ranking Member talks about my city.
Representative Dean?
Mr. Jordan. Well, Madam Chair, the--
Ms. Dean. Madam Chair--
Mr. Jordan. --again, ``regardless of the type of
institution in which they are housed, the seriousness of their
offense, or the potential recidivism risk that they may
present.'' I didn't write that. You did. I didn't--that is not
a Republican language. That is you and Chair Nadler.
So, if you are now saying ``the seriousness of their
offense'' is not in the letter, that you want to strike that
out, that is one thing, but that is not what you wrote on March
30, 2020.
Ms. Bass. We can debate the letter, but I would pose--
Mr. Jordan. No, that is not debating the letter. That is
what is in the letter.
Ms. Bass. I would pose that you are mischaracterizing it,
and I will call on Representative Dean.
Mr. Jordan. I am reading your words.
Ms. Bass. Representative Dean.
Ms. Dean. I thank you, Madam Chair.
I do want to say, I thought this was a serious body here to
talk about governing and protecting public health and
protecting public safety, and not a campaign commercial. I
thought the campaign was over. Sadly, we are seeing
mischaracterization of other Members' works very, very
grotesquely.
So, number one, I thank you both for the work that you do.
I thank you for the teams that you have assembled and the
extraordinary staff who puts their own lives and health at
risk.
What I would like to know more about is, during COVID, for
example, compliance with mask-wearing among staff and among
inmates. You able to get full compliance for simple mask-
wearing? Because you are challenged with confinement and close
spaces.
Mr. Carvajal. Thank you, Congresswoman.
It is a tough--just like with anything, it is enforcement
and accountability and expectations. We expect people to wear
it, we expect from the leadership that it be enforced, and we
expect from everyone that they have personal accountability to
follow the rules.
We incorporated unannounced inspections. We welcome outside
inspections. If there is any doubt, just this week, I sent
someone to verify, because I had people complaining--I heard
these complaints. They were concerning. We sent an unannounced
team to an institution just for that reason.
Ms. Dean. That is great, because you are in the business of
supervising and overseeing. So, I would think you would have
the tools in place to deal with, sadly, this pandemic and the
need for these important measures.
I, too, want to ask about the use of compassionate release.
I want to make clear that, when you testified that some 18,112
inmates were returned to home confinement, that is not
compassionate release. From the records that we have seen, that
I read about, only 11 people of nearly 11,000 folks in the
first 3 months who had applied for compassionate release had
received that.
So, I want to be really clear. When we talk about 18,000
people going to home confinement, they were going there anyway
under the protocols as things were happening; they weren't as a
result of COVID release. Am I correct?
Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, passage of the CARES Act and
COVID caused us to place a high number of people who would not
ordinarily have been considered, at least at this point in
time, for home confinement.
You are correct; the compassionate release numbers are
lower. As I explained earlier, that is a lengthy process. Under
our policy and by the guidelines of the statute, an inmate has
to be showing extraordinary and compelling circumstances. That
is not something we do in a day or two.
Ms. Dean. I heard that answer. I appreciate that and the
balancing of the urgency of COVID against the assessment of
whether a person is appropriate for compassionate release. Some
of those criteria were met in the cases that had been
identified, and yet those folks were not released.
Of the 18,000 who went to home confinement, can you break
down that number for us? How many were headed to home
confinement anyway? How many are because of your reassessment
from COVID?
Mr. Carvajal. I don't have the exact numbers in front of
me. They change--
Ms. Dean. Would you be able to provide that?
Mr. Carvajal. I will tell you, as of right now--there is
approximately 8,000 on home confinement currently, right now.
About 50 or 60 percent of those are CARES Act, specific to the
CARES Act, that would not have ordinarily been in home
confinement at this point. I am not saying they weren't ever
going to be eligible.
Ms. Dean. I am worried about my time. Sorry to try to keep
it tight.
What I would like to ask you is if you would provide the
chairwoman and the Ranking Member detailed data about those who
have been released for compassionate care--I am hoping there is
well more than 11 that we have learned about; that seems
incredibly sad--and also the breakdown of the 18,000 and now
8,000 who are in home confinement.
I appreciate all of that. I am going to have no time. Darn
it. I apologize.
Ms. Bass. You can continue.
Ms. Dean. I thank you.
What I would like to ask about and shift to is something I
have been very concerned about, which is the use of shackling
of pregnant women while in confinement. Can both of you speak
to the use of shackles on pregnant women in your agencies?
Mr. Carvajal. Thank you, Director.
We don't do it. We have procedures in place. We amended our
policy.
It has happened one time since the passage of the FIRST
STEP Act. It was documented. It was a mistake, for all
practical purposes. The female was identified as being pregnant
in the same day; the person didn't have time to enter it. We
have good procedures in place to identify, respecting their
rights. It was for less than 5 minutes.
Aside from that, if it gets done, it gets reported all the
way up to our medical director, our women, and special programs
administrator; there is a review conducted. We use alternative
means. We do not restrain pregnant or postpartum females in our
agency.
Ms. Dean. Thank you.
Mr. Washington. I believe that is the same answer for the
United States Marshals Service. Because we have the pretrial
folks, folks under prosecution. We also have the statute that
required that to be stopped. So we use alternative means.
Ms. Dean. Well, I would quote others who have said that
that is barbaric, and I appreciate that that has been banned.
Thank you very much.
