Tuesday, May 13, 2014

Soup Reads, Responds To A Bruce Western Essay About Criminal Justice

Soup McGee
Professor KnowsHisShit
Soc. 321
5/10/14
Fifth, not extra
Reading Response Five
Why does Western think that the high rate of imprisonment stalls the economic health of the nation?
When Western wrote this in 2009, black American men were eight times more likely to end up in prison than white American men. What that rate is now, I did not find with a passing search. However, in ‘The New Jim Crow,’ written three years later, Michelle Alexander shares that nearly one-third of black men are likely to spend time in prison at some point, only to find they [have fallen] into permanent second-class citizenship after they get out.’ Among the numbers he does cite, ‘of black men born in the sixties with no more than a high school diploma, 30% spent time in prison,’ and ‘60% of (black men who are) high school dropouts have a prison record’ is particularly concerning.
Bruce Western’s essay could easily serve as an intro to the topic for those less familiar than I—which I am sure is the point. What it provides for me is an opportunity to look even deeper into the reasoning behind my own social exclusion. For example, I wonder how many people in my class who have not had an interdependent relationship with someone involved with the criminal justice system will read the essay without dismissing it, because, after all, ‘do the crime, do the time.’ And, ‘they made their bed, they can lie in it.’ Or even, ‘they broke the social contract and so are rightfully barred from entirely re-integrating.’ I should not leave out: ‘People can’t change; rehabilitation is a disproven theory.” Yeah. REALLY not a fan of that argument.  ‘The Confederate Flag isn’t a symbol of oppression and secession, either,’ is usually not far behind.
I took note of Western’s point that about the assumption of rehabilitation never sailing in the South. The mere idea that there is ‘an innate moral equality’ in all men should, in a country founded on the idea that each person’s creator made them equal with all of humanity, not be a thinking distortion. Yet, here we are.
The Prosperity Gospel rings a nasty bell in my head; upon reading about the ‘rigorous programs of work and isolation’ prisons were designed to provide, I vomited a little. I spent many hours working my ass off to ‘prove’ that it wasn’t my work ethic that was wrong with me. As if most everyone since I was fourteen who has come into contact with me and knows of my status hasn’t acted in one way or another as if I was just plain old defective. That originally prisons were to be a ‘democratic way’ to “remedy the moral defects of criminal offenders” reads as new to me but feels as old as the pitch on my sandals. If the initial idea of the penal system truly was to ‘rescue the citizenship of the unfortunate, the poor, and the deviant,” democracy in America truly is boiling away, given where we stand today.
 Personally speaking, ‘former inmates are generally poorly prepared for the routines of steady employment’ is so true it hurts. Literally, it hurts my pride and dignity, both. Luckily, I am not barred from food stamps, as many former offenders are, but I am dependent on them because of my status. Also, Western hurts me personally, to read: ‘inmates are ultimately released with few resources to lead productive lives,’ and ‘profound social exclusion that significantly rolls back the gains to citizenship hard won by the civil rights movement.’—leads to ‘diminished rates of employment and marriage—again, with the vomit.
I am indeed, though not a minority of color, ‘hidden’ and ‘erased by conventional measures’ of success in American society. I fall into the new ‘caste’ created by policies reacting to the Civil Rights Movement, a caste created with the intent of making certain that ‘class inequalities in imprisonment increased as the economic status of less-educated men decreased.’ I think, anyways.
Less education means less economic opportunity means more inequality means a worse economy for everyone.  As Western says, ‘the penal system assumed new responsibilities for public health, delivering treatment to a large scale for mental illness, tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS, and hepatitis C.’ How could this NOT negatively impact everyone (except the 0.01%)?






















The incarceration rates disproportionately impact men of color: 1 in every 15 African American men and 1 in every 36 Hispanic men are incarcerated in comparison to 1 in every 106 white men.”



Monday, May 5, 2014

Corrections Soup

Soup McGee
Sociology 321
M/W 10:30
Professor Adrian
4/25/14
                                                                Exploratory Number Three for Me

     The corrections system (prisons, jails, juvenile halls, probation and parole) presents the single most pressing structural impediment to reaching what could look more like equality in the United States. Some see equality as an unattainable objective or, one that if reached, would make us all Harrison Bergeron from the Vonnegut short story (‘…finally, everyone was equal….’). The corrections system is built and operated with our shared tax dollars. To expect this system to not be disparate in reach and impact is in fact a reachable and Constitutional goal, even here in our non-fiction universe. With this and my larger goals in mind, I have been reading The New Jim Crow, and listening to lectures by the author, Michelle Alexander; this semester has been a deep dive into understanding the current corrections system as an expansion of slavery. 
     
