Rethinking “Gate Money.”

When individuals are released from prison, their successful reintegration into society depends on various factors, including money.

Removing the acute financial stress in the early moments of release enables people to better focus on their reintegration. Providing adequate financial aid and professional reentry support during this critical transition period can significantly improve their ability to rebuild their lives.

In this article, we will explore the importance of increasing taxpayer funds given to individuals upon release, otherwise known as “gate money,” address concerns about increasing taxpayer-funded support, and propose a solution called "spending controls" that can ensure funds are used towards appropriate “reentry milestones.”

Public Investment in Reentry

“Gate money” is set by each State and is intended to assist individuals transitioning from prison to the outside world. It serves as a financial lifeline, helping to meet immediate needs such as food, housing, hygiene, clothing, and transportation.

However, the current amount of gate money provided to released individuals is insufficient, leaving them financially weak and impeding their chances of successful reentry.

In California, a person leaving prison receives $200. This amount has stayed the same since 1973. In Texas, individuals on parole receive two $50 paper checks: one upon release and another when they meet their parole officer. In many states, people receive no money at all.

Furthermore, gross inefficiencies in distributing gate money are costly to taxpayers and individuals.

Gate money given as paper checks are often cashed near a local bus station or liquor store for 10% of the amount. Gate money given on prepaid cards typically have predatory fees that consume the available balance. Often, individuals withdraw cash off a card at an ATM (incurring fees) or trade the card at a pawn shop for half the value. These fees are a direct waste of resources needed to support reentry.

Critics of Gate Money

While there may be differing perspectives on this matter, several arguments exist against providing gate money to individuals upon their release from prison. Here are a few reasons why some might argue against the provision of gate money:

Resource Allocation

Critics argue that allocating funds for gate money might divert limited resources from other critical areas, such as education, healthcare, or social services. They contend that taxpayer money could be better utilized by investing in programs that address the root causes of criminal behavior or support broader community needs.

Potential Misuse of Funds

Concerns are raised regarding the potential misuse of gate money. Critics argue that individuals might use the funds for illicit activities, such as drug and alcohol purchases or other criminal behavior, which could undermine public safety and perpetuate cycles of criminality.

Lack of Accountability

Others argue that providing gate money without proper oversight or accountability enables individuals to make poor financial choices. They suggest that individuals leaving prison should take personal responsibility for their financial well-being by seeking employment, utilizing community resources, and accessing support programs rather than relying solely on financial assistance.

Dependency and Motivation

Critics contend that providing gate money could create a dependency mindset among released individuals, discouraging them from actively seeking employment or engaging in efforts to reintegrate into society. They argue that individuals should be motivated to independently secure their financial stability, which might be hindered if they rely heavily on initial financial assistance.

Responsible Financial Aid

To address concerns about increasing gate money, implementing a solution called “spending controls” offers a sensible solution.

Spending Controls

By establishing guidelines and restrictions on how the funds can be used, States can ensure taxpayer money is allocated for reasonable expenses that support an individual's reintegration. Modern financial technology makes it possible to allow or block transactions based on spending categories, merchant IDs, and location. It’s also possible to block or allow point-of-service types (like an ATM or gas pump) and even control the spending velocity.

Eligible Expenses

Collaboration between correctional facilities, community supervision, and reentry organizations can help define a list of eligible expenses. These may include housing deposits, transportation costs, medicine, clothing, job training programs, educational pursuits, and other essential needs.

Reentry Milestones

Gate money could be distributed in fixed amounts based on appropriate reentry milestones. Parole officers and reentry professionals could tailor milestones based on individual needs. Milestones could span several categories: employment, housing, health (mental, dental, and addiction), family counseling, and financial literacy.

Conclusion

Investing taxpayer money in reentry initiatives is a wise and compassionate use of resources.

Increased amounts of gate money coupled with spending controls represents a pragmatic approach to supporting individuals transitioning from incarceration to society and would reduce the likelihood of technical violations or a return to criminal behavior.

When a person has adequate financial aid, they can better focus on their reentry. This results in stronger communities and alleviates the financial cost of continued incarceration carried by taxpayers.

By giving individuals a genuine chance at reintegration, we foster a more just and safe society for all.