Thank you for your consideration.
Ms. Bass. Sure.
Before I move to our last speaker, Mr. Washington, if you
could confirm that in data, especially during transportation,
okay? If you could confirm it. You said you believed it wasn't
the case, so I just wanted to know if you could confirm it,
especially during transportation.
Mr. Washington. Yes, Madam Chair.
Ms. Bass. Thank you.
Our final member is Representative Mucarsel-Powell.
Let me just say, Representative Cline had to leave to go
back to his office, but he wanted to express to you, as do I,
our joy in working with you over the last couple of years and
the leadership that you have displayed here in Congress. We
just want you to know how much you will be missed, and we hope
we see you again in the future.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Thank you so much, Chair Bass.
To all my colleagues in the committee, it has been the
greatest honor to serve with all of you, even in the most
contentious times, and I truly will carry these experiences
with me. I hope that we will all meet soon again, after I am
done with serving here in the House of Representatives.
Thank you so much, Chair.
Thank you to the witnesses for appearing this morning. It
is such an important public health issue. I wanted to just
start at setting the record straight and responding to some of
the points that the Ranking Member has made.
He continues to accuse Democrats of failing to keep our
communities safe. That is the farthest thing from the truth. It
is actually Republicans and Members like him who are trampling
on the Rule of law and trying to overturn the will of the
people.
Just yesterday, one of the President's attorneys called for
Chris Krebs to be taken out and shot--Chris Krebs, the security
official who Trump fired because he wouldn't go along with the
lies from the Administration, because he said that there was
absolutely no evidence of fraud.
It is the Democrats who are fighting to save lives during
this pandemic. It is the Democrats who are constantly trying to
keep our communities safe and to save the lives of those who
are incarcerated, because we realize that there is respect and
dignity to every human life.
Now, Director Carvajal, I sent you a letter with
Representative Demings back in April. In my district, we have
one of the prison bureaus, FCI Miami. It is a low-security
facility that holds about 900 inmates and employs several
hundred staff. A hundred-and-thirty-nine inmates at FCI Miami
have tested positive for COVID-19, and, unfortunately, we have
lost 1 life there at that facility.
So, I would just urge you that you would make voluntary
testing available to staff immediately. It is very difficult
for them to travel long distances to get those tests. It is not
just for the safety of the inmates and the staff; it is also
for the safety of our community here in Miami.
Now, I wanted to turn quickly to another issue, and that is
the deployment of the BOP teams to respond to the protests over
the murder of George Floyd.
In June, we received reports that showed that tactical BOP
teams were sent to Washington, DC, and Miami. The riot team
sent to Miami sat in a hotel for a few days and left after the
protests in Miami because they were nothing but peaceful. There
were no Federal buildings at risk. We didn't see any sort of
violence.
Director Carvajal, why were tactical BOP teams sent to
Miami? If you can shortly, quickly answer that question.
Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, they were there only a few
hours. We actually redirected them back to DC. Yes, they were
deployed.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Who made that decision, and what was
the rationale for that?
Mr. Carvajal. As you know, Congresswoman, we are a
component of the Department of Justice. The Attorney General
and the Department of Justice requested assistance in the law
enforcement mission. They called us. I made the decision after
consulting with my leadership team to make sure that we could
send the number of personnel, and we did.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Are these teams trained in civilian
crowd control?
Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, they are trained in crowd
control. It is actually what we do.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Okay. So, I am assuming that the
special operations response teams received training on
appropriate non-inmate crowd control since June?
Mr. Carvajal. We have a contingency plan and training in
place to train for civil disturbances. That is non-prison-type
disturbances. We train our personnel and our tactical teams in
just that.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Okay. Thank you.
Director Washington, since June 2020, how many times have
BOP agents or employees been deputized as U.S. marshals?
Mr. Washington. Since June of 2020? I don't recall any BOP
agents being deputized as U.S. marshals.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Okay.
Mr. Washington. Is that the case?
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Go ahead, Director Carvajal.
Mr. Carvajal. If I may assist there, our personnel who were
deployed are deputized by United States Marshals. It was done
on site before they ever took to the patrolling.
That was done because, by statute, our arrest authority is
limited in the BOP, and anytime we are deployed--we often
deploy; it just doesn't get media attention. We respond to most
every major national disaster out there. Our staff are always
deputized before they go out on patrol.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Let me ask you something that I saw.
Some of the BOP personnel were concealing their identities by
removing their nametags and other identifying badges. Who
directed them to do this, and what was the purpose of that?
Mr. Carvajal. Congresswoman, I would like to correct the
record. I appreciate you asking me that question.
No one was instructed to remove anything. I got asked that
question during a virtual press conference, and I answered it
very bluntly. I failed to properly mark our people because we
deployed in such a quick manner--we don't usually worry about
that. Having an institution marker on you doesn't mean nothing
in a major city if you don't know where that prison is located.
We did correct that immediately. Within 2 days, we
appropriately marked all our staff. There is a standardized
marking for them now.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Well, I thank you for that, Director
Carvajal, because we actually did see that Federal agents were
unidentified, and it poses a risk to the safety, to the overall
safety, of our community. So, I do hope that you hold those
that did that and did not follow the appropriate procedures
accountable.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
Ms. Bass. Thank you very much.
Before we adjourn, I just want to say, one, I want to thank
you again, both of our witnesses, for coming today. Let me
thank you for taking the time to come and let me also thank you
for your work. In addition to raising concerns we want to know
how we can best help you.