     Our corrections system is an economic engine dependent on the labor and torture of prisoners, and breeds depreciation of the Constitutional Rights every American is born with the assumption they enjoy. Her point can be summed up thusly: there are more black Americans now under the control of the corrections system than were ever enslaved. Our current structure is, in her words, establishing a new ‘caste’ system, ‘capturing poor, mostly non-white people. 
     
     To understand the extent of such social exclusion, include in your long thought this tidbit: “At midyear 2005 more than half of all prison and jail inmates had a mental health problem” (Bureau of Justice Statistics). It may be that people who purposely commit crimes belong in prison; are we being effective or fair when we lock up people whose behavior was largely influenced by mental illness? Being a former felon, mentally ill or not, excludes people from taking full part in American society. This is acceptable, apparently, to the vast majority of my neighbors. 
     
    The fact that there is even a federal Prison Rape Elimination Act speaks to the horrifying nature of life inside prisons; the fact that only Maine and Vermont currently allow everyone, including incarcerated citizens, to vote needs to be seen as equally horrifying. If the major changes many experts see as necessary throughout the system are to ever take place, the right to vote must be seen as primary. The Supreme Court recognized this in a 1964 decision, Reynolds v. Sims, saying: 
                        “…undoubtedly, the right of suffrage is a                    fundamental matter in a free and democratic society. Especially since the right to exercise the franchise in a free and unimpaired manner is preservative of other basic civil and political rights, any alleged infringement of the right of citizens to vote must be carefully and meticulously scrutinized....” 
Through public policy or personal attitude, we have historically forbidden or just plain discouraged participation by current and ex-felons in the voting process. 
     
      Social exclusion is a process, a prospective process by which people are prevented from engaging in similar opportunities with access to similar resources, or from asserting their rights. When people are disenfranchised or alienated from society, the community surrounding them also suffers, because the full potential of individuals within is not being reached. This can be seen in the effect of our corrections system. Former felons are much less likely to participate in the democratic process (or be allowed to), much less likely to network in the business community (or have the skills to), and more likely to endure material and familial hardship. 
     
     The corrections system exists to socially exclude those who have been adjudicated or convicted by a jury of their peers. The prescribed due process of law indicates in these cases some past behavior implying an inability to comply with the necessary rules of civilization. The stipulation here is clear, and debatably fair: serious crimes deserve serious consequences. Prison is supposed to be that serious consequence. Those neighbors of ours who are not in prison must not to be subject to this legalized discrimination. Those who commit crimes directly related to untreated mental illness must also be seen as and treated as equal citizens. Stripping anyone of their preservative rights should only be done in the most extreme instances, if ever. 
     
     Social exclusion causes ‘a substantial reduction in pro-social behavior’ and “rejected people are capable of self regulation but are normally disinclined to make the effort.” Society wants something but creates the opposite. Add to this mix mental health issues that go mostly untreated- unrecognized but for stigma and profit- and the prison system is a mass growing on our Constitution. Rational people with a reasonable morality will see this as true.      

     Looking for a solution when the starting assumption is ‘there is no cure’ is overwhelming, frustrating, and exciting. There is no ‘cure’ for crime; there is no existing functioning alternative for prison. At a macro level, to ‘fix’ the prison system, what with its CCPOA’s and CCA’s, is not feasible. The tradition of treating, and having someone to treat as, other, is deeply ingrained in must be called the American psyche. What we can do, perhaps, is implement some rather simple, almost commonsense solutions. I have a few I would like to share as further salvos in the effort to reach equality in America.
   
      One: add the rate of recidivism to the rate of incarceration in each state. Rank them. The states whose combined total is 1-25 shall be taxed at a level 15% higher than the states in the bottom 25. Corporate tax, income tax, let the policy wonks work out those details. But challenge states to compete with each other to incarcerate the fewest people, not the most. And feed 8.1% of those tax monies to the states who are succeeding. Incentive! 

     Another macro-level attack: a mandatory mentoring process for everyone who wants work in the criminal justice system. Not just a few weeks in training or an AA in the field—months working inside institutions to ensure the applicants have the required emotional and social skills to do the job. In this idealistic view, prisons and jails will be filled with only the most dangerous and truly deserving people, staffed by qualified recruits. 

     States with admitted Eighth Amendment problems, such as California, ought to institute an additional penalty when officers of the state commit new violations. If prison truly is a deterrent to those who might chose to break the law, then let us see those who are chosen to enforce it are held to a higher standard. Anyone with a criminal conviction ought to receive free health care until such time as their integration with society allows them to participate in the state or federal exchange. 

