Nel's New Day

July 18, 2017

U.S. House Produces Mixed Results

Most media attention on Congress has targeted the Senate, but the House keeps chugging along. The 2018 budget plan goes to committee tomorrow with a partial repeal of Dodd-Frank in order to stop protecting consumers plus a reduction of $203 billion for financial industry regulations, federal employee benefits, the safety net, etc. to pay for tax cuts and military. Defense spending would increase over the next decade as nondefense discretionary declines to $424 billion from $554 billion. Like senators, representative factions are split between far more cuts to the safety net and opposition to the proposed ones.

Unlike Dictator Donald Trump’s (DDT) assumption of a four-percent growth, the House Budget Committee expects a 2.6 percent annual average. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office forecasts a 1.9 percent growth in the economy for the next decade.  The House budget plan also assumes that their repeal of the Affordable Care Act will pass.

Last week the House Appropriations Committee passed a $20 billion spending bill to fund federal agencies, including $1.6 billion to build DDT’s wall against Mexico. The bill includes a measure preventing the IRS from enforcing the 63-year-old law preventing churches from backing political candidates. Another provision in the bill is taking control of funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau from the Federal Reserve.

Congress—meaning both chambers—must pass a budget by October 1 to avoid another embarrassing and expensive government shutdown similar to the one in 2013. Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), House Freedom Caucus chair, said that his members won’t vote for any budget without constructing the wall. They also claim that they won’t vote for the budget bill because they haven’t seen it. Ryan needs the Caucus because they comprise 31 of the 240 Republicans in the House; passing a bill requires 218 votes. Representatives from districts along the Mexico border are largely opposed to a wall between Mexico and the United States.

The House is still largely ignoring a Senate bill, passed 98-2, that imposes greater sanctions on Russia and limits DDT’s ability to lift them. House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) said that the bill should have originated in the House after DDT lobbied the House to weaken the bill. Special interests in energy are now opposing the bill. Despite the Democratic support for the bill in the senate, Ryan is blaming Democrats for the slowdown.

The House did manage to pass two anti-immigration bills. The first cuts off some federal grants from cities that do not go beyond federal law in cooperating with immigration authorities, and the other creates tougher sentences for criminals illegally entering the U.S. several times.  The second bill was based on a woman killed by a man who had been deported to Mexico five times; DDT had used her as a symbol during his campaign. The Senate will probably not survive the Senate, especially the first one opposed by law enforcement groups. The National Fraternal Order of Police wrote House leaders that “withholding needed assistance to law enforcement agencies—which have no policymaking role—also hurts public safety efforts.”

Even GOP representative couldn’t swallow the massive cuts to the UN peacekeeping budget that its ambassador Nikki Haley touted on behalf of DDT. Rep. Kay Granger (R-TX) pointed out “our leadership is irreplaceable.” Appropriations Committee Chair Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-NJ) said the cuts are not “sustainable or advisable” if the U.S. wants to maintain its status as a global leader.

The House did give DDT a bloated defense budget of $696 billion, more than his requested $603 billion. To survive, the budget needs to cut a deal to increase or repeal the sequestration caps that the GOP supported in 2013. A proposal to end the 2001 Authorization of Use of Military Force remained in the budget, but an amendment passed to require an administration strategy to defeat ISIS and an assessment of whether the 2001 AUMF is adequate to accomplish the strategy.

Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-MO) lost her amendment to bar the Pentagon from paying for grender transition services when 24 Republicans joined Democrats to kill the measure. Twenty-seven GOP House representatives, including Oregon’s Greg Walden, joined the Democrats to oppose lawmakers who tried expand DDT’s religious profiling and Islamophobic policies. The failed amendment would have required the Secretary of Defense to “conduct strategic assessments of the use of violent or unorthodox Islamic religious doctrine to support extremist or terrorist messaging.”

