Monday, April 20, 2009
"THE REAL COST OF PRISONS"--TELEPHONE TOLL CHARGE PRICE-GOUGING OF INMATES
Click here to access the "The Real Cost of Prisons" Weblog. Click here to access "The Real Costs of Prisons" website itself. One of the issues that is discussed on the site that was of interest to us was the issue of telephone toll charge price-gouging of inmates. As readers of this BLOG may recall, the exorbitant phone rates imposed upon inmates was one of the ways in which former Dorchester County Sheriff Nash was able to maintain a jail slush fund to spend as he pleased without County Council oversight. As readers may also recall, an audit revealed that this particular slush fund was one of the primary sources of the funds former Dorchester County Chief Jailer Arnold Pastor embezzled.
In the Op-ed Piece "A bad call for prisoners" Ronald Fraser writes:
While we do not know whether newly elected Sheriff L. C. Knight has terminated the practice of price-gouging of prisoners for phone use we do think that what is good for Florida, Michigan, Missouri, and New York is good for South Carolina, particularly as it relates to taking money from incarcerated "Deadbeat Dads" that could and should go to their children.Prisoners who use the telephone to maintain strong family ties will be better prepared to rebuild their lives upon returning home. Why then does Massachusetts allow price-gouging phone companies to drive prison rates for interstate calls sky high, isolating inmates from the outside world? It is time to end telephone price gouging in prisons. If phone companies in Florida, Michigan, Missouri and New York can provide inmates with reasonable rates, so can Massachusetts.
On a related issue, we call everyone's attention to the article Lots of room to grow. Note that the Charleston County Jail houses almost three times the number of inmates it was built to house--many of them "Deadbeats." We wonder if the fines being imposed against these men are being given to Charleston County Sheriff Al Cannon to offset the cost of housing and feeding them. And if not, we wonder if the Charleston County Family Court Judges would be a little more circumspect in the the number of men sent to jail for failure to pay child support if Sheriff Cannon sent the Family Court a bill each month. But, then again, maybe he makes enough money charging prisoners for phone calls and canteen privileges that this "income" offsets the costs of housing and feeding them.
Labels: "Deadbeat Dads", Audit, Child Support, Inmate Labor
Sunday, April 19, 2009
IS JAILING "DEADBEAT DADS" DOING MORE HARM THAN GOOD?
In the article "Question: Is Court-Ordered Child Support Doing More Harm Than Good?"* authors Stephen Baskerville, Ph.D. and Geraldine Jensen present two compelling and opposing arguments. However, we submit that the wrong question is being asked. The better question which was posed by Tony Fantetti is "Should 'deadbeat dads' face jail time?" As Mr. Fantetti points out, many fathers cannot meet their financial obligations. And he then goes on to suggest:
Of course, we--as a society--would never even consider incarcerating a mother merely for being financially irresponsible, particularly without hard empirical evidence that spending some time "in the barb-wired hotel all dressed up and nowhere to go" would somehow teach those mothers how to be responsible. Otherwise, Octoplet Mom would be spending time in Los Angeles County Jail rather than spending time with Dr. Phil. So why are we so eager to take this approach with fathers? Should we not at least answer the question of whether jailing "Deadbeat Dads" is doing more harm than good. Should we not consider not just whether THE RECESSION is contributing to homelessness, but whether it is impacting on the ability of fathers to continue to pay child support at the Court-ordered levels as well.Those demanding the incarceration of fathers in arrears on child support should themselves be jailed for their own overdue payments to their creditors. After all, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Discriminately incarcerating one class of people (fathers) for overdue financial obligations in a society, and not incarcerating others who are guilty of the same, amounts to a state-sanctioned discriminatory inquisition.Perhaps all single mothers with delinquent and outstanding medical bills for treatment of their children should be summarily jailed? If a father becomes involuntarily unemployed following massive layoffs, and is without income and therefore "refuses" (or so he's accused) to pay his child support should be jailed for being a "deadbeat," then it logically follows that a mother who "refuses" to seek medical treatment for a sick child simply because she is without the means to pay is also without a valid excuse and should be locked up as well.