     Another? A Constitutional Amendment asserting that the right to vote may not be infringed upon until death.

     One more: if someone is arrested and charged with a crime, a full mental-health panel must be convened; only appropriate placement should take place. This would require a wholesale restructuring of the system and our understanding of justice. I am not confident that the restorative justice train has gained enough steam nationwide to smash through this glass. 

     These are not altogether feasible ideas. Neither are they absurd. But as a student, my bullhorn only reaches the ears of interested parties. I am much more capable of accomplishing more micro-level decisions, making connections outside of my normal wheel. This includes teaching tolerance, acting out, speaking up—in my case, making more presentations re: life inside prisons, and my personal struggles with integration. This is showing support for the victims of the system, and the goal I share with my wife is to unite resources with people struggling to integrate.




http://www.sozialpsychologie.uni-frankfurt.de/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Baumeister-DeWall-Ciarocco-Twenge-2005.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17201542?dopt=Abstract http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html https://www.aclu.org/files/pdfs/votingrights/votingwhileincarc_20051123.pdf http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/05/This-Town-Needs-A-Better-Class-Of-Racist/361443/

Friday, April 11, 2014

Do You Agree Or Disagree, In General, Mr. Cherkez?

-- I try exceptionally hard to not be a dick, and I work hard to show respect for what other people believe...but when you whisper to my child about heaven and god when you think I won't notice or something...yeah, fuck that. #inlawproblems #ventinghelps
Like · · Promote ·
  • Soup McGee then she mocked me for being #hardofhearing...I #kickedherout
  • Elijah Cherkez What did she say about heaven that bothered you?
  • Soup McGee -- the problem isn't with WHAT she said, the problem is that she whispered, thinking I would not hear her...our child knows some people believe differently than we do, but secret proselytizing is, to my mind- and she knows this- is abusive. After all, she had previously agreed to let me be the 'spiritual leader of our household' - only to hide bibles throughout the house. That's what. Thanks for asking! Question for you: you caught that she mocked me for being hard of hearing, right? So why the focus on heaven and not on compassion for being mocked because of my disability? Also:

    "There are some biblical facts that cannot and should not be ignored, if Christians really value truth. For example, the time separating when Moses lived (ca. 1250 BCE) from when the stories of Moses were written in the Bible (ca. 950 BCE) is about 300 years, representing 15 generations of oral transmission. Can anyone knowing this continue to be a literal believer? The gospels were written 40 -70 years after the crucifixion, which means that most of what we read about Jesus in the Bible was handed down orally for two to three generations before one word of it achieved written form. The gospels were also first written in Greek, a language which neither Jesus nor his disciples spoke or wrote! How can anyone claim "inerrancy" for such material? Other facts well-known in the academy, but seemingly unknown outside by either believers or critics, are that scholars can find no evidence that miracles were associated with the memory of Jesus before the 8th decade of the Christian era, that there is no mention of the virgin birth anywhere before the 9th decade and that the narratives of the ascension and Pentecost did not appear until the 10th decade. The New Testament does not agree on such basic issues as the identity of the twelve disciples or the details of Easter. Why has none of this been made available in churches or been discovered by those who pose as the church's secular critics?
    The New Testament also introduces us to a group of characters who are far more likely to be literary creations than they are to be literal. Was Judas Iscariot a figure of history? I do not think so. There is no mention of him in any source before the 8th decade. Paul, writing between 51 and 64 CE, appears never to have heard of the tradition that one of the twelve was a traitor. In addition to that, every detail of the New Testament portrait of Judas can be located in other traitor stories in the Hebrew Scriptures. If a major figure like Judas is not real then what about such lesser characters as Nicodemus, the Samaritan woman by the well, Lazarus, miraculously raised from the dead four days after being buried, or even the "Beloved Disciple?" All of them, I now believe, were created to illustrate a theme."

    Do you agree or disagree, in general?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.../why-i-wrote-re-claiming...

Tuesday, February 18, 2014

Waiting For Bi-Partisan Godot




Article Analysis Assignment

First, read a news story from the newspaper or the Internet.  Answer the following questions regarding your news story: 1) What is the main issue, who are the main actors being discussed;  Then, choose one of the assigned articles you read for this week.  Answer the following questions regarding the assigned article: 1) What are the basics of this article (who, what, when, how, why, etc.);  2) What is the overall main point the author is trying to convince you of?  3) Do you agree with the author’s argument?  Why?  Why not?   Finally, tie together your news story with what you learned from the assigned article, textbook readings, podcasts, videos, etc. for this week.  Type your answers in the box below using your own words, no outline or bullets, complete sentences and paragraphs, single-spaced, full-page. 
 