We would have liked to have done a second panel. If we had
done a second panel, I would have invited Donte Westmoreland,
who was sentenced to 7 years in Kansas. It was a first-time
marijuana charge. Ironically, if he had been from California,
what he had done would not have even been a crime. In fact, he
could have opened his own business.
I want to say that public safety is safety from violence
but also safety from COVID in terms of the general community.
My concern is both for the inmates but also the staff. The
staff are dying as well, not just the inmates.
So, reducing the prison population safely protects the
health and safety of inmates and the general community. That we
will continue to call--as it says in the memo, ``We further
urge you to assess the risk of contracting COVID-19 of every
individual in BOP custody.''
With that, this concludes today's hearing, and we adjourn.
[Whereupon, at 10:49 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
APPENDIX
=======================================================================
STATEMENT OF DONTE WESTMORELAND
Dear Chairwomen Bass, Ranking member Jordan, and Members of
the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime,
My name is Donte Westmoreland. Six weeks ago, I was sitting
in a cell at the Lansing Correctional Facility in Kansas,
serving nearly an 8 year sentence for allegedly selling (1
pound) of marijuana. I received this very lengthy sentence even
though I had a no criminal history score. Fortunately, after
serving nearly 4 years of my sentence, it came to light that
prosecutors had concealed exculpatory evidence and my
conviction was overturned.
I grew up in Stockton, California where I was raised by my
grandmother. My mother had many challenges of her own which put
me in position to be the sole supporter for our family. It was
difficult maintaining a household financially I had my two
younger brothers and my grandmother was receiving public
assistance at the time. I focused mostly on being a caregiver
for my grandmother, I was an athlete in high school and
graduated in 2013. My dream was to keep moving forward with my
education, but I knew that was unlikely given the circumstances
of my situation. My grandmother encouraged me to visit colleges
she would say, ``There is more to life than just taking care of
me, experience life you only have one.'' I knew deep down that
was not possible, but it encouraged me to visit universities
across the states, including Kansas.
This was interrupted by my arrest on March 8, 2016. I chose
to take this case to jury trial because I felt I was not guilty
of the crime in addition I was forced to go to trial with sick
unprepared counsel. Right before my trial, my grandmother, the
woman that raised me, suffered extreme distress. She ended up
passing away during the trial and my 10 and 11 year old
brothers were placed in the foster care system, where they
remain today. On May 22,2017 I was sentenced to serve nearly an
8 year prison term which was ironically my youngest brothers
birthday.
There have been a few moments that really brought
everything home for me. One came while I was watching TV in
prison and saw a news story saying that Missouri, the State
right next to me, had legalized medical cannabis and was
issuing licenses for cultivators and retailers and talked about
billions of dollars of wealth that was going to be generated by
the legal industry. But there I was sitting in prison for
allegedly doing the same thing. What was criminal in Kansas was
considered entrepreneurial in the bordering State of Missouri.
Another moment I can never forget came when I learned that
COVID had infected other prisoners and guards in the prison I
was incarcerated in. I did all I possibly could to protect
myself, but that's difficult when you have no control over the
people who are housed with you, and you have no control over
the air you breath and limited access to personal protective
gear. It's really terrifying, just waiting and hoping you don't
get it. In the end, despite my best efforts I became infected
with the virus. At the moment I felt as if I was sentenced to
death, behind a first time marijuana offense. I recovered, but
five prisoners and two guards that were in the same facility
died from Covid.
I knew some of them personally--here today, gone tomorrow.
I honestly did not know what my future held at that point.
My charges are still pending. It is still possible that I
could be returned to prison to serve out my nearly 8 year
sentence, if prosecutors in Kansas choose to put me on trial
again, but I've been encouraged lately. I've been encouraged
that the citizens of all five states that had cannabis reform
initiatives on the ballot decided to approve those measures,
including in conservative states like North Dakota and
Mississippi. I have also been encouraged by the Biden
Administration announcement that they intend to make federal
cannabis reform a priority. I'm really encouraged to have been
invited to submit this written testimony to the House Judiciary
sub-committee on crime.
My story is not unique. Today 40,000 people are serving
prison sentences for non-violent cannabis convictions, even
though cannabis has been completely legalized in ten states and
made legal for medical purposes in a large majority of states.
These prisoners are disproportionately people of color, who are
four times more likely to be arrested on cannabis charges than
are White people. Sometimes they were traveling from a State
where their possession of cannabis would have been legal or
just a minor offense but had the bad luck of being pulled over
in one of the states that still has not passed reform
legislation, as was the case with my arrest.
Today, I am trying to rebuild my life and avoid being sent
back to prison in Kansas. I cannot get time back, but I can
make the most of the time I have now. I very much hope that
this sub-committee and congress will take whatever steps are
necessary to make sure that in the future nobody else has the
kind of experience that I had.
Thank you for the opportunity to share my story. I
appreciate it very much.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD SUBMITTED BY DIRECTOR MICHAEL CARVAJAL
SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIR KAREN BASS
(1) Vaccinations
On November 23rd, the Associated Press reported that the
BOP has instructed wardens and other Bureau of Prisons staff
Members to prepare to receive a COVID-19 vaccine within a
number of weeks. Though the American Medical Association
recently passed a resolution stating that both prison staff and
incarcerated people ought to be among the first to receive the
vaccine, reports indicate that the BOP only intends to use
their initial supply for vaccinating staff.