Another loss for the GOP came from 46 Republicans voting against with their caucus to defeat an amendment to the Pentagon’s budget to eradicate language about climate change’s threat. The defense policy calls climate change a “direct threat” to national security and requires analysis about its affect on the military. The House voted 185-234 to keep this language by voting down the amendment. Justification for the language in the Defense Department included the rising sea levels threatening military installations and disasters of drought and floods that exacerbate instability and increase extremist insurrections and war. Defense Secretary James Mattis has already stated that climate change is “a real-time issue, not some distant what-if” and “impacting stability in areas of the world where our troops are operating today.”

One House member who may find himself embroiled in the DDT/Russia collusion is Oversight Committee Chair Trey Gowdy (SC). His super PAC accepted a great deal of money at the same time that the House Intelligence Committee began his investigation into the collusion. Gowdy defended himself by saying that “it’s not unusual for Russians to contact campaigns.” Yes, it is, and how does Gowdy know about these contacts? He also faces an ethics complaint about the possibility of bribes for his actions connected to Hillary Clinton’s debunked Benghazi investigation.

Gowdy has demanded that every DDT official disclose all communications with Russia before they come “out on the front page of the newspaper.” He wouldn’t admit that there is a problem with Russian collusion, but he wants the distraction to stop. Yet he admitted that “four or five statutes [could be] impacted” and “trusts” special investigator Robert Mueller “to sort all that out.” Mueller has 16 attorneys in his team of 25 people looking into Russian interference.

Things between the House and the White House may grow even more tense, if possible. Devil’s Bargain, a new book from Bloomberg’s Joshua Green, states that white supremacist Steve Bannon, back in WH favor, called Ryan “a limpd**k mother**ker.” Green wrote that the comment from DDT’s chief strategist came from the suggestion of Ryan as a DDT alternative is the RNC were contested. Breitbart.com, Bannon’s former website, launched critical pieces about Ryan. Can this be the first of “kiss and tell” books about DDT—without the kiss?

Ryan has expressed dismay at the senate failure to pass a healthcare bill after the House found 217 votes for Trumpcare months ago. He said that the House will move forward on tax “reform” (aka cuts for the wealthy). Passing the House health care bill has been profitable from some U.S. representative who bought stock in health insurance companies. As the bill moved forward in late March, GOP congressional members invested, i.e., Rep. Mike Conaway (R-TX), $30,000 and Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), $50,000-$100,000.

Shortly after Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) pulled the vote on its second bill for Trumpcare, he declared that the Senate would vote for a repeal of the Affordable Care Act and then replace it later. That plan didn’t work either. Senators who opposed the harshness of the Trumpcare bill are already voicing their opposition. And one possible GOP vote—Sen. John McCain—is still in Arizona. Plus McConnell will need 60, not 50, votes because a repeal won’t fall under the reconciliation process. Yet McConnell plans to move ahead with a vote next week

Ryan was surprised when some women representatives objected to the enforcement of a dress code preventing sleeveless tops and open-toed shoe. Rep. Jackie Spiers (D-CA) initiated “Sleeveless Friday,” a day when the temperature in Washington, D.C. was 97 degrees. Twenty-five women gathered for a photo op on the steps of Congress. Three-fourths of the women in the House are Democrats, but the protest crossed party lines.

Some people may complain about the women making a big deal of a small thing. At this time, however, the Republicans in the House are making a small thing of a big deal—DDT’s conflicts of interest, lack of tax returns, violent and threatening tweets, Russian connections, etc.

May 19, 2012

Prisons Move Back Two Centuries

Two-hundred years ago, people went to squalid, crowded prisons for such minor acts as owing money where they were required to pay for their own food. The United States is going full circle back to those days. Despite the fact that states have taken money away from education to pay for prisons, the privatization of these facilities is turning them back into early nineteenth-century penal institutions.

The 1833 law banning debtors prisons in this country left a loophole for over one-third of the states. The law does not permit arresting people for not paying bills, but debt collectors can file lawsuits, sending people to prison for not paying legal fines or failing to show up for court hearings. Many of these people in prison don’t even know that they are not compliant with the law because collection agencies give them no notification of their debt collecting. Sometimes, against the law, these agencies partner with police to either pay their bills or go to jail.  

