Leymon 2
“FIXED” SENTENCING REFORMS: THE EFFECT ON THE RACIAL
COMPOSITION OF IMPRISONMENT RATES OVER TIME
Sentencing guidelines, statutory presumptive sentencing, and determinate sentencing have
become an important part of the criminal justice system. The main purpose behind a relatively fixed
matrix of sentences is to remove judicial discretion by insuring that convicted felons receive a relatively
fixed sentence depending on the crime committed. Few studies have attempted to systematically answer
the question of whether these new “fixed” sentencing procedures or if the removal of parole boards
(determinate sentencing) produce the intended outcomes; furthermore, concern exists that they may be
contributing to an increase in increase in racial disparities. This study assesses the effects of sentencing
reforms on shifts within states’ (all 50 states) incarceration rates from the years 1978 to 1998. Prais-
Winston regression with panel corrected standard errors (PCSE) has been shown to be effective in
assessing data of this sort (cross-sectional time-series). This method incorporated with “fixed effects” for
states and controlling for violent crime rates, drug crime rates, percent black, percent Hispanic, percent
white, poverty rates, unemployment rates, percent urban, population density, new commitments to prison,
and parole violators returned to prison should help isolate the possible effects that sentencing reforms
have had on the racial disparity. Substantively, the results could indicate that reforms have unintended
consequences (e.g. growth in racial disparities). Functionally, rapid prison growth can be a logistical and
financial burden on a state and these results could help to shed light onto the specific mechanisms of
possible growth. Results indicate that “fixed” sentencing reforms do indeed increase imprisonment rates
and racial disparities over time.
Convention