The Death of Compassion

The following statistical analysis does not rely upon persuasion.  It relies upon facts published by the United States government.

After reviewing these facts there is no other conclusion that can be made except this:  Since George Bush II has ascended into office, Compassion has died a stingy death.

Year-by-Year Facts:

• Clemency Acts 1900 to 1945 for a total of 12,661
• Clemency Acts 1945 to 2001 for a total of 9,823
• Clemency Acts 2001 to 2007 for a GRAND total of 116 (as of 2/21/07)
• United States Population 1900 to 2007

Acts of Clemency 1900 to 2001 average annually:               225

Acts of Clemency by George H. Bush average annually:        19

Note:  Given our population growth, if the average annual pardon rate of the 1920's was in force today, we would have in excess of 1,000 per year.  As shown above, we have only average 19 for the last 7 years!

Conclusion:

The conclusion - aside from the fact that Compassion has no quarter in today's White House - is that the pardon power of the presidency doesn't work.  It is broken and there is no one in the Executive Branch who cares to fix it.

SOLUTION:  Pass legislation at the federal level (and all state levels not already providing for recognition of rehabilitation) granting access to fitness hearing and receipt of a Certificate of Rehabilitation (COR).  Click HERE to read the bill as of January 1, 2008.  The COR would permit persons convicted of certain non-violent federal offenses to seek clearing of the conviction by filing a petition with the federal judge who rendered sentencing.

While Congressman Rangel's proposed legislation (HR 623) is a good start it simply does not go far enough and we will continue working for passage of a COR. 

For example, what difference does it make 5, 10 or 15 years after a person is released from prison and during this interim period having led a civil life and provided the community with continuing services, that the person had a so-called "crime of violence" - which can be interpreted as a burglary, a petty theft, getting into a fight with one's spouse, etc.  For example, 18 USC § 16, defines "crime of violence" as:

(a) an offense that has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or property of another, or

(b) any other offense that is a felony and that, by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense.

Thus, a "teenager" convicted of joy-riding would have a conviction for a "crime of violence."  Rangel's bill doesn't take into consideration factors that should be allowed to the discretion of a federal judge.  We request that attention be brought to some of these issues.

Additionally, Rangel's proposed legislation requires that the petition be filed in the sentencing court.  During the completion of a lengthy federal sentence and a five-year waiting period required to seek clearance, a lot can certainly happen - including moves from East Coast to West Coast.  Thus, any legislation should allow a person seeking the right to prove rehabilitation to apply in the federal judicial district that is the place of their habitual abode.

Nevertheless, HR623 is an admirable start.  However, the TRP no longer supports Rangel's bill and, instead, is promoting its own Certificate of Rehabilitation (COR) that is already provided for in federal law but is lacking in procedural definition.