(Hey, look who it is, and he’s drawing attention to the prison crisis again. – promoted by Brian Leubitz)
(this is cross-posted at FDL News)
When I wrote regularly for Calitics, the progressive blog for California politics, I took a particular interest in the prison crisis, which has reached epidemic proportions in the Golden State. The health care system has already been taken over by a federal receiver because it violated the prisoners’ Constitutional rights against cruel and unusual punishment, with at least one prisoner dying each week from medical neglect. The entire system, which fits 170,000 convicts into jails with 100,000 beds, may get taken over by the courts as well. Severe overcrowding, cutbacks to rehabilitation and treatment programs, and an insane parole policy which sends 2/3 of all recidivists back to jail for technical parole violations have contributed to the problem. As has the pervasive “tough on crime” stance from the political leadership of both parties, which has yet to be contrasted with any kind of progressive message on how to fight crime smartly and safely, at lower cost and with corresponding lower incarceration and crime rates.
Here are a few stories that all happened within the past 24 hours in California, regarding these matters: (over)
1) The State Assembly, dominated by Democrats with a 50-29 majority (with one independent), voted down a bill that would have allowed courts to review cases of juveniles sentences to life without the possibility of parole. The sponsor of the bill, LeLand Yee (D-San Francisco), noted that “No other country in the world outside of the United States allows children to be sentenced to life without parole.” But over a dozen Assembly Democrats, either worried about close races in November or future statewide races (and the hopes of gaining support from police officers, prison guards or other interests that support the “tough on crime” status quo), either voted against the bill or walked away from the vote. This bill would have affected a grand total of 250 inmates and gave them the opportunity to prevent being locked up from a mistake made when they were children.
2) While only 34 of an 80-seat Assembly could bother to vote to end life sentences for juveniles, the entire state Senate voted unanimously for something called “Chelsea’s Law,” another in a parade of sentencing constrictions against sex offenders. I believe this adds the death penalty into the mix, in addition to raising sentences for all permutations of the crime. California has already deprived sex offenders from living in homes if they ever manage to get out of prison, leading them to sleep under bridges and get lost in the system, which defeats the entire purpose of making children safer.
This is part and parcel with 30 years of stiffer sentences coming out of the state legislature – over 1,000 sentencing laws in that time and every single one of them increased sentences.
3) LA County has a new toy, a “gift from Raytheon,” as it was put on the radio (does it come in blue?), called an Assault Intervention Device, basically a modified taser that gives the sensation of extreme heat and forces any instigator into submission. This should be a nice experiment in efficient torture of the “pain without injury” variety, with the prisoners used as guinea pigs. Hopefully the guards will get to see how far it can go!
4) The prison health care system has actually not fully improved under federal receivership, with prisoners still suffering from extreme medical neglect. One woman told the story of a convict relative who was refused treatment for glaucoma for so long that his eye exploded.
Again, most of this washed over me in one 40-minute car ride. And nobody seems to care much about it. There’s precious little organizing on this topic from the “smart on crime” perspective, outside of the Ella Baker Center and a couple other underfunded concerns. In my time at Calitics I probably wrote 40 posts about the prison crisis, and maybe drew a half a comment per. I don’t know whether it’s the racial and socioeconomic composition of the blogosphere or the “out of sight, out of mind” tendency of most people, but here we have the vulnerable and the voiceless who are basically getting their Constitutional rights stripped away in some of the most unjust ways imaginable, and they need someone speaking up for them.
Furthermore, the prison crisis connects to virtually everything that’s wrong with California. The white flight ushered in by inner-city riots in the mid-1960s prefigured movement conservatism in places like Orange County. Nixon was among the original law and order candidates, and that perspective gets a lot of support among the sprawl of California, regardless of party. This sprawl, of course, breeds entitlement on the part of the suburban classes, as they want their tax dollars to go to their infrastructure to support their gas guzzlers, and not to turn around the inner cities that house “those” people. Environmental issues, land use, water, immigration, race – all of this can be traced back to the crisis in the prisons, or at least shown as a major symptom.
