Mario Cuomo gives the keynote address at the Democratic National Convention in San Francisco, 1984. Photo retrieved from newyorker.com
By Dylan Lenin M. Santos
The opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints expressed within this article represent those of the author, not the Stony Brook Undergraduate History Journal. Our journal is dedicated to maintaining a neutral historical perspective, while providing historians with a chance to publish their conclusions.
Mario Cuomo’s threat to flood United States Attorneys offices across the state with arrested drug suspects in 1990 was a long time coming.[1] Despite 7 years of both New York and the Federal Government expanding law enforcement and carceral infrastructure, Mario Cuomo, the 52nd Governor of New York, was faced with ever increasing crime rates and prisons that were perpetually overcrowded. Cuomo had reached a tipping point, realizing he could not merely fight drug abuse by throwing drug addicts in jail. Rather, he reversed his strict punitive policy regarding crime by 1989, instead also engaging in drug rehabilitation centers and continuing his strengthening of social welfare.[2] Despite shifting towards non-punitive policy at the end of his tenure as Governor, Cuomo’s prior “law and order” approach to criminal justice had already created a system of mass incarceration.
The topic of the American liberal’s contributions to mass incarceration is one of odd detail. The pressing question of how politicians like Mario Cuomo can expand systems of social welfare and at least rhetorically keep the plight of the poor and subjugated in mind, yet simultaneously construct a carceral system that encourages poverty and systemic racism, is a puzzling one. Cuomo deliberately pursued policies to expand carceral practices without full cognisance of their contributions to the perpetuation of mass incarceration and the detriment they would cause for those of lower socio-economic status. Therefore, Cuomo’s contributions to mass incarceration and its effects appear to have been those of unwitting intention, but an entirely willing agency.
Before the question of Mario Cuomo’s contributions to mass incarceration can be answered, his liberal views on expanding the social safety net must be discussed. Cuomo was a major advocate for the expansion of social welfare in order to combat poverty. One of his first actions as Governor in 1983 was the raising of house allowances for welfare recipients by 25%, increasing the allowance cap for the first time since 1975 and allowing an added 570,000 households to receive welfare benefits.[3] This was a large increase and is indicative of Cuomo’s liberal views and his attempts to alleviate poverty and financial inequity within New York. However, such legislation also runs against Cuomo’s expansion of law enforcement and carceral systems which only proved to worsen the conditions of poverty and inequity. As Cuomo’s intention to alleviate such issues is clear, it lays credence to the notion that Cuomo was unwitting to his active contributions to the systems of mass incarceration in New York and its effects.
This paradoxical attitude can be seen in one of Mario Cuomo’s first contributions to mass incarceration, as such an attitude demonstrated Cuomo’s lack of awareness regarding the effects of his actions. During his first term as Governor, Cuomo signed bills to provide for 3,400 prison cells along with two new prisons, one being entirely new and another being converted from a jail in Erie County, New York.[4] These bills evidently expanded the carceral institutions that aid mass incarceration, however it’s within the passage and debate of this bill that demonstrates Cuomo’s unwitting nature.
As Cuomo dealt with the passage of this particular bill, he proposed that contracts to convert the Erie County jail should be reserved for companies led by minorities or women.[5] One can only ponder on how such a motion could produce any kind of outrage, yet that is exactly what this proposal produced. Despite that the bill had already passed through the state legislature, Republicans repudiated the motion and threatened to withhold the bill from Cuomo’s desk to stop him from signing it. In an undemocratic motion of resistance, Republicans forced Cuomo to come to the bargaining table. Instead, the bill mandated corporations that acquired contracts with Erie County to also sub-contract with minority and women-led companies.