Questions
(a) How much of the vaccine does the BOP need to provide
coverage to all those in your custody and for all personnel
working in your facilities?
(b) Do you have reason to believe that you will not be
receiving a sufficient amount of the vaccine? If you received
an adequate amount of the vaccine how would you prioritize who
initially receives the vaccine?
(c) Is it true that BOP intends to only vaccinate staff, in
the first instance? If so, what is the reasoning behind this?
What is BOP's timeline for providing the vaccine for those in
custody?
(d) Is there a BOP policy on distribution of the COVID-19
vaccine? If so, please provide a copy.
(e) Who has been consulted in developing this policy?
(f) When will the BOP share this policy publicly and post
the information on its website?
(2) Prisoner Transport
As we understand it, the Bureau of Prisons has a limited
moratorium on prisoner transport. It has been reported that,
from the outset of the pandemic, BOP has continued to accept
inmates from local and private facilities, via the U.S.
Marshals Service, without first requiring a negative COVID-19
test. The BOP's own internal guidance was not mandated on
outside entities, to include the U.S. Marshals, whose continued
transfer of COVID-19-positive inmates, and in some instances,
visibly and seriously ill inmates, arguably resulted in the
proliferation of COVID-19. Indeed, over the months of the
pandemic, the virus has ``spiked'' at different BOP facilities
and several facilities have become hot spots for COVID-19
(e.g., Terminal Island, Oakdale, Elkton, Butner, Fort Dix,
etc.).
Yet, as of November 23, 2020, BOP has apparently lifted
even the limited prisoner transport moratorium it had in place.
Social visits, as we understand, have also resumed.
Questions
(a) Our country is in the midst of the worst spike in cases
since the beginning of the pandemic. People are dying from
COVID-19 at extraordinary rates. We know that COVID-19 can
spread into and in correctional institutions when prisoners are
transferred from one location to another. Why, at this time,
has BOP lifted the moratorium on prisoner transfers?
(b) Regarding social visits, why have these resumed? Is BOP
conducting any kind of contact tracing in relation to social
visits?
(c) How do you justify the policy of simply accepting
whatever persons the Marshals bring to BOP, without regard for
whether they are infected and would, therefore, spread the
virus into a BOP facility?
(3) BOP COVID-19 Protocols
The Justice Department's inspector general has reported
that the Federal Correctional Complex in Oakdale, Louisiana,
failed to isolate or quarantine prisoners who were exposed to
or who tested positive for COVID-19. The report found that
``some inmates who had tested positive were left in their
housing units for up to 6 days without being isolated.'' In the
BOP's COVID-19 Pandemic Response Plan, released on September 8,
2020, the BOP requires that a person who tests positive for
COVID-19 be immediately placed under medical isolation.
Questions
(a) At the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2, 2020, you stated
that prisoners who test positive for COVID-19 are isolated, but
we keep hearing that they are not--and COVID-19 keeps spiking
in BOP facilities across the country. What specific steps were
taken and are still being taken, in every BOP institution, to
address the Inspector General's findings?
(b) More generally, what resources are being provided to
individual facilities to ensure that incarcerated people are
able to practice good hygiene?
(c) Is the BOP taking steps to ensure compliance with mask
and social distancing requirements in its facilities? What
steps are those?
(d) At this point in time, what is the status of the supply
of personal protective equipment for
staff and prisoners? Could Congress be doing more to ensure
you have what you need?
(4) Testing
It has been reported that as of November 3, the Bureau of
Prisons had tested roughly 56% of its population and, in
addition, that the BOP only tests those who show symptoms of
COVID-19. In early October, Senator Elizabeth Warren, Senator
Cory Booker, and Representative Nanette Barragan introduced
legislation to improve the BOP's response to COVID-19. This
legislation calls for weekly surveillance testing, expanded
contact tracing in prisons, and expanded data collection. This
type of legislation is necessary because there is cause for
concern that the BOP is not taking adequate steps to locate
individuals who are positive for COVID-19, or to conduct
appropriate contact tracing to limit further spread.
Questions
(a) Is this the type of intervention from Congress that
would be helpful to you?
(b) What is the BOP's testing strategy? How many prisoners
have been tested as of this date
(c) Has this testing strategy been made public?
(d) Were public health officials consulted in the
development of this strategy? Who was consulted?
(e) Does the BOP have procedures in place for contact
tracing in the event an incarcerated person or staff member
begins showing symptoms of COVID-19 or tests positive for
COVID-19? If not, why not? If so, what are these procedures?
Where are these procedures made public? Were public health
officials consulted in the development of this strategy?
(f) Can you guarantee that every prisoner released from a
BOP facility has been tested before being released or
transferred from the facility? What is the procedure if a
prisoner tests positive before being released or transferred?
At the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2nd, you stated that
BOP corrections officers were, in some instances, reluctant or
refusing to be tested for COVID-19.
(g) How pervasive is this reluctance to be tested?
(h) What can Congress do to assist BOP in obtaining both
availability of testing for staff, as well as compliance with
testing by staff?
(5) Compassionate Release
The Department of Justice has instructed federal
prosecutors responding to a motion for compassionate release to
take the position that being at risk of death or serious
illness from COVID-19, due to Centers for Disease Control-
identified risk factors, is ``an extraordinary and compelling
reason'' within the meaning of the statute. BOP could also take
this position and either request the release of prisoners with
serious risk factors or approve their requests for release.