Lisa Lindsay, a breast cancer survivor, ended up in jail after receiving an erroneous medical bill for $280. Because she was assured that she didn’t owe the money, she didn’t pay it. After being assured that she didn’t owe the money, she ignored the payment requests. The collection agency took over; police handcuffed her at home and took her to jail. After this case and many others in Illinois, the state House of Representatives passed a bill forbidding such action, but after over six months the state Senate has still not acted on this bill. What happened to Lindsay? She paid $600 that she didn’t owe so that she wouldn’t go to prison.

Robin Sanders was pulled over for a loud muffler and taken to jail on a warrant for failure to appear. Although she owed $730 on a medical bill, she didn’t know that a collection agency had filed a lawsuit against her. “They say they send out these court notices, and nobody gets them,” Sanders said. There was no Illinois law to keep her from going to prison.

Sean Matthews, a homeless New Orleans construction worker, owed $498. His six months in jail cost the city six times that much. He was lucky: other debtors are required to pay for their jail times themselves.

In Kansas City, a man went to jail for missing one furniture payment. Indiana, Washington, and Tennessee are only a few of the states with surprise arrests for unpaid debt. To make paying bills more difficult, some states add fees to debtors; Florida collectors can require a 40-percent surcharge from late debtors.

The Federal Trade Commission received more than 140,000 complaints related to debt collection in 2010 and took 10 debt collection agencies to court for their shyster practices in the past three years.

People in prison can’t earn enough money to pay their debts which makes getting out of debt almost impossible. Leaving them in prison then costs taxpayers money, and debtors have more trouble getting housing and employment if they get out, forcing them into state welfare programs.

That doesn’t change the policies of keeping them in prison, but states do get creative about saving money while keeping people in prison. In Texas, the prisons stopped serving lunch on weekends; instead prisoners get two meals on Saturdays and Sundays for the past month.

The most popular method of cheaper prisons, however, might be privatizing them. Prisons are a big profit maker. The nation’s largest private prison company, the Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), has sent letters to 48 states, offering to buy their prisons outright. With $250 million, they can afford it. The catch is that the prisons must be kept at least 90 percent full for a profit.

CCA also demands a 20-year management contract plus the profits they will extract by spending less money per prisoner. They need that guarantee because with crime declining during the past 20 years, so has the number of inmates. By becoming both owner and manager of a large number of prisons, CCA can set prices without open-bid competition for prison services, creating a monopoly similar to that between the Pentagon and the military-industry complex.

Investors in CCA also have a vested interest in keeping people in prison: profits shrink if the number of prisoners declines. CCA warns them that dangers to profitability include “relaxation of enforcement efforts, leniency in conviction or parole standards and sentencing practices, or through the decriminalization of certain activities that are currently proscribed by our criminal laws.” The corporation spells it out: “any changes with respect to drugs and controlled substances or illegal immigration could affect the number of persons arrested, convicted, and sentenced, thereby potentially reducing demand for correctional facilities to house them.” CCA is telling its share-holders how to vote to keep up the price of their stocks.

Thus far, CCA is doing quite well. Last year, taxpayers paid them $74 per person to run immigration detention centers. The biggest facility, the one in Lumpkin (GA), pays CCA $200 a night for each of the 2,000 detainees, and CCA annually collects between $35 and $50 million in profits.

Part of their profits come from extorting prisoners. Although the detained immigrants make only $1 a day, CCA charges them $5 a minute for use of the phones to talk with lawyers and other people. CCA also saves money by shorting prisoners on food. One woman reported that she had to deposit money for her diabetic husband to buy enough food.

Part of CCA’s profits goes into lobbying, $14.8 million in the last few years pushing for anti-immigration laws to ensure that they keep getting inmates. CCA contributed money to pass the anti-immigration laws in Alabama, Arizona, and Georgia because they own immigrant-detention facilities in those states.