The debate around this bill is indicative of a few aspects of Mario Cuomo’s contribution to mass incarceration and its unequal effects on minority populations. Mario Cuomo recognized that minorities were disadvantaged within American society, as proven by his attempt to reserve contracts for corporations spearheaded by such minorities. In addition, the fact that minorities were at a disadvantage would’ve been hard for Mario Cuomo to ignore, given that the median hourly wage of a black man was merely 73% of that of a white man by 1980.[6] Cuomo attempted to address these blatant problems through legislation, in the hopes that he might amend racial inequities. But these legislative attempts alone were not the only actions indicative of Cuomo’s realization of racial realities within the United States. This can be seen by his fight to keep at the least, mandated sub-contracting rights for minority led corporations. In contrast to his attempts to alleviate racial inequities, Cuomo signed a bill dramatically expanding New York’s carceral infrastructure.
It’s undeniable that incarceration rates disproportionately impact minorities which has persisted from the 1980s when Cuomo came to power, into the modern day. As stated by Gary Hunter and Peter Wagner in Prison Profiteers: Who Makes Money From Mass Incarceration, despite making up less than a quarter of the American population, Hispanic and Black Americans make up 63% of the incarcerated population.[7] By expanding New York’s prison system, Cuomo provided the material means to expand mass incarceration. It is ironic that Cuomo’s new Erie County prison was built by minorities to predominately incarcerate minorities. This irony, combined with the fact that Cuomo evidently understood American racial inequities and attempted to amend them through his expansion of social welfare and reservations of Erie County contracts, is striking. However, this trend of Cuomo’s unwitting contributions to mass incarceration and its effects were only compounded by the simultaneous war on drugs which was being carried out by the Federal Government. Such a worsening of mass incarceration would of course be awarded to President Ronald Reagan. When Reagan took office in 1981, he shared similar notions as Cuomo, that law enforcement and carceral systems had to be expanded in order to fight crime.
As discussed in From The War on Crime to The War on Poverty by Elizabeth Hinton, Reagan passed the bi-partisan Comprehensive Crime Control Act which punished urban landscapes that were suffering from poverty caused by deindustrialization and the loss of jobs that came with it.[8] By implementing punitive measures, such as allowing seizures of up to 90% of cash and property from accused drug dealers that could then be used to expand police budgets, this bill only managed to keep Americans poor and punish them for seeking alternative ways out of their situation. The punishment was to get oneself arrested, thrown into a prison cell and to become yet another statistic to add upon the national phenomena of mass incarceration. As Hinton states, this legislation mainly affected urban locations. Her examples of the downtrodden state of urban America came from New York City itself, describing industrial plant closures and abandoned buildings.[9] Thus Hinton gives partial reasoning as to why New York’s incarceration rates were increasing during the 1980s.[10] One could argue that Mario Cuomo would have seen these punitive policies as antithetical to his liberal views, as such policies targeted the “downtrodden,” that being the poor, and by a disproportionate extension, minorities.
Cuomo had beaten Reagan in the hypothetical race of who could fund law enforcement faster. In the beginning of 1983, Cuomo had proposed an extra $115 million to expand the number of police officers, state prison cells and district attorneys to fight crime and address prison overcrowding.[11] It should also be noted that, within this budget, money was allocated to crime victims, and around $4.5 million was allocated to explore alternatives to imprisonment. One may infer that, even as Cuomo contributed to mass incarceration, he was exploring alternative strategies to combat crime. Despite the possible alternatives, Cuomo further expanded carceral systems six years later. This decision proved to further burden New York City, as it was simultaneously assaulted by punitive laws, deindustrialization, and poverty.