During the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2nd you made clear that
the compassionate release process is more complicated than
merely home confinement because it essentially results in the
actual reduction of a person's sentence. We understand that;
although we also understand that it is ultimately the court
that decides whether or not to reduce the sentence.
During the hearing, you acknowledged that federal courts
have granted approximately 2,000 motions for compassionate
release. The vast majority of these have been to protect
prisoners vulnerable to COVID-19. By contrast, federal courts
granted 166 reduction in sentence motions between January 2019,
when the First Step Act was enacted, and the end of February
2020.
Based on information obtained through the Freedom of
Information Act, the Marshall Project has reported that, during
the first three months of the pandemic, BOP approved 11 of the
10,940 compassionate release requests it received. That
represents 0.1 percent of requests received.
The data did not indicate whether any of those approvals
were based on a heightened vulnerability to severe illness from
a COVID-19 infection.
Questions
(a) Beyond the first three months of the pandemic, has the
rate of approval continued to be 0.1%? In other words, is the
BOP Office of General Counsel still approving only
approximately 0.1% of compassionate release requests?
(b) Has BOP approved any compassionate release requests
based on a heightened vulnerability to severe illness from a
COVID-19 infection?
(c) How many requests for sentence reduction motions have
wardens or BOP denied during the COVID-19 emergency period? Out
of how many requests?
(d) How many motions for sentence reduction has the Bureau
of Prisons filed on behalf of prisoners in its custody since
the beginning of the COVID-19 emergency period?
(e) Why hasn't BOP filed more reduction in sentence motions
for prisoners?
(f) Does BOP have any plans to increase the use of
compassionate release? If so, what are these plans, and, if
not, why not?
(g) Has the Bureau informed all prisoners it deems possible
candidates for compassionate release of their right to request
relief?
(6) Home Confinement
On March 27, 2020, Congress came together to unanimously
pass the CARES Act, which authorized the Attorney General to
expand dramatically the use of home confinement to protect
vulnerable individuals from COVID-19. Attorney General William
Barr made the finding that triggered this expansion on April 3,
ordering BOP to expedite its use of home confinement. But,
later, a judge found, after hearing the testimony of the Warden
of FMC Devens, that BOP has adopted a policy that is ``utterly
inconsistent'' with the Attorney General's directive to
maximize home confinement. The Department of Justice's
Inspector General, too, has found that BOP has failed to fully
use its early-release authorities to transfer vulnerable
individuals to safety at hard-hit facilities like Lompoc
Federal Correctional Complex (FCC) and Oakdale FCC.
When you appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee in
June, you testified that BOP was ``prioritizing'' home
confinement over compassionate release. Congress is interested
in understanding what you mean by this. Yet BOP has not
answered calls by Members of Congress--including several on
this Committee--to produce detailed data about releases to home
confinement. During the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2nd, you
stated that 18,000 prisoners have been released to home
confinement since the start of the pandemic, but could not give
specific numbers on the ones that have been released
specifically under the authority of the CARES Act.
Question
(a) When will BOP produce data about the exact number of
transfers into home confinement pursuant to CARES Act
authority, rather than other authorities that existed prior to
the CARES Act? (This question was asked by at least three
Members of Congress at the hearing.)
(7) BOP Pandemic Response at Carswell Prison for Women
FMC Carswell, the hospital prison for women in Fort Worth
Texas, has reported over 500 cases of COVID and six deaths.
Half of those in the medical facility and 38 percent of those
in the compound have tested positive. During the first three
months of the pandemic, 349 women, about a quarter of the
prison's inmates, asked for compassionate release. The warden
denied or failed to respond to 346 of them, including a request
from Marie Neba, a woman with stage 4 cancer serving a 75-year
term for Medicare fraud. The government opposed her subsequent
motion for compassionate release. Even when she was on her
deathbed after contracting COVID-19, the warden refused to
grant her compassionate release so she could die without being
in handcuffs. At the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2, 2020, you
stated that ``most people'' who are not released ``aren't
released . . . because they have committed a crime of violence
or sex offense or they have a detainer or an Act of
terrorism.''
Questions
(a) With regards to the Carswell prison, please provide
specific data to show that most of those who have not been
released have not been released because they have committed a
crime of violence, a sex offense, an Act of terrorism, or have
a detainer.
(b) What justification is there for denying virtually every
woman in a hospital prison compassionate release? What was the
justification for denying Marie Neba?
(8) Employee Issues
In recent weeks, the Inspector General of the Department of
Justice has issued multiple negative reports about the Bureau
of Prisons' handling of the COVID-19 crisis, revealing
substantial mishandling of the crisis coupled with national
grievances from the National Prison Council.
Questions
(a) What steps have you taken to improve collaboration with
the national union to address the continued threat of COVID-19
in our federal prisons and their surrounding communities?
(b) Is there anything Congress can do to assist you with
issues involving BOP employees?
(c) Specifically, what additional resources do you need to
address their concerns? What are your main issues when
addressing the national union?
(9) Use of Restraints on Pregnant Women
At the BOP/USMS hearing on December 2nd, you testified that
only one pregnant woman in BOP custody has been restrained
since passage of the First Step Act, and only for a short
period of time.
