VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1[2]34 ]
Subject: The Prison Question


Author:
Ned Depew
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 10:25:27 01/23/08 Wed

Governor Spitzer's call to close un-needed prisons (including the HCF) as a cost saving measure has been met locally with a chorus of protest from those whose bread is buttered with taxpayer dollars from the prison industry. But the reality is that this is a great idea and a real benefit - for the state and for our region.

The prison industry has been used by politicians for decades as a a patronage sink and a sop to localities desperate for "economic development." It has traded on the misery of others - offenders, their families and their victims - to create a web of patronage obligation and enrich a small coterie at taxpayer expense.

We should be rejoicing over the fact that a declining crime rate and an improvement in the general moral climate of our State is leading to the shrinking of the prison population, and consequently the amount of money we waste on housing prisoners.

And that money is - except in the case of those few truly dangerous prisoners who really need to be carefully segregated from the general population - wasted! It produces nothing of value. We are deprived of the productive capacity of those who are inmates, as well as those who are guards and administrators, to feed an industry that produces absolutely nothing of value.

The economics of the prison industry are a zero sum (actually an invariable negative if you figure in the loss of local taxes - since facilities take up land and are tax exempt - and the loss of productivity to the overall economy noted above). They are entirely funded by taxes. Taxpayers pay the entire cost - they generate no real revenue themselves (the "income" generated by housing prisoners from other jurisdictions is still paid for by taxpayers - from those areas).

As far as those thrown out of work is concerned, they need to be provided with job counseling, training, placement assistance, etc, etc, like any workers displaced by changes in their industry. But to ask to keep the prison open - at taxpayer expense - just to protect their jobs is incredibly selfish.

Should you or I ask the government to create jobs for us - that are superfluous - just because we want jobs? Certainly not. Asking the government (taxpayers) to continue to bear the enormous and unnecessary cost of unneeded prisons in order to benefit a small group of workers is ridiculous.

In "the best of all possible worlds" prisons would be unnecessary. At any rate, they should be as small, and hold as few people as possible. Everyone who is capable of being a contributing member of society should required (and assisted as necessary) to become one. That's what our system of free universal public education (badly flawed though it is) was meant to encourage.

If our prisons really did a good job of "rehabilitating" inmates, then you might be able to make an argument that some good does come out of them. But US prisons are among the worst in the industrialized world in terms of recidivism (the rate at which former inmates re-offend and are returned to prison), and many studies have testified that the prison system is the "higher education" system of crime, where relatively minor offenders are brutalized, desensitized, recruited and trained to lives of far more violent and dangerous crime that they were being jailed for originally.

Better the State should take some of that $10-33 Million in savings and put it to use attracting companies in growing and productive fields like alternative energy, information technology, specialty manufacturing and industrial/technological R&D, to name just a few, and training former prison guards and admnistrators to work in industries that are truly productive, that produce value-added products and contribute something real to the local and national economies.

Being a prison guard is the very definition of a "dead end job." We should be seeking to eliminate such jobs from our society, not protecting them. We should rejoice - even the guards themselves should rejoice - that they will be - with relocation and retraining aid from the State - being offered an opportunity to escape the oppressive, violent, paranoid atmosphere of prison for real productive jobs on the outside.

The closing of the Hudson Correctional Facility should be an occasion for celebration - of the success we've had in reducing the crime rate, of the taxpayer money that will be freed from the waste of non-productive use to potential productive use, of the liberation of the workers from onerous, thankless, brutalizing, boring jobs to the possibility of productive, creative employment.

Hearing local elected leaders bleat about how we taxpayers should continue to keep these employees essentially "on the dole" at public expense is symbolic of all that is worst in how the notion of democratic government has been warped in pursuit of self-interest.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
[> Subject: Commissioner Brian Fischer's response...


Author:
Ned Depew
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 12:07:51 02/06/08 Wed

as printed in the Hudson Register-Star on January 31:

To the editor:

As commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services and someone who has spent his career in corrections, I found the comments made by Ned Depew in this newspaper ("Celebrate the closing of the prison," Jan 22, 2008) offensive, uncalled for and inaccurate.

Working in corrections is not a dead-end job for anyone. Like the police in our communities, the men and women who work in our prisons perform a necessary function that helps ensure public safety. Each person who chooses to work in corrections contributes to the safety of one another -- and of the inmates we are responsible for. Suggesting that staff should leave and get