Labels: A. C. L. U., Child Support Collection, Civil Contempt, Family Court Reform, Inmate Labor, Silly Laws, Sixth Amendment, User Fees/Hidden Taxes
Saturday, April 18, 2009
A.C.L.U. CRITICIZES BRUTAL AND OVERCROWDED CALIFORNIA JAIL
According to A.C.L.U. Criticizes Jail:
The American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California is calling for the closing of the Los Angeles County Men’s Central Jail, saying it is so overcrowded and brutal that it threatens the mental health of inmates. The conditions are “medieval and drive men mad,” Melinda Bird, a senior counsel for the group, said at a news conference on Tuesday. Mary Tiedeman, the group’s jail project coordinator, said she routinely saw inmates with “black eyes and bruised bodies” who contend that other prisoners or guards beat them. Steve Whitmore, a spokesman for Sheriff Lee Baca, said that any accusations of violence by guards were reviewed by the county’s Office of Independent Review.
We wonder how many of the Los Angeles County inmates are incarcerated for failure to pay debts. And we wonder how the living and safety conditions in Los Angeles County Men's Central Jail compare to the living and safety conditions in Berkeley County South Carolina where an inmate was recently beaten to death by a fellow inmate. And we wonder if the Los Angeles County Men's Central Jail is as crowded as the Charleston County South Carolina Jail. And we wonder whether the Los Angeles County Men’s Central Jail is either profiting from inmate labor or using more inmate slave labor than is being used by either the State of Ohio or by Berkeley County South Carolina. And we wonder if the Los Angeles County Sheriff's wallet is getting fat as inmates are growing thinner.
At the end of the day, there is little or no oversight over how these jails are run, so it is no wonder that they are often used as cash cows and free labor pools. Slavery is alive and well in America--especially, it appears, in South Carolina.
Labels: A. C. L. U., Child Support Collection, Civil Contempt, Inmate Labor, Jail Overcrowding, User Fees/Hidden Taxes
Friday, April 03, 2009
INMATES HELP BUILD NEW ADDITION TO JAIL IN BERKELEY COUNTY SOUTH CAROLINA
In Inmates Help Build New Addition to Jail WCIV TV tells the story of "inmates [whose] lives [are being turned] around by building a new jail."
At first blush, the article presents uplifting news. But, closer inspection reveals that this story is less than heartwarming.
As would be expected in a workforce of non-violent county inmates, some of the workers are apparently "Deadbeat Dads" like "49-year-old Donald Clark [who has] been locked up since January for issues related to child support" and [who] is happy to be outside and get[ting] fresh air instead of sitting in there and just looking at the TV."
Mr. Clark gets fresh air, but no reduction in his sentence and no income to apply to his increasing child support obligation. The citizens of Berkeley County get a bill for guarding, housing, and feeding Mr. Clark. The Contractor gets free "voluntary labor" which results in reduced overhead and higher profits. The Berkeley County Sheriff's Office likely profits in some way off the increased jail population. However, the ex-wives, ex-girlfriends and children of Mr. Clark and the other inmates get nothing and, in the meantime, the total child support arrearage in South Carolina continues to increase algebraically. So, overall, this is not a heartwarming story. And any public policy that allows the commercial use of either slave labor or uncompensated "voluntary labor" provided by people incarcerated for not meeting their child support obligations--whichever the case may be--is both an immoral public policy and a wasteful public policy.
In Inmates Help Build New Addition to Jail WCIV TV tells the story of "inmates [whose] lives [are being turned] around by building a new jail."
At first blush, the article presents uplifting news. But, closer inspection reveals that this story is less than heartwarming.
As would be expected in a workforce of non-violent county inmates, some of the workers are apparently "Deadbeat Dads" like "49-year-old Donald Clark [who has] been locked up since January for issues related to child support" and [who] is happy to be outside and get[ting] fresh air instead of sitting in there and just looking at the TV."