Question
(a) Can you confirm that restraints were not used on Andrea
Circle Bear at any point while she was in BOP custody?
(10) Social Distancing
On October 27, the ACLU filed a lawsuit against the Bureau
of Prisons over its handling of COVID-19 at the federal
facility in Butner, NC. Among other things, the complaint
alleges that the BOP has not reconfigured housing units to
allow for social distancing. During a Senate Judiciary
Committee hearing in early June, Director Carvajal committed to
new efforts by the Bureau to create ``alternate living
[spaces]'' in recognition that the current layout of
correctional settings is ``not made for social distancing.''
Questions
(a) Please identify what percentage of BOP facilities have
been subject to such adjustments, especially in light of COVID-
19's current and expected acceleration this winter?
(b) How is the BOP ensuring and enforcing social distancing
if housing has not been adjusted?
(c) How is the Bureau ensuring continued access to
religious worship and services for prisoners that complies with
CDC safety guidelines?
(11) Transparency in Demographic Information
As of November 25, there were 4,159 identified COVID-19
cases in Bureau of Prisons custody, 19,563 recoveries, and 145
deaths among incarcerated persons, and 1,339 current cases,
1,824 recovered, and 2 deaths among staff Members that have
been reported. Alarmingly, even this limited data reveals a
large number of coronavirus cases among incarcerated people and
correctional staff, yet the data does not indicate the
demographic information--such as age, sex, gender, race,
disability, or sexual orientation--of staff or incarcerated
people under BOP custody. According to data from the COVID
Tracking Project, Black people nationwide are dying at over two
times the rate of White people (113 deaths per 100,000 compared
to 55 deaths per 100,000). To date, Black people account for
19% of COVID-19 deaths where race is known. In light of these
types of concerns, many Members of Congress have requested that
BOP collect and report demographic data.
Questions
(a) Is BOP recording any demographic information for
positive/negative cases, recoveries, hospitalizations, and
deaths? If so, what demographic data is being recorded?
(b) Given that demographic data is necessary to learn
whether any demographic groups are experiencing greater impact
from the virus (and whether there are any disparities in terms
of treatment or outcomes), can the data BOP has been collecting
pertaining to COVID-19 be disaggregated to permit reporting
about demographic information?
(c) Going forward, will BOP commit to collecting and
reporting demographic data?
(12) Quarantine and Solitary Confinement
Across federal facilities, rolling lockdowns and
quarantines have restricted movement and increased solitary
confinement. Reportedly, these have had the unintended
consequence of deterring prisoners from reporting symptoms for
fear of being placed in isolation or locked down. Public health
officials have recommended de-densification efforts, as well as
the use of medical isolation as uniquely distinct from punitive
solitary confinement. Yet, reportedly, punitive isolation
continues to be used in BOP in response to the pandemic. A June
2020 report found a 500% increase in solitary confinement in
federal and State jails in response to the outbreak of the
COVID-19 pandemic.
Questions
(a) Please provide the BOP's policy for quarantine during
the COVID-19 pandemic. Have individuals who tested positive
while in the process of being released been allowed to self-
quarantine at home?
(b) Will you pledge to immediately stop the practice of
using solitary confinement as a substitute for medical
isolation? If so, how does BOP plan to institute the use of
medical isolation in place of punitive solitary confinement?
(13) First Step Act Implementation
As you know, the First Step Act, mandated the development
and implementation of robust recidivism reduction programming
in the Bureau of Prisons. Our communities--not to mention
correctional staff--cannot afford an entire 2021 where the
majority of federal prisoners go without constructive
programming. According to the Council of State Governments,
over 20 states already use electronically secure tablets to
provide educational and rehabilitative programming for
prisoners.
Questions
(a) How are rehabilitative programming and productive
activities taking place during this period of modified
operations in BOP?
(b) What is the Bureau's strategy for continued recidivism-
reducing programs in the likely event of a ``third wave'' of
COVID-19 this winter or future acute outbreak?
(c) Is BOP able to use electronically secure tablets for
programming, as over 20 states around the country already do?
During this pandemic, it is critical for federal prisoners
to continue to receive support and accountability from family
Members, loved ones, and faith leaders. A March 2020 BJS report
using 2018 data found that 15 out of 122 federal facilities had
``video conferencing available to prisoners to communicate with
individuals outside of the criminal-justice process.''
(d) Today, in December, 2020, how many facilities now have
that capacity?
One key goal of the bipartisan First Step Act was to
facilitate greater BOP partnerships with outside third-party
institutions able and willing to provide evidence-based
programming and productive activities.
(e) Has the BOP made efforts to communicate or advertise
the opportunity for third party program providers to apply?
(f) If so, how many program applications from external
program providers are submitted, approved, or rejected at this
time?
In its explanatory statement for FY21 Commerce-Justice-
Science appropriations, the Senate Appropriations Committee
expressed the concern that the BOP's request for First Step Act
implementation ``covers existing programming, including
educational and counseling programming, which existed at BOP
long before the FSA.''
(g) Is this an accurate description of the Bureau of
Prison's budget request?
(h) How will BOP clearly distinguish between investments
and programming that preceded and followed the First Step Act
so that the public and lawmakers can clearly track the Bureau's
progress?
