The following article was researched, written, and submitted by Rachel Creed. Ms. Creed works in the Social Service area here on the Shore. She is currently pursuing her Masters Degree in Social Work from George Mason University.
House Bill No. 834, known as Cousins Bill (2024), is a component of a broader series of prison reform bills referred to as ‘Second Look’ laws. Introduced as an amendment to the Code of Virginia, this legislation would permit inmates in state or local correctional facilities, as well as secure facilities, to petition the court for early release after serving a minimum of 15 years. Eligible to both violent and non-violent convicts, the bill would offer the incentive of potential early release to inmates who demonstrate efforts towards self-reform, such as through the completion of rehabilitation or educational programs.
Status: (Introduced) 2024-02-13 – Left in Appropriations [HB834 Detail].
Eligible inmates would be permitted to submit such petitions once every three years, with a maximum of two petitions. Notably, the Cousins Bill mandates the applicable court to notify the inmates’ victims if their petition is approved to continue to a formal hearing.
The core social issue addressed by Cousins Bill is the retributive and excessively punitive consequences for criminal convictions, with a particular focus on rectifying the increasingly lengthy sentences that have been normalized in the United States since the 1980s. Evidenced by the legislation’s emphasis on providing incentivization for early release, the Cousins Bill reflects a societal desire to progress beyond a punitive criminal justice system towards one that prioritizes rehabilitation and community reintegration.
In the United States, incarceration was not initially intended to be punitive. Practicing English Common Law, early American colonists utilized incarceration as a temporary measure to precede criminal consequences, such as public shaming and execution. The country’s first prison reformation resulted from the conclusion of the Revolutionary War. As English Common Law was widely perceived as outdated and needlessly cruel, new legislation was written to create a criminal justice system that was based upon rehabilitation and mercy rather than shame and retribution. Thus, incarceration began to be implemented as a form of punishment in and of itself.
The nation’s second wave of prison reforms coincided with the Industrial Revolution, during which a mass influx of foreign immigrants prompted the construction of large state prisons. Following a brief setback—the Civil War—the construction of large prisons was hastily resumed as a response to the abolition of slavery. Increasing racial hostility fueled the implementation of long-term imprisonment as a means of social control over emancipated slaves.
The resulting conditions of state prisons produced the next phase of prison reform in the U.S. To address the excessive filth, disease, and overcrowding, large prisons adopted what was, at the time, considered to be rehabilitative systems of operating. One of these systems, the ‘Auburn System’, required inmates to work without cessation while remaining in complete silence for the entirety of their sentences. Invented by the state of New York, the Auburn System was adopted by the Commonwealth of Virginia alongside several other states in the mid-19th century.
Throughout the 20th century, the nation’s inclination toward rehabilitative approaches to criminal justice steadily increased. Scholars of the 1970s theorized that this philosophy would only progress until retributive and punitive measures for criminality were completely abolished. Nevertheless, the public’s preference for rehabilitation came to a brutal halt in the 1980s with the onset of the War on Drugs. As the initiative framed the alleged crime wave as an imminent crisis, ‘tough on crime’ policies were implemented nationwide to impose an unprecedented number of drug-related arrests, consequently producing the fastest-growing period of mass incarceration in the nation’s history.
As a component of ‘tough on crime’ policies, Virginia abolished the parole system in 1995, and replaced it with the probation system. This policy occurred alongside ‘truth in sentencing’ laws, which ensured that inmates would not be released before serving at least 85% of their sentence (Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission, 2005). In only five decades since the War on Drugs, Virginia’s rate of inmates serving life sentences increased by 90% (Justice Policy Institute, 2022). The commonwealth now holds claim to the 9th highest incarceration rate in the nation.
By 2010, Virginia experienced a resurgence of public interest in a rehabilitative approach to criminal justice. Subsequently, in 2017, Washington D.C. initiated sentencing reform with the Incarceration Reduction Amendment Act (IRAA), enabling inmates incarcerated before the age of 18 to petition for early release after serving a minimum of 20 years. Building on this, the Second Look Amendment Act of 2019, enacted in 2021, expanded the IRAA’s provisions to include inmates sentenced before the age of 25.
Interestingly, despite the nationwide crime surge in 2020, Americans did not regress to a punitive preference for criminal justice protocols as they did in the 1980s. Hannan et al. (2023) argued that the public did not attribute this crime surge to short prison sentences, but instead perceived it as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and mounting distrust in the criminal justice system ignited by the police slaying of George Floyd; nationwide distrust that was further solidified by the aggressive police response to public protests and the Black Lives Matter movement.
However, given that the number of violent crimes increased in the state by 7.1 percent in 2021, the public’s continuous support of rehabilitative approaches to criminal justice indicates that a larger shift in the American zeitgeist has taken hold.
Virginia Democrat Delegate Rae Cousins introduced H.B. 834 to the House on January 9th, 2024. Although this marks the third proposal of ‘Second Look’ policies in Virginia, supporters of the bill had high hopes that bipartisan support for this current effort would result in its passage. Two national surveys conducted in 2021 and 2022 revealed that over 75% of respondents supported Second Look legislation—this percentage includes individuals from all major subgroups. The surveys also indicated that respondents were more likely to support the early release of prisoners if they ‘signaled’ their recovery through participation in rehabilitation programs, received a recommendation from the warden, and had the support of the affected victims.
Cousins Bill has garnered the support of several political figures in the commonwealth, including Republican Senator Chap Peterson. In an interview defending his support for the bill, Peterson stated, “The trial judge would have 100% discretion…The commonwealth’s attorney would be involved, the victim would be involved, but effectively it’s a look at [those] that are long-term prisoners” (FOX 5 DC Digital Team, 2023). Delegate Carrie Coyner, a member of the conservative ‘Americans for Prosperity’ group, has been a public supporter of Second Look laws for three years. In a recent interview, Coyner stated that she is, “—a believer that people can be redeemed and rehabilitated”.