It’s pathetic that every leader in this state for the last thirty years has looked to the empirical political disadvantage of standing against this human cruelty, and the advantage of steering clear of the issue. The leadership vacuum has led to a severe loss of dignity and justice, and worse, it could lead to a systematic decline in political participation, according to a fascinating new paper.
Weaver and Lerman argue that experience with police and prisons is an important contact — indeed, perhaps the only contact — between many citizens and their government. This contact then socializes people to have particular attitudes toward that government. And these attitudes are far from democratic ideals […]
It shows the apparent effect of contact with the criminal justice system on whether people are registered to vote, actually vote or participate in at least one civic organization. People are far less likely to do any of these things as their contact with police and prisons ranges from no contact to being questioned, arrested, convicted, serving time in prison or serving at least one year in prison (“serious time”).
Meanwhile, distrust in all levels of government increases as contact with the criminal justice system increases […]
Weaver and Lerman conclude:
If we take seriously the results presented here, they suggest that those with contact at every level of criminal supervision withdraw from political life – they are not in civic groups, they are less likely to express their political voice in elections, they are less involved in their communities. Thus, the carceral state carries deep implications for who is included and how they are included in the polity.
This is not a joke or something to easily dismiss. So much flows from this mindless, Hammurabic-style cycle of vengeance that creates terrible outcomes for society. I wish someone would have the courage to speak about it.
Hi David,
I don’t know if you still check Calitics for comments on any of your pieces that get cross-posted, but I’ll offer my 2 cents in this “half a comment.”
As I had previously stated in a comment on Brian’s SB 399 piece, I think this is a symptom of a society that believes in revenge over rehabilitation. We’re generally not interested in being compassionate and giving those who made mistakes a chance at redemption or a second chance. Also, I think you’re on to something with the “out of sight, out of mind” mentality. When someone is incarcerated, it is done so with the hope that we can essentially make them disappear forever. In a way, we’ve accomplished that with the lame-ass parole system and the 3 strikes law (which folks want to make into a one strike law). I think we really are heading towards a prison culture where essentially “undesirables” are incarcerated. I may be pessimistic, but I don’t see that changing anytime soon, and the SB 399 vote as well as your other three points above seem to agree with me.
As a side note, I wonder what the demographics of the Assembly Members votes on SB 399 would look like. I don’t think I’d be too surprised if the No votes came from predominately rural or suburban districts while the yes votes came from mostly urban districts.
I’ve followed your writing since your original days at Calitics and then Hullabaloo (now I read you at FDL). I’ve never left a comment here b/c I think others are usually far more informed and also seem to think faster while typing. But I want to say that I appreciate your writing more than you can imagine–every topic you touch you handle with an incredible level of information and analysis. And your sense of empathy and compassion for social justice gives me so much hope when what I see for the most part is incredible indifference (not from the commenters here, just in general in my life).
I also wanted to add that, regarding prison reform, my heart is breaking at the lack of courage and leadership on the part of our Democratic party. Individual legislators may have good moments but overall and in this case in particular, instead of worrying about November, they should be (as I wish Obama was on other topics) making the case to voters and using data to prove their case.
I don’t understand why so few are willing to do this. I know there’s a general discussion about Democrats being afraid to take stands and set the terms of the debate in the Tomasky article in The Guardian and I think I mostly agree w/ Marcotte that it’s got to do w/ how difficult it is to make a stand against the other side when they have lying, cheating, and assholery in their tool box. But we can also see in Representative Alan Greyson that it’s possible to communicate in a righteously angry way and still make a powerful case without losing integrity. Rachel Maddow, while not a legislator, certainly shows how to reset the terms of the debate w/ a powerful quip followed up by evidence.
The dynamic you describe makes me sick to my stomach and I keep having my conversations with others (trying to keep it civil), sending my emails, going to events and writing letters with the belief that at some point our legislators will become sick with their acquiescence to a profoundly sociopathic system (prison, economic, medical, environmental, educational etc.)
In my despair, I use your writing and the work of others (on Calitics, from Digby, and many many others)to keep me sane–to remind me that I’m not alone with this heartache. Thank you for that.
