Body Analysis
The title of this research paper, “Balanced Justice”, could not be less appropriate considering its approach. A more appropriate title should be “Unbalanced Analysis”. The body of the research paper contains strictly shallow quantitative analysis of a limited set of variables, namely cost savings derived from a corresponding decrease in the amount of time a criminal remains behind bars. The authors have tried to prove that the independent variable of cost savings, through the use of cost-benefits analysis, is directly proportional to the dependent variables of sentencing guidelines, time served, recidivism and subsequent quality of life. Ms. Rosenberg and Mark have displayed that cost-benefits analysis can reduce cost, however whether these cost savings are a benefit to the system or society is not proven.
The headings used; Rethinking Policy, Calculating Impacts, and Net Benefits illustrate that the authors had a predetermined outcome, which …show more content…
Two illustrate prison populations, one shows EXAMPLE theoretical juvenile cost savings numbers, and one presents the percentage of federal budgets spent for research and development (R&D). Chart number one graphically represents the number of state and federal prisoners by year between 1980 and 2009. Unfortunately, there is no reference to this chart in the body of the text. The narrative mentions the Washington State Institute for Public Policy, are we to assume that these statistics represent the prison population only in Washington? The correlation between prison population and cost is obvious but there is a need to illustrate the interconnection graphically and textually. The next graph is similar in that it alleges to represent the prison and jail populations spanning the same number of years as chart one. Again, it is not referenced in the body nor is there any type of correlation. Chart number two does not provide any clue to the demographic
The title of this research paper, “Balanced Justice”, could not be less appropriate considering its approach. A more appropriate title should be “Unbalanced Analysis”. The body of the research paper contains strictly shallow quantitative analysis of a limited set of variables, namely cost savings derived from a corresponding decrease in the amount of time a criminal remains behind bars. The authors have tried to prove that the independent variable of cost savings, through the use of cost-benefits analysis, is directly proportional to the dependent variables of sentencing guidelines, time served, recidivism and subsequent quality of life. Ms. Rosenberg and Mark have displayed that cost-benefits analysis can reduce cost, however whether these cost savings are a benefit to the system or society is not proven.
The headings used; Rethinking Policy, Calculating Impacts, and Net Benefits illustrate that the authors had a predetermined outcome, which …show more content…
Two illustrate prison populations, one shows EXAMPLE theoretical juvenile cost savings numbers, and one presents the percentage of federal budgets spent for research and development (R&D). Chart number one graphically represents the number of state and federal prisoners by year between 1980 and 2009. Unfortunately, there is no reference to this chart in the body of the text. The narrative mentions the Washington State Institute for Public Policy, are we to assume that these statistics represent the prison population only in Washington? The correlation between prison population and cost is obvious but there is a need to illustrate the interconnection graphically and textually. The next graph is similar in that it alleges to represent the prison and jail populations spanning the same number of years as chart one. Again, it is not referenced in the body nor is there any type of correlation. Chart number two does not provide any clue to the demographic