Former inmates Taylor Paul and Troy Ketchmore, each of whom started their respective rehabilitation programs, have also voiced their support for Cousins Bill. Ketchmore stated, “I am living proof that if you qualify yourself, you can come home and be productive”. Another former inmate turned advocate, Shawn Barksdale, stated, “I’m here to show what a second chance looks like”. However, Barksdale expressed skepticism about the ability of the bill to be effective in practice, as the impartiality of the judges could pose a challenge to the approval of hopeful inmates’ petitions.
Even victims, such as Sheba Williams, have voiced their support for the bill. Williams is the director of ‘Nolef Turns,’ a non-profit organization that assists former inmates and their families regain community stability. Williams has stated that she supports Cousins Bill, regardless of her disclosure that both she and her family have been victims of violent crime themselves.
The most prominent criticisms of the legislation concern the potential consequences its passage would present for community safety, the preservation of ‘truth-in-sentencing,’ and the well-being of affected victims. A central critic of the bill, Republican Senator Rob Bell, asserts that it would be unjust to release prisoners before they have paid the full price for their crimes (FOX 5 DC Digital Team, 2023). Mirroring the crisis-focused style of problem-framing that was rampant in the 1980s, Bell has attempted to convince the public that the bill would result in an imminent threat to public safety:
The longer the sentence, the more likely it is that this is a violent crime. We think it is very important that there be finality in the final judgment and we not retroactively change the sentence…Our goal is to make sure that these crimes are not being recommitted and so we believe truth in sentencing is an important part of that.
In a similar vein, spokesperson for Attorney General Miyares, Victoria LaCivita, feels that lengthy sentences are vital to prevent violent crime. In a recent interview, LaCivita remarked that the early release of inmates with violent convictions, “is not the solution to the growing crime spoke across the commonwealth”.
Another critique of the bill focuses on the effect its passage would have on victims. Attorney General Miyares has stated that the Cousins Bill, “—is another example of the criminals first, victims last mindset…This bill only re-victimizes individuals” (Carter, 2024, para.10). While Shawn Weneta of the ACLU has asserted that, “—a lot of victims [support] this bill” (FOX 5 DC Digital Team, 2023, p.2), many victims have voiced their opposition to its passing.
However, it should be noted that regardless of an early release, the former inmates will never be able to reclaim the years of their lives they lost to incarceration—fifteen years is not a light sentence. Make no mistake, the former inmates will never stop paying for their crimes. They will never be permitted to vote or own firearms. They will be sentenced to community probation for many years, under the close observation and supervision of the court, always prepared to be sent back to jail should they ever backslide into their criminal habits. As Virginia legally permits landlords and employers to deny applicants who are convicted felons, it can be incredibly challenging to avoid those criminal habits when former inmates attempt to reintegrate themselves into society. The stigma, the hardship, the poverty, and the guilt are all life sentences in and of themselves.
Some victims have expressed that they would support the bill if it did not require them to be notified about inmates’ petitions, as many have stated such notifications would be “retraumatizing”. Although the intention behind the mandatory victim notification is to spare them from unnecessary distress, the omission of such notifications could be equally distressing. This presents a significant challenge for mitigating the public’s perception and support of the bill. Policymakers who voted against the bill have defended their decision on the basis that the bill does not offer enough consideration to the victims.
The Cousins Bill also poses several positive consequences for the commonwealth. The number of incarcerated Virginians could be significantly reduced, as roughly 2500 incarcerated individuals would be granted the opportunity to petition for their freedom. If 2500 inmates were to be released, this would necessitate an increase in the number of probation officers, thus creating employment opportunities in communities all over the state. The bill’s impact statement estimated that this would cost the commonwealth less than $80 thousand annually for each hired probation officer. As the average caseload for a probation officer is 50:1 (Virginia Department of Corrections, 2022), this would require an estimated expenditure of $4 million. As of 2017, Virginia spends an average of $20 thousand annually on each inmate. If each of the 2500 eligible inmates were granted early release, the commonwealth would still save roughly $45 million annually.
One convincing argument for the passage of Cousins Bill is that it would give inmates incentives to work toward their reform and earn their release. The key word is that statement is earn; As former inmate Troy Ketchmore stated, “If you don’t qualify yourself, we won’t even be worrying about this”.The inmates who will be granted early release will be those who have successfully signaled their rehabilitation. Those same inmates are likely to exhibit a reduction in problematic and destructive behavior, both during and after incarceration, thereby diminishing the likelihood of eventual recidivism.
Nevertheless, accurately gauging true reform remains challenging, which makes it equally difficult to predict who may recidivate. It is worth noting that Virginia maintains one of the nation’s lowest recidivism rates, and there is limited evidence to suggest that the timing of an individual’s release significantly contributes to predicting recidivism with any measurable accuracy.
Perhaps the most consequential and hefty outcome of Cousins Bill is that it would result in the reunion of formerly incarcerated individuals with their friends and family. Those who re-enter the community will not only have the ability and knowledge to pursue a life that is free of crime and self-destruction; This second chance carries the potential to generate an entirely new appreciation for the value of liberty, life, and the pursuit of happiness. Maybe 15 years is enough.
About the Author
Or you could do like the Biden Administration. Just let criminal illegal aliens in by the thousands and protect them arrest. That way you can keep room in the jails for American citizens.
And we wonder why there is so much crime in general and violent crime in particular…