USING RANDOM JUDGE ASSIGNMENTS TO ESTIMATE THE EFFECTS OF INCARCERATION AND PROBATION ON RECIDIVISM AMONG DRUG OFFENDERS*

Most prior studies of recidivism have used observational data to estimate the causal effect of imprisonment or probation on the probability that a convicted individual is rearrested after release. Few studies have taken advantage of the fact that, in some jurisdictions, defendants are assigned randomly to judges who vary in sentencing tendencies. This study investigates whether defendants who are assigned randomly to more punitive judges have different recidivism probabilities than defendants who are assigned to relatively lenient judges. We track 1,003 defendants charged with drug-related offenses who were assigned randomly to nine judicial calendars between June 1, 2002 and May 9, 2003. Judges on these calendars meted out sentences that varied substantially in terms of prison and probation time. We tracked defendants using court records across a 4-year period after the disposition of their cases to determine whether they subsequently were rearrested. Our results indicate that randomly assigned variations in prison and probation time have no detectable effect on rates of rearrest. The findings suggest that, at least among those facing drug-related charges, incarceration and supervision seem not to deter subsequent criminal behavior.     

CRIMINAL INVOLVEMENT OF FEMALE OFFENDERS

Two theoretical approaches tend to dominate the literature on the manner in which exoffenders reintegrate into society. These are the structural and subcultural models. The structural model (Merton, 1938; Cloward and Ohlin, 1960: Ohlin, 1970) posits that closing of the legitimate opportunity structure leads to secondary deviation and it also traces initial criminality to a discrepancy between means and ends for achieving success goals. The subcultural model (Cohen, 1955; Pownall, 1969) views the primary factors explaining the failure of the exoffender to adjust to society as influences exerted by the criminal subculture. These have traditionally been treated as competing theoretical models. The research reported here sought to evaluate these two approaches and to combine them in an applied framework called differential integration. Data on 874 exoffenders provided with job placements during 1976 show that structural variables tended to differentiate the employment outcomes of exoffenders much more than subcultural variables and that there is partial support for the differential integration concept .     

Are Leftist Governments More Generous Toward Public Sector Employees? Evidence From Canada, 1967–1984

This article tests the hypothesis that leftist governments concede higher wage increases to their public sector employees than right-wing governments. Leftist governments are expected to be more generous toward public sector employees because of their commitment to public sector intervention, and because of the heavy representation of the public sector among leftist party elite and clientele. The study examines all major wage settlements signed between 1967 and 1984 in the Canadian provincial public sector and finds that, everything else being equal, wage increases are 10% higher under leftist governments. The standard economic variables (labor demand, expected inflation and spillover from previous contracts) that have been shown to affect wage increases in the private sector also emerge as significant. Finally, the data indicate that the greater the public debt the more constrained governments feel to negotiate minimal wage increases. These findings establish that a proper understanding of public sector labor relations requires a consideration of political as well as economic variables.