CCA has another excellent reason for wanting to purchase prisons. By owning these institutions, they own the people inside. They will be in charge, taking over inmates’ human rights—or lack thereof. In 37 states, CCA virtually sells inmate labor at subminimum wages to Fortune 500 corporations like Chevron, Bank of America, AT&T, and IBM. A million prisoners are now making office furniture, working in call centers, fabricating body armor, taking hotel reservations, working in slaughterhouses, or manufacturing textiles, shoes, and clothing, while getting paid somewhere between 93 cents and $4.73 per day. (Tell Rep. John Boehner or Mitt Romney where the jobs are going!)

With the highest incarceration rate of any country, the United States holds 25 percent of all the prisoners on the planet: 2.3 million people—6 million by counting everyone in some form of incarceration or in the parole and probation process. That’s two out of every 100 people in the United States. And every year, about 13 million people in this country spend some time in jail or prison for at least a short time. That’s over four out of every 100 people in the nation.

The number skyrocketed with Ronald Reagan as president when African-Americans became imprisoned in increasingly disproportionate numbers. The numbers of people in prisons can only grow if the country continues on its pattern of austerity, union-breaking, sweatshop labor, coercion of desperate people to accept lower wages, and part-time or temporary work with no healthcare and retirement benefits.

The prisons in Arizona prove what a failure CCA is. According to Arizona law, the state may contract for private prisons only if they are cheaper. The state’s study showed that CCA was more expensive. Arizona’s solution was to bury a plan to “eliminate the requirement for a quality and cost review of private prison contracts” in the $8.6 billion budget proposal.

The study would have shown that bad security allowed three inmates escape from the Kingman facility, kill an Oklahoma couple, and burn their bodies in their trailer. And that wasn’t the only problem that the study would have revealed. Paul Senseman, Gov. Jan Brewer’s Chief of Staff, is a former lobbyist for CCA, and his wife currently lobbies for CCA. Chuck Coughlin, Brewer’s chief adviser, runs a consulting firm that represents CCA. The three of them contributed $60,000 to her 2010 campaign.

The privatization of prisons comes from small-government advocates who support companies only interested in making a profit with no concern for social consequences. The unnecessary harm to minor offenders, hardening of minor offenders into serious criminals, and calls for more draconian law enforcement and punishment leads to the need for more and more prisons and the drain from education that can create a more civilized society. And it only gets worse. In Pennsylvania, a private detention company bribed two judges to order youths imprisoned, just so there would be more fodder for private prisons.

Studies show that private facilities perform badly compared to public ones on almost every metric—prevention of intra-prison violence, jail conditions, rehabilitation efforts—except reducing state budgets and adding to the corporate bottom line. And the country is heading toward privatization of all its prisons.

Possibly worse is the for-profit prisons set up for kids. Read this if your stomach is up to it.

© blogfactory

Genuine news

Civil Rights Advocacy

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. -- Margaret Mead

AGR Daily News

Transformational News; What Works For Seven Future Generations Without Causing Harm?

JONATHAN TURLEY

Res ipsa loquitur - The thing itself speaks

Jennifer Hofmann

Inspiration for soul-divers, seekers, and activists.

Occupy Democrats

Progressive political commentary/book reviews for youth and adults

V e t P o l i t i c s

politics from a liberal veteran's perspective

Margaret and Helen

Best Friends for Sixty Years and Counting...

Rainbow round table news

Official News Outlet for the Rainbow Round Table of the American Library Association

The Extinction Protocol

Geologic and Earthchange News events

Central Oregon Coast NOW

The Central Oregon Coast Chapter of the National Organization for Women (NOW)

Social Justice For All

Working towards global equity and equality

Over the Rainbow Books

A Book List from Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Round Table of the American Library Association

The WordPress.com Blog

The latest news on WordPress.com and the WordPress community.

%d bloggers like this: