In March, I was waiting in line for the kiosk and noticed a memo posted on the bulletin board. Signed by the director of the Division of Adult Institutions, it was addressed to death row inmates.
The memo explained that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) had implemented a pilot program two years earlier, allowing eligible death row inmates at San Quentin State Prison to voluntarily transfer to other high-security general population prisons.
Called the “Condemned Inmate Transfer Pilot Program,” it was created by California Proposition 66, approved by voters in 2016. The goal of the initiative was to integrate condemned inmates into general population prisons, so they could work and pay restitution fines to their victims.
The move allowed CDCR to phase out the practice of separating people on death row from others based solely on their sentence and removed the maximum custody designation for them. In addition, CDCR would now determine where an inmate should be housed based on one’s behavior, risks, needs and other individual case factors, including safety concerns and one’s physical and mental health.
In some cases, being housed in general population facilities would enable a person to be closer to their family or county of commitment, where they were confined awaiting trial. While people who are condemned would still be classified similarly as a prisoner who is serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole, this could provide greater access to rehabilitation programs, more community and a chance to return to society. They could also potentially hold prison jobs that would allow them to pay restitution.
But the truth of the matter is more complicated. The idea that death row inmates could have greater access to jobs to pay restitution to their victims is impractical, even disingenuous.
Death row inmates are officially considered “close custody” inmates, meaning they require more supervision but need not be placed in segregated housing. Inmates with this designation are also not allowed to go beyond prison walls for employment opportunities or vocational program training because of their high risk of escape.
Claiming to provide death row inmates with jobs and other rehabilitation programs is just a way for CDCR to entice death row inmates to voluntarily get off death row, ultimately saving the state money.
It’s expensive to house inmates on death row. And the California administration has finally come to terms with the high cost, too. Now, advocates inside and outisde government are starting to lobby for the abolition of the death penalty in California altogether — for moral reasons, yes, but for financial ones too.
In 2019, Gov. Gavin Newsom issued an executive order placing a moratorium on the death penalty.
In the end, this seemingly well-intentioned program might do little good for prisoners on death row.
My understanding is that these inmates automatically have single-cell status, which is a blessing for a prisoner serving a long sentence. If they volunteer to get off death row, then they likely have to forfeit their single-cell status.
What’s more, once a death row inmate enters the general population prison, the only employment he or she is likely to obtain is a support services job such as groundskeeping, janitorial work or maintenance. The pay rate for these jobs is anywhere between 8 and 37 cents an hour. With such low pay rates, how could death row inmates or anyone else be expected to pay restitution fines to their victims?
The only true solution is to start paying prisoners the state minimum wage.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
Republish this article
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Here are our ground rules:
- You must credit Prison Journalism Project. In the byline, we prefer “[Author Name], Prison Journalism Project.” At the top of the text of your story, please include a line that says: “This story was originally published by Prison Journalism Project” and include a link to the article.
- No republishing of photographs, illustrations or graphics without specific permission. Please contact inquiries@prisonjournalismproject.org.
- No editing the content, including the headline, except to reflect changes in time, location and editorial style. For example, changing, “today” to “last week,” or San Quentin to San Quentin, California. You can also make minor revisions for style or headline size, and you can trim stories for space. You must also retain all original hyperlinks, including links to the Prison Journalism Project newsletters.
- No translation of our stories into another language without specific permission. Please contact inquiries@prisonjournalismproject.org.
- No selling ads against our stories, but you can publish it on a page with ads that you’ve already sold.
- No reselling or syndicating our stories, including on platforms or apps like Apple News or Google News. You also can’t republish our work automatically or all at once. Please select them individually.
- No scraping our website or using our stories to populate websites designed to improve search rankings or gain revenue from network-based advertisements.
- Any site our stories appear on must have a prominent and effective way to contact you.
- If we send you a request to remove our story, you must do so immediately.
- If you share republished stories on social media, please tag Prison Journalism Project. We have official accounts on Twitter (@prisonjourn), Facebook (@prisonjournalism), Instagram (@prisonjournalism) and Linked In.
- Let us know when you share the story. Send us a note, so we can keep track.
California’s Effort to Integrate Death Row Inmates is Misguided