Mr. Clark gets fresh air, but no reduction in his sentence and no income to apply to his increasing child support obligation. The citizens of Berkeley County get a bill for guarding, housing, and feeding Mr. Clark. The Contractor gets free "voluntary labor" which results in reduced overhead and higher profits. The Berkeley County Sheriff's Office likely profits in some way off the increased jail population. However, the ex-wives, ex-girlfriends and children of Mr. Clark and the other inmates get nothing and, in the meantime, the total child support arrearage in South Carolina continues to increase algebraically. So, overall, this is not a heartwarming story. And any public policy that allows the commercial use of either slave labor or uncompensated "voluntary labor" provided by people incarcerated for not meeting their child support obligations--whichever the case may be--is both an immoral public policy and a wasteful public policy.
Labels: Inmate Labor
Saturday, November 10, 2007
NEW CONCERNS RE: JAIL "SLUSH FUND" & INMATE LABOR
Following is an excerpt from an old Post and Courier article that has added resonance given recent developments concerning the Dorchester County jail "slush fund":
The article, which can be accessed by clicking here raises the following questions:All of them were jailed for falling behind in their child-support payments, said Chief Deputy John "Barney" Barnes, the jail administrator. None of them was a violent offender or a flight risk, he said.
So they were working for the county for free. These inmates could save the new school thousands of dollars in labor costs.
On any given day, about 35 inmates from the Dorchester County jail are doing free work for the county, Barnes said.
He estimates inmates provided 75,000 hours of labor last year to public works projects around Dorchester County.
Another worker was less upbeat. He was angry that he was sentenced to a year in jail for owing $1,300 in child support and he's not able to make any money to pay it off. But he said working is better than sitting in jail because the time seems to pass quicker.
Counties around the country are relying on inmate skills to bolster shrinking budgets, said Capt. Cliff McElvogue, superintendent at the Hill-Finklea Detention Center in Berkeley County.
"Some of these counties will tell you they could not make it without inmate workers," he said. "There's no doubt about it. The economy is tight.
To me, this is the best detail the jail gives," Tony Washington, who is serving a year for not paying child support, said as he sorted cardboard boxes at the recycling center. "You're not out mowing lawns in the sun, and I get to deal with people." But he wishes he could be making some money.
"I've got seven kids," Washington said. "I'm in here for not paying for one of them, and now I can't take care of any of them."
- Who and which entities are benefiting from this free labor?
- How could Dorchester County survive without benefit of this free labor (75,000 hours per year)?
- Is the practice legal?
- What safeguards have been instituted to insure that the labor is truly voluntary?
- Why did County Counsel allow this questionable practice to continue unabated for so long?
This article raises further concerns about the use of the jail slush fund. As written in the Post and Courier:
Nash said no taxpayer money is going into the [Romanian] chiefs' visit, but the jail fund picked up the tab for some of their meals and snacks. The jail fund comes from inmates and includes money from haircuts, medical exams, collect phone calls and a $15 processing fee for arrested suspects that Nash put on hold after County Council questioned whether it was legal (emphasis added).
Just a few years ago Sheriff Nash promised to create an independent board to oversee the "Prisoner Recreation Fund." At that time he indicated that he paid the jail chaplains from the Prisoner Recreation Fund, which comes from a commission paid by the company that provides telephone service for the prisoners. However, there is no indication that the independent board either exists or was ever created. Moreover, there is no indication that there is any independent oversight over how Sheriff Nash assigns the "voluntary inmate labor."
We think that it is safe to say that Sheriff Nash has no idea either where Dorchester County inmates are being assigned or how monies from the Prisoner Recreation Fund are being spent. Certainly, it is inappropriate to use prisoner work assignments as a way of currying political favor. And the "Prisoner Recreation Fund" should not be used to pay for anything that does not directly benefit the prisoners. More important, given that the County may have to repay hundreds of thousands of dollars to people who were deprived of their property without Due Process of Law, Sheriff Nash should cease distributing these funds at least until a determination is made of how much has been embezzled and whether it has to be repaid. Additionally, he should immediately create that independent board to oversee any future dispersal of funds.
