Abstract

There is a disconnect between the academy on the one hand, and the public, the Congress, and the courts on the other, with regard to punishment in the United States. The academy has highlighted the extraordinarily troubling implications of the mass imprisonment of the past two decades, the racial disparities, the social dislocation to poor communities and communities of color, the impact on this democracy of felon disenfranchisement, the extent to which retribution has surpassed all other purposes of punishment, displacing any effort to determine "what works" to reduce crime. But the public is barely a participant in these discussions. If it reads the tabloids, watches television, or surfs the internet, it hears an entirely different story, a story about dangerous crime rates and impending doom, a story about fear and retribution. And so long as it hears that story, it will support ever more punitive laws, and rail against judges who are widely perceived to be lenient.The story is in fact more complex, the proverbial "good news" and "bad news." The good news is that the public may not be as punitive as the media and politicians suggest, if they are given the facts. They understand sentencing and individualized treatment. They can tell the difference between the king pin and the mule, between the postal worker who steals a check and the Enron executive who rapes a company. The bad news is that courts, who know the individual facts, nevertheless face extraordinary pressures to be tough, no matter what the offense