(14) Deployment of BOP and USMS Personnel During Protests
A June 2020 report by the Office of the Inspector General
called into question Special Operations Response Team (SORT)
training and specifically identified a number of dangerous
elements of regular SORT training. As you indicated during the
BOP/USMS hearing on December 2, 2020, BOP agents or employees
can be--and were this past summer--deputized as U.S. Marshals.
Questions
(a) Since June 2020, how many times have BOP agents or
employees been deputized as U.S. Marshals? When and for what
purpose?
(b) Regarding the June 2020 deputization of BOP personnel
as U.S. Marshals, how many complaints has the BOP received
concerning use of force or behavior contrary to regulations?
What is the status of those investigations?
(15) Issues Raised in Recent OIG Reports
The Office of the Inspector General identified that the
BOP, among other DOJ agencies, has implemented procedures to
comply with the Death in Custody Reporting Act's requirements
to document and report deaths of individuals in custody.
Questions
(a) What specific procedures has the USMS implemented to
comply with the Death in Custody Reporting Act?
The Office of the Inspector General found that the BOP
lacked procedures in place to ensure that vendors provided food
that meets USDA and FDA standards.
(b) What specific steps, if any, has the BOP taken to
ensure it serves safe, edible food?
(16) Questions Pertaining to Pandemic Response at Ft. Dix FCI
(a) Recently a moratorium on inmate transfers to Ft. Dix
FCI was lifted, despite a continued rise in positive COVID-19
cases at the facility. Since the moratorium was lifted on
November 24, 2020 multiple buses have arrived at the facility
carrying inmates that tested positive for COVID-19 upon
arrival. What is the BOP's rationale behind continuing to move
COVID-19 positive inmates to a facility with an outbreak of the
virus?
(b) Recently the publicly available number of active COVID-
19 cases on the BOP's COVID-19 dashboard dropped by nearly 200
overnight for Ft. Dix FCI. Can you please explain the reasoning
behind the decision to confirm that these inmates are no longer
carriers of the virus and do not pose a threat to spread COVID-
19 to other inmates and correctional officers? Were all of
these inmates tested to ensure they were negative for COVID-19?
(c) Multiple reports in the media have indicated a severe
lack of quality medical care for COVID-19 positive inmates at
FCI Ft. Dix. What is the BOP's procedure for caring for
symptomatic COVID-19 patients? What is the procedure for BOP
medical staff if an inmate's condition rapidly deteriorates?
(17) Questions Submitted on Behalf of Congressman Eric
Swalwell, Member of the House Judiciary Committee
These questions pertain to Michael Cohen, who, until May of
2020, was imprisoned at FCI Otisville.
(a) Which BOP officials reviewed Mr. Cohen's conditions of
release? Who ultimately approved the conditions of release, to
include prohibitions on his ability to write or publish
materials?
(b) Did BOP officials receive any communications from the
Department of Justice or White House concerning Mr. Cohen's
conditions of release? If so, please produce those documents
and communications in their entirety.
(c) Which BOP or U.S. Marshals monitored Mr. Cohen while he
was released from federal correctional custody? Who in the
Department of Justice reviewed the reports of Mr. Cohen's
compliance? To whom were reports of his compliance forwarded?
(d) Upon his release, what, if any, communications did the
Department of Justice or the White House have with BOP
officials concerning Mr. Cohen's behavior or compliance with
the conditions of his release?
(e) Did BOP officials receive any communications from the
President's personal counsel concerning Mr. Cohen's conditions
or terms of release. If so, please produce those documents and
communications in their entirety.
(f) Which BOP officials reviewed and who ultimately
approved the transfer of Mr. Cohen from furlough and home
confinement to jail?
QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD SUBMITTED MICHAEL CARVAJAL FROM REP.
VAL DEMINGS
1. On August 26th, I met with representatives from FCC
Coleman and Bureau of Regional Director Jeff Keller. During
that meeting we discussed the deployment of BOP created
``strike teams'' to inspect and audit certain BOP facilities
regarding their use and compliance with BOP COVID-19 protocols
and provide recommendations to rectify issues identified
a. LWith regards to the work of the ``strike teams,'' which
facilities were inspected?
b. LWhat specifically were the teams directed to audit and
inspect?
c. LWhat were the results of these audits and inspections?
d. LDid any policy recommendations result from the audits
and inspections?
e. LWill you commit to providing this Committee with the
results of the audits and inspections, including any policy
infractions, resulting discipline, and recommendations?
2. With the critical budgetary concerns and shortages, what
was the rationale for purchasing UV body scanners for some of
its facilities, in lieu of more effective COVID-mitigation
measures?
3. What steps has BOP taken to mitigate staffing shortages
and issues that are COVID-related? Is BOP still widely using
``augmentation'' to respond to staffing issues?
QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD DONALD W. WASHINGTON FROM CHAIR KAREN
BASS
(1) Transparency and COVID-19 Protocols
The U.S. Marshals Service has custody of over 61,000
individuals awaiting trial, sentencing, or transfer into the
Bureau of Prisons, about 70% of whom were held in over 850
different state, local, or tribal facilities under the terms of
intergovernmental agreements. Despite repeated requests from
this Committee and other Congresspeople, and in contrast to the
BOP, there is no public source that reports the number of
COVID-19 cases among those in USMS custody, nor have you
published a COVID-19 response protocol. Basically, the only
information the public has about what is happening in USMS
custody in relation to COVID-19 is contained in occasional
statements given to the press. Most recently, your agency
reported that 6,676 individuals in its custody had tested
positive for COVID-19 and that 20 had died. During the hearing
before the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland
Security of the House Judiciary Committee you indicated that
this information is sometimes difficult for the USMS to obtain,
but, during the hearing, you were requested to provide it
nonetheless.