Labels: Inmate Labor
Monday, March 13, 2006
RULING MIGHT LET CHARTER SCHOOL REOPEN
An article in the Charleston Post and Courier indicates that a charter school shut down by Dorchester School District Two in August of 2004 will be allowed to reopen. The Post and Courier article also indicates that James Academy of Excellence will be seeking thousands of dollars from the County for reimbursement of the construction costs and the costs of running a private school at the same location where the charter school had been scheduled to open.
Previously, it was reported that Dorchester County Sheriff Ray Nash provided "volunteer" inmate labor for this school. Recent developments raise three questions: (1) If the inmates now want the county to pay them for the reasonable value of their services, who will be responsible for doing so--the county, the Sheriff's Office, the school district, or the charter school? (2) Will Sheriff Nash provide "volunteer" labor for the construction of the other schools that are to be built in Dorchester School District Two? and, (3) What will happen if the contractors who lost the James Academy of Excellence construction bid because they did not know that they could use free inmate labor bring lawsuits?
From our standpoint, extreme caution should be taken regarding the use of inmate labor. This is particularly true when the labor pool includes people who are neither convicts nor in contempt and there is no independent system in place to determine whether the labor is provided "voluntarily."
An article in the Charleston Post and Courier indicates that a charter school shut down by Dorchester School District Two in August of 2004 will be allowed to reopen. The Post and Courier article also indicates that James Academy of Excellence will be seeking thousands of dollars from the County for reimbursement of the construction costs and the costs of running a private school at the same location where the charter school had been scheduled to open.
Previously, it was reported that Dorchester County Sheriff Ray Nash provided "volunteer" inmate labor for this school. Recent developments raise three questions: (1) If the inmates now want the county to pay them for the reasonable value of their services, who will be responsible for doing so--the county, the Sheriff's Office, the school district, or the charter school? (2) Will Sheriff Nash provide "volunteer" labor for the construction of the other schools that are to be built in Dorchester School District Two? and, (3) What will happen if the contractors who lost the James Academy of Excellence construction bid because they did not know that they could use free inmate labor bring lawsuits?
From our standpoint, extreme caution should be taken regarding the use of inmate labor. This is particularly true when the labor pool includes people who are neither convicts nor in contempt and there is no independent system in place to determine whether the labor is provided "voluntarily."
Labels: Inmate Labor
Thursday, March 24, 2005
INMATE LABOR
Click here to access an article titled "Counties tap into inmate labor pool" from the Charleston Post and Courier that discusses what it done with free inmate labor in the Tri-County area.
Dorchester County Chief Deputy John "Barney" Barnes, the jail administrator, readily admits that none of the prisoners are compensated for their labor, but they work "Just for the pleasure of serving in Dorchester County, just the good feeling of knowing they are appreciated." And he estimates inmates provided 75,000 hours of uncompensated labor in 2004 to public works projects around Dorchester County.
What the article does not explain is that many of those whose labor benefits the public are not eligible for early release because their sentences are not for a set period; they will remain in jail for the length of the sentence only if they do not pay their child support arrearages. Of course, because they are not paid for the work they perform, they have no way of earning money to apply to the arrearages and, in fact, fall further behind while in jail.
This article raises a number of disturbing questions. First, how could the Tri-County area function without free inmate labor? Second, why would the Sheriffs of these counties want to insure that people are processed quickly through the system or assisted in obtaining Work Release? And, third, who monitors the program to determine that the labor is in fact "voluntary?"
It is no wonder that the Counties are not pushing for Court Reform that would allow more of the fruits of the labor of the non-custodial parents to benefit their children and less to benefit the friends of the County Sheriffs.
It is no wonder that the Counties are not pushing for Court Reform that would allow more of the fruits of the labor of the non-custodial parents to benefit their children and less to benefit the friends of the County Sheriffs.
Labels: Inmate Labor