This week I chose the article “Ballot Battle Brews…” because of the Hybrid Democracy article we were assigned and the point the authors make re: the need for initiatives to have ‘bipartisan support.’ I want to be convinced, but I cannot be as of yet, and the ‘Ballot Battle Brews…’ article explains why. The main actors are the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the California Hospital Association, and the issue at hand is their disagreement over the Fair Healthcare Pricing Act (which would cap any hospitals’ ‘gross charges’ at ‘no more than 25% above the actual cost of providing care’). The fact that you can go to the emergency room, as I did recently because of a severe headache brought on by multiple severe concussions, and be charged $21 for an aspirin, etc., shouldn’t take ‘bi-partisan support to correct, and it should surprise no-one that the CHA is planning to spend more than 10 million dollars in a counter-advertising effort, through a group called…wait for it…Californians for Initiative Abuse. Because when these profiteers feel threatened, the best they can do is scream about how this is another scheme where the ‘Union’ is ‘just trying to increase their membership’ --as if that were a crime and $300 crutches weren’t. If Californians sat around waiting for a ‘bi-partisan’ bill that would fix this, we would be doing the same as praying for rain. Which is to say, wasting time. Not only do I disagree with the authors, I think the right amount of partisanship is necessary, particularly from groups that would fight against such clear exploitation of California’s neediest.



    

Tuesday, February 11, 2014

And Today, The Concession Of A Vote Tomorrow...Timing, Soup, Timing...



This week I chose the article ‘GOP In Disagreement…’ because the debt ceiling does not authorize new debt, but instead clears the check, as it were, for the money that Congress has already appropriated. The GOP, the main actors in the article, seem to not remember this very basic bit of information, and in fact daily campaign on falsehoods, namely that raising the debt ceiling is somehow a ‘blank check’ for the Obama Administration. This is of course not the case. Kevin McCarthy, the Congressional House Republican whip, says he does not have the votes to send a ‘clean debt limit’ to the Senate or to the President.  This has happened before, the stonewalling by House Republicans, each time much to the detriment and not to the betterment of the welfare of our great nation. And they know this, or they should…regardless of ideology.
As it is, Modern Monetary Theorist and economics professor Stephanie Kelton points out in another article, ‘Why the US lost the War on Poverty’: “The simplest way (to end or prevent poverty, or, care for the general welfare) is to print more money…inflation is caused by too much money chasing too few goods…inflation occurs when the economy is producing to the limit,” says the good professor. Everyone knows this is not what is happening right now. That the deficit (the people’s money) has been cut so extraordinarily during the Obama Administration means that the people’s money is in the hands of the government and the private business, and not invested in the peoples future through the rebuilding of our national infrastructure, as mandated by the Constitution (see: post office, roads, schools, etc.) for the betterment of the general welfare of the general citizen.
This brings me to Madison’s Federalist 45. He argued that the federal government rightfully possesses certain powers over the states, and rights that the states do not. States have responsibilities to not only their sovereign citizens but to the federal government and the citizens of all other states as well. The rights to make treaties, declare war, etc., are all rightfully federal. But his most interesting point is the one that closes the essay, where he seems to scold the supporters of the Articles of Confederacy for refusing to admit that a federal AND a state government simply MUST tax to survive. 

As with today, the extreme of the right had taken over and begun RUINING the people’s government. The Constitution, as Madison put it, was not written to give the federal government new powers, but rather a more effective means of administering old powers. Foremost among these, in Madison’s eyes and mine, was the rightful authority of the Congress both federal and state, to ‘require indefinite supplies of money for the common defense and general welfare’ of the nation and her citizens.

I am tying these three articles together on the notion that old is new again, as the radical right prevents adequate and appropriate taxation though the Norquist ‘No-New-Taxes-Pledge.’


  Federalist 45



Article Analysis Assignment

First, read a news story from the newspaper or the Internet.  Answer the following questions regarding your news story: 1) What is the main issue, who are the main actors being discussed;  Then, choose one of the assigned articles you read for this week.  Answer the following questions regarding the assigned article: 1) What are the basics of this article (who, what, when, how, why, etc.);  2) What is the overall main point the author is trying to convince you of?  3) Do you agree with the author’s argument?  Why?  Why not?   Finally, tie together your news story with what you learned from the assigned article, textbook readings, podcasts, videos, etc. for this week.  Type your answers in the box below using your own words, no outline or bullets, complete sentences and paragraphs, single-spaced, full-page.