Questions
(a) What is the current data regarding the number of
infections, hospitalizations, and deaths, for both detainees
and staff?
(b) Will you commit to begin immediately publishing on the
USMS website basic COVID-19 data (as the Bureau of Prisons
does) and as has been repeatedly requested by Members of this
Committee and others in Congress?
(c) Does the USMS have a COVID-19 protocol that it requires
contract facilities to follow? How are you auditing compliance
with that protocol? If no protocol exists, what audit
procedures has the USMS adopted to ensure safe and humane
conditions during this crisis? Will you commit to publishing
those audits immediately?
(2) Movement of Prisoners and Transfers
Over the past months, there have been numerous reports that
the U.S. Marshal Service's failures to adequately test or
screen individuals for COVID-19 have led to the spread of the
disease across the country. In August, the Office of the
Inspector General reported that ``USMS's decentralized system .
. . creates potential safety issues as detainees are
transferred between facilities and to and from federal
courthouses and U.S. Attorney's offices.''
Questions
(a) What steps, if any, is the USMS taking now to remedy
these failures and in response to the OIG's report?
(b) Will you commit to publishing data about transfers and
testing protocols?
We have heard accounts of people in Marshals custody being
moved across State and county lines and placed into local jails
with no information on their transfer paperwork about whether
they have been tested for or have COVID-19. In light of this
information, there is a legitimate concern that individuals in
your agency's custody are contributing to community spread of
the coronavirus, when placed in contract facilities around the
country. Some local courts and jail administrators have worked
hard to protect people in jails and the community from the
pandemic by decreasing the jail population, providing adequate
PPE, and other measures.
Question
(c) Can you guarantee that Marshals policy and practice
during the pandemic has not been at cross-purposes with these
local efforts or led to community spread of the coronavirus?
(3) Access to Counsel
The pandemic has sharply curtailed pretrial access to
counsel, given that in many instances attorneys cannot meet
with their clients in person and given that many facilities are
in virtual lockdown. Attorneys with clients in USMS custody are
no exception. There are ample examples of the challenges
experienced by pretrial detainees from the lack of access to
counsel, including being able to get needed medical attention
during this pandemic.
Questions
(a) Has the USMS issued directives to its contracting
facilities about how they must facilitate access to counsel
during the COVID-19 pandemic?
(b) Has the USMS undertaken any national efforts to support
the expansion of video conferencing for legal visits in local
(public or private), state, and tribal facilities? If so, will
you commit to publish those communications, or to produce them
to this Committee?
(4) Demographic Data Collection
According to data from the COVID Tracking Project, Black
people nationwide are dying at over two times the rate of White
people (113 deaths per 100,000 compared to 55 deaths per
100,000). To date, Black people account for 19% of COVID-19
deaths where race is known. The U.S. Marshals Service does not
make racial demographic data--pertaining to cases, recoveries,
and deaths--available to the public.
Questions
(a) Is the USMS recording any demographic information for
positive/negative cases, recoveries, hospitalizations, and
deaths? If so, what demographic data is recorded? If data is
being recorded, why has that data not been made publicly
available?
(b) Can you promise to make any demographic data you have
been collecting publicly available as soon as possible?
(5) Use of Restraints on Pregnant Women
In 2008, the Bureau of Prisons ended the practice of
routinely shackling pregnant women and the First Step Act of
2018 outlawed the practice except in very limited
circumstances. Both the American Correctional Association and
the National Commission on Correctional Healthcare have adopted
standards opposing the use of shackles; however, these
standards are only guidelines and are voluntary. At the end of
the December 2, 2020 BOP/USMS hearing, your staff indicated
that you would be reporting to the Committee the number of
times restraints were used on pregnant women in USMS custody. I
have reviewed your December 28, 2020 annual report to Congress
pertaining to USMS compliance with section 301 of the First
Step Act of 2018.
Questions
(a) Please provide information about the number of times
restraints have been used on pregnant women in USMS custody,
for as far back as you have been collecting such data. Please
provide details pertaining to each instance that restraints
were used and the rationale for their use.
(b) Your December 28 report provides USMS data pertaining
to the use of restraints on pregnant women, from October 1,
2019 through September 20, 2020. Please provide the same data
since September 21, 2020.
(c) The case of Andrea Circle Bear (a.k.a., Andrea High
Bear) was mentioned during the December 2 hearing. Ms. Circle
Bear was eight months pregnant, gave birth while on a
ventilator, in BOP custody, and ultimately died from COVID-19.
Can you confirm that restraints were affirmatively not used on
Ms. Circle Bear when the U.S. Marshals transported her from
South Dakota to FMC-Carswell, in Texas?
(d) More generally, what is the USMS's policy regarding the
use of restraints on pregnant women? What is your specific
policy pertaining to the use of restraints while transporting
pregnant women?
(6) Issue Raised in Recent OIG Reports
The Office of the Inspector General identified that the
BOP, among other DOJ agencies, has implemented procedures to
comply with the Death in Custody Reporting Act's requirements
to document and report deaths of individuals in custody.
Question
(a) What specific procedures has the USMS implemented to
comply with the Death in Custody Reporting Act?
[all]