Cuomo’s efforts to fight crime and poverty mainly ended in failure, only contributing to furthering the poverty and despair amongst those he aimed to help. The failures of these policies were discussed in a 1986 opinion piece written by Robert Gangi, then the executive of The Correctional Association of New York, a policy organization that was concerned with criminal justice issues. In this opinion piece, Gangi states multiple shortcomings of Cuomo’s legislation to fight crime, citing increasing incarceration rates, crime rates and the never ending reality of overcrowded prisons, despite major increases in the number of state prisons.[12]
Cuomo’s policies were not working, and the entirety of New York was facing the repercussions of repeated policy failure. As more people were thrown into prisons, the demand for more law enforcement and prisons themselves increased, creating the self fulfilling prophecy of mass incarceration. It should also be noted that it was primarily the poor who were thrown in jail for drug use. Rising incarceration rates were indicative of Cuomo’s systematic punishing of poor people for turning to drugs to sustain themselves or to cope with their predicament. There were, however, solutions that Gangi proposed, such as drug treatment centers, reviving probation programs and the easing of punitive policy towards drug offenses and other crimes.[13] As Gangi explained, these policies would relieve prison overcrowding and allow for prisons to become rehabilitative instead of punitive. This line of logic follows the notion that if a prison is purely punitive, when a prisoner is released into the public they will simply commit another crime and be sent back into prison. Much in the line of the argument that Cuomo was an unwitting contributor to mass incarceration, Gangi went on to state the following about Cuomo and his expansion of New York’s carceral infrastructure:
Governor Cuomo’s prison policies qualify him not for praise but for a dubious-achievement award. Despite the Governor’s sometimes stirring rhetoric about government’s responsibility to care for poor people, unless he alters his course, history will likely identify him Mario Cuomo, the prison-builder.[14]
It would take another three years for Cuomo to realize that there was a possibility that his focus on law enforcement and expanding carceral infrastructure were detrimental to his efforts to help the less fortunate.
It was during Cuomo’s seventh State of the State on January 7, 1989 that he abruptly changed course and took a sharp left turn away from typical punitive policy. In a slew of panicked attempts to amend his mistakes, Cuomo began passing bills and lashing out at his Federal counterparts. In what could be compared to a New Year’s resolution, Cuomo advocated for an expansion of 5,500 drug treatment slots within New York State, an increase of 10%, with the end goal of creating a slot “for every individual who needs and wants one”.[15] Seemingly, Cuomo had begun to become cognizant of the effects of his policies, putting an emphasis on drug treatment rather than incarceration. Showing that when Cuomo became aware of his contributions to mass incarceration, he attempted to cull them. By providing drug rehabilitation centers, drug users could attempt to wean off of their addictions, hypothetically causing drug crimes to decrease by providing the means for individuals to conquer their addiction. Among this realization was a sudden and panicked flood of funds into drug rehabilitation. Later that same year, Cuomo would yet again attempt to bolster New York’s rehabilitation programs, planning to triple the number of residential treatment centers without a plan to pay for them.[16]
These attempts at providing rehabilitation show a different approach to drug use within New York State, providing drug users with rehabilitation instead of only incarcerating them. By moving away from tactics that would typically contribute to mass incarceration, Cuomo shows that he was not consciously contributing to mass incarceration. When he realized he was doing so, he restructured his approach to drug use in New York State to avoid what is mass incarceration.
Cuomo’s intentions became clear through seemingly panicked legislation and frustrated accusations aimed at the Federal Government. During the 126th Gettysburg Anniversary, Mario Cuomo gave a speech in which he used rather racial terminology to describe the then current status of the poor in 1989 as being that of “New Slavery,” inflammatory language meant to draw a parallel to the status of poor minorities in 1863.[17] He went on to criticize the lack of social welfare and drug abuse prevention spending by the Federal Government. As such, Cuomo was criticizing Federal failures as contributory to the institution of mass incarceration. Cuomo was referring to the Reagan administration’s reduction in social welfare spending, the removal of 500,000 American families from welfare rolls, 1,000,000 from food stamps, and up to 2,600,000 children from school lunch programs.[18] This, combined with the excessively punitive actions taken up by the Comprehensive Crime Control Act, created a system of oppression which punished those in poverty, a system which Cuomo had realized he only exacerbated.