Obviously David you have the courage to speak about the problems and insanities confronting California and our country. For this I am grateful. Reading you and others such as Robert and Brian on this site really have become my touchstone for hope and reality in the messed up political world we live in. I truly despair for our country and can understand why so many people stay home and withdraw from the process. The best I can do is lurk, sign a petition, vote, and throw in a five spot once in a while. Again, thanks, truly, for all you do.
Jim
and as someone who’s experienced the concentration camps that are LA County Jail and Lancaster State Prison, it’s good to see some writing done.
the prison crisis is symptomatic of the dysfunction in California.
Hi David,
Something we’ve been talking about over at KALW’s Informant (where I work) is what the public’s appetite is for ‘smart on crime’ messages–particularly those that point to the financial costs of mass incarceration as reason for change. I’d be interested to hear your take on whether say, the current argument for death penalty abolition that focuses on economics, is a message that’ll resonate with Californians.
Solorio does Prison Guards’ bidding, votes to keep life sentences for children.
By
Vern Nelson
– August 27, 2010Posted in: “The OC”, Fresh Juice, jose solorio, justice, prison-industrial complex
I’m writing this because I hope Jose changes his vote when this comes up again today (Friday.) If you want to call him, his number is 714-939-8469 or 916-319-2069. We would like him to vote in favor of Leland Yee’s SB 399, the “Fair Sentencing For Youth Act,” especially now that it has been amended to be a little tougher.
In California, many young people under the age of 18 are sentenced to spend the rest of their lives in prison. No other country in the world allows this barbaric practice – not Russia, not Iran, not Cuba. Senate Bill 399, the Fair Sentencing For Youth Act, would review these cases and require young people to work towards rehabilitation. If they can prove that they have turned their lives around, they will have an opportunity to be resentenced.
Typically many of these kids were doing something dumb like acting as a lookout during a drug deal where a murder ended up taking place, and then everybody involved got life. This bill, which would only affect about 250 such prisoners, would allow them to show that they have reformed and try to make a new start after simply hanging out with the wrong crowd when they were 16 or 17. And apart from the simple humanity of the measure, not keeping all these poor kids in prison their whole lives would save taxpayers tens of millions of dollars.
But when the bill got to the assembly floor on Tuesday, it sadly fell seven votes short of passage. As David Dayen wrote in his outraged summary:
The State Assembly, dominated by Democrats with a 50-29 majority (with one independent), voted down a bill that would have allowed courts to review cases of juveniles sentences to life without the possibility of parole. The sponsor of the bill, LeLand Yee (D-San Francisco), noted that “No other country in the world outside of the United States allows children to be sentenced to life without parole.” But over a dozen Assembly Democrats, either worried about close races in November or future statewide races (and the hopes of gaining support from police officers, prison guards or other interests that support the “tough on crime” status quo), either voted against the bill or walked away from the vote. This bill would have affected a grand total of 250 inmates and gave them the opportunity to prevent being locked up from a mistake made when they were children.
Santa Ana’s own Jose Solorio was one of the “No” votes. As nobody can remember the name of whatever Republican is running against him this year, he doesn’t fall under the “close race” category, but he IS a major recipient of Prison Guard money. His office was unable to give me an explanation for his “No” vote, so for now we can only assume he is trying to keep that Prison Guard money flowing rather than doing the right thing.
In order to make the bill more palatable to these cautious, “tough-on-crime” Democrats, author Leland Yee has added a few amendments, and will be trying again to pass it today (Friday.) Those alterations:
* Instead of allowing youth offenders to appeal their sentence after 10 years in prison, they would have to wait until year 15.
* Convicts would be restricted to two appeals, instead of a total of four.
* Juvenile defendants would have to “show remorse and work toward rehabilitation” before they can be considered for a new hearing.
* The new sentence could only be 25 years to life, nothing more lenient.
Solorio’s office was also unsure yesterday how he would vote today with these amendments. Let’s hope he does the right thing and helps to pass this important, sensible and humane bill. More on the Fair Sentencing For Youth Act here. Another great article here.
Another vote may happen Monday.
Here’s info on who to lobby w/contact info:
http://calitics.com/showDi…