Bill Overview
Title: Inmate Financial Accountability Task Force Act
Description: This bill establishes a joint task force to (1) develop a strategic plan to improve the criminal and civil debt collection process and establish an effective coordination mechanism among each entity involved in the process, and (2) develop a strategic plan to improve oversight of Bureau of Prisons inmate trust fund accounts for detecting and deterring illicit financial activity and money laundering.
Sponsors: Rep. Gooden, Lance [R-TX-5]
Target Audience
Population: Incarcerated individuals in federal prisons
Estimated Size: 150000
- The bill focuses on criminal and civil debt collection from inmates, impacting those who have committed financial offenses or have financial obligations related to their incarceration.
- It concerns inmate trust fund accounts, affecting inmates within the Bureau of Prisons system.
- The task force's work may influence policy affecting all incarcerated individuals in federal prisons, estimated around 150,000-160,000 individuals.
- Illicit financial activity and money laundering would particularly affect inmates with financial transactions.
- Improved coordination among entities will impact inmates by potentially changing how their financial obligations are managed.
Reasoning
- The Inmate Financial Accountability Task Force Act primarily impacts the financial management within the federal prison system, focusing on improving coordination and oversight of inmate financial activities.
- Inmates with financial obligations related to their incarceration or those engaging in irregular financial activities will be the most affected by the Act.
- The policy has a capped budget, and given the size of the prison population, the task force's initiatives may not directly influence every inmate immediately.
- Those directly impacted may see changes in how their financial obligations are managed, which could improve or worsen their perception of wellbeing depending on their involvement in financial activities.
- The scope of the task force's work may indirectly influence policies that could change inmate trust fund procedures across all federal prisons, having a broader systemic impact.
- Considering the implementation cost, direct financial oversight improvements may first target larger cases of misuse or those affecting multiple inmates.
Simulated Interviews
Inmate - Serving time for tax evasion (Federal Correctional Institution in Florida)
Age: 35 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about how the task force's findings might increase restrictions on my trust fund account usage.
- If they help clear the confusion in financial dealings and fines, it would ease a lot of stress.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Inmate - Serving time for fraud (Federal Correctional Complex in California)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy seems like it might make things harder for my family if they try to collect aggressively.
- I'm worried about being unfairly accused of misuse with new investigations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Inmate - Serving time for drug trafficking (United States Penitentiary in Texas)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the task force might stop some shady dealings that disrupt group activities.
- As long as it doesn't restrict positive uses of trust funds, it's a step forward.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Inmate - Serving time for money laundering (Federal Prison Camp in Colorado)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm likely in the crosshairs of these initiatives, but transparency might clear my record in the long run.
- Immediate stress could worsen as the task force digs in.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Inmate - Awaiting trial (Metropolitan Detention Center in New York)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If this task force makes it easier to manage my funds while I'm in here, that could really help.
- I worry about any unnecessary penalties or scrutiny.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Inmate - Serving time for a white-collar crime (Federal Medical Center in Kentucky)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- My main concern is maintaining access to my trust fund without undue hassle.
- As long as the task force helps to streamline processes, I support it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Inmate - Awaiting sentencing (Federal Detention Center in Pennsylvania)
Age: 23 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about my family's financial state if debts are pushed onto them.
- The task force might help me understand better how to manage my finances in here.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 3 |
Inmate - Serving time for racketeering and fraud (Federal Correctional Institution in Arizona)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased oversight could clarify my past transactions, which would be a relief.
- I'm skeptical but hopeful that it won't mean more penalties without reason.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
Inmate - Serving time for armed robbery (Federal Correctional Complex in Louisiana)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope the task force's actions don't mess up how I pay my fines from here.
- If it means better understanding for us, then it's a positive change.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
Inmate - Serving time for embezzlement (Federal Prison Camp in Alabama)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 12.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If this helps me manage restitution better, then it could be a positive change.
- My main goals are keeping things transparent and avoiding new, undue charges.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $3000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $3500000)
Year 2: $2500000 (Low: $2000000, High: $3000000)
Year 3: $2500000 (Low: $2000000, High: $3000000)
Year 5: $2500000 (Low: $2000000, High: $3000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The program's success depends on effective inter-agency coordination and technological advancements.
- Initial investments might lead to tangible benefits through improved collections and fraud reduction.