When Cuomo realized that he was contributing to the system of mass incarceration, he lashed out at some of its foundations, such as the increased punitive measures for drug use and the weakening of the social safety net. As such, Cuomo’s incendiary insults went further than calling poverty a status of “New Slavery,” to the point where he threatened to flood the Justice Department with arrested drug suspects. His justification was that the Federal Government was not shouldering their share of the crime burden, as Cuomo blamed federal policies as making the situation far worse. In the New York Times article covering the threat, Cuomo’s anger with the Federal Government seeps through the page:
The Governor said the protest would be feasible, since drug offenses are covered under Federal and state law, which would allow local law-enforcement authorities to arrest drug suspects under Federal law and subject them to Federal prosecution. ”I’m thinking about it very, very seriously,” he said at his seventh annual law-enforcement forum in Manhattan.[19]
If Cuomo understood the degree of his contributions to mass incarceration and its effects on poverty in the beginning of his tenure as Governor, this sudden legislative reversal followed by drastic protest probably wouldn’t have occurred. After all, there isn’t much sense in suddenly becoming frustrated and angry with a lack of drug rehabilitation and ever decreasing social safety nets if Cuomo always understood that such actions contributed to the constant prison overcrowding and incarceration he faced. Essentially pointing towards the conclusion that Cuomo was completely oblivious to the system he was contributing to.
There is, however, a counter argument to this point, being that the State of New York was then undergoing financial problems and Cuomo clearly allowed the state to profit from mass incarceration[20]. Perhaps it’s possible that Cuomo was aware of the system he was contributing to, and he only rallied against the Federal Government’s actions against crime and poverty as they were an easy scapegoat. But while there is evidence to support such an argument, it’s one that is easily refuted in the face of all the prior stated evidence.
For example, one could point out that along with Cuomo’s expansion of drug rehabilitation, he allowed the state to seize houses of those who were arrested and linked to drug crimes while performing an excise tax on illegal drug sales.[21] Therefore, as this is an heinously punitive measure against all drug crimes which would provide profit for a financially troubled government, it’s possible that Cuomo understood what he was contributing to and sought to make a profit off of it. This is a hard claim to deny, as even as it appears that Cuomo sought to focus more on rehabilitation, he still managed to incorporate increasingly punitive measures that would clearly contribute to the systems of mass incarceration. However, if there is any clear cut evidence coming from Cuomo’s tumultuous relationship with carceral systems in New York, it’s that he is an incredibly stubborn person.
In terms of increasing social welfare while simultaneously contributing to New York’s carceral systems, Cuomo is incredibly consistent. To be aware of the effects of mass incarceration while also increasing social welfare funding would mean that Cuomo was purposefully self-sabotaging himself. It should again be stated that those who turned to drugs and were targeted for such use, as shown by Hinton, were the poor, the exact demographic that Cuomo was aiming to help with social welfare funding. In the face of no evidence regarding possible “kickbacks” from contractors who built state prisons, there is no possible argument that could be made that Cuomo was witting to what he was contributing to. It may be true that he passed legislation that allowed him to seize houses owned by drug criminals, but such a bill clearly wasn’t passed with a goal of cyclical profit off of the poor by contributing to mass incarceration. This is due to the fact that he actively engaged in passing bills to address drug use via rehabilitation, the exact reform proposed by Robert Gangi when discussing how to fix New York’s issues regarding drug crime.[22] Therefore, to refute such an argument insinuates that Mario Cuomo was aware that such legislation would contribute to mass incarceration. Rather, such actions are demonstrative of his attitude towards how drug crime should be handled, with Cuomo himself stating, “You cannot stop drug addiction with law enforcement … You must have law enforcement, but it is not enough.”[23]
While Cuomo contributed to mass incarceration, he was oblivious to its effects. His efforts to fight socio-economic inequality and poverty were shown through his efforts to strengthen New York’s social welfare system and his efforts regarding the conversion contracts of Erie County Jail. Cuomo’s contributions to mass incarceration indicate that he failed to realize that he was contributing to a system that was worsening the status of poverty by mistakenly promoting crime legislation that targeted the poor instead of helping them. Certainly, all the discussed expansions of carceral systems, be it increased punitive measures or the expansion of prison infrastructure all point to his willing attitude towards contributing to mass incarceration. Mario Cuomo certainly saved himself from the label of a “Prison Builder,” but he did not save himself from being the unwitting, yet willing contributor of mass incarceration that he was.
Endnotes
[1] Ralph Blumenthal. “Cuomo Ponders A War Against U.S. Drug War.” New York Times, Sep 28, 1990, Late Edition (East Coast). Accessed 11/28/20, https://www.proquest.com.
[2] Elizabeth Kolbert. “Cuomo Panel Urges More Anti-Drug Funds: Treatment of Addicts is Emphasized Over Law Enforcement. Cuomo Proposes Doubling Anti-Drug Funds.” New York Times (1923-Current File), Dec 01, 1989. Accessed 11/28/20, https://www.proquest.com.
[3] “CUOMO RAISES HOUSING ALLOWANCE FOR RECIPIENTS OF WELFARE BY 25%.” New York Times, Dec 03, 1983, Late Edition (East Coast). Accessed 11/28/20, https://www.proquest.com.
[4] “Cuomo Signs Measures to Pay for New Prisons.” New York Times (1923-Current File), Jul 29, 1983. Accessed 11/28/20 https://www.proquest.com.
[5] “Cuomo Signs Measures to Pay for New Prisons.”
[6] Eileen Patten. “Racial, Gender Wage Gaps Persist in U.S. despite Some Progress.” Pew Research Center. Pew Research Center, August 14, 2020. Accessed 11/28/20, https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/07/01/racial-gender-wage-gaps-persist-in-u-s-despite-some-progress/.
[7] Tara Herivel and Paul Wright, eds., Prison Profiteers: Who Makes Money from Mass Incarceration (New York, NY: New Press, 2008), 81.
[8] Elizabeth Kai Hinton, From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime: the Making of Mass Incarceration in America (Cambridge, MA, MA: Harvard University Press, 2016), 310.
[9] Elizabeth Kai Hinton, 316.
[10] Prison Policy Initiative, “New York Profile,” New York profile | Prison Policy Initiative ( Prison Policy Initiative), accessed November 28, 2020, https://www.prisonpolicy.org/profiles/NY.html.
[11] Susan Chira. “BUDGET PROPOSES SPACE FOR ADDITIONAL 2,300 PRISONERS.” New York Times, Feb 01, 1983, Late Edition (East Coast). Accessed 11/28/20, https://www.proquest.com.
[12] Robert Gangi. “Cuomo is Wrong on State Prisons.” New York Times (1923-Current File), Jun 21, 1986. Accessed 11/28/20 https://www.proquest.com.
[13] Robert Gangi.
[14] Robert Gangi.
[15] Elizabeth Kolbert, Special to the New York Times. “STATE OF THE STATES; Cuomo Plans A Major Effort to Fight Drugs.” New York Times, Jan 05, 1989, Late Edition (East Coast). November 28th 2020, https://www.proquest.com.
[16] Elizabeth Kolbert. “Cuomo Panel Urges More Anti-Drug Funds: Treatment of Addicts is Emphasized Over Law Enforcement. Cuomo Proposes Doubling Anti-Drug Funds.”.
[17] Sam Howe Verhovek. “Cuomo, at Gettysburg, Rails at ‘New Slavery’.” New York Times, Nov 20, 1989, Late Edition (East Coast). Accessed November 28th 2020, https://www.proquest.com.
[18] Elizabeth Kai Hinton, 314.
[19] Ralph Blumenthal.
[20] Elizabeth Kolbert, Special to the New York Times. “STATE OF THE STATES; Cuomo Plans A Major Effort to Fight Drugs.”.
[21] Elizabeth Kolbert, Special to the New York Times. “STATE OF THE STATES; Cuomo Plans A Major Effort to Fight Drugs.”.
[22] Robert Gangi.
[23] Elizabeth Kolbert. “Criminal Justice: Hard Goal for Cuomo: [First of a Series on the Cuomo Record as Governor of New York.].” New York Times, Oct 02, 1990, Late Edition (East Coast). Accessed November 28th 2020, https://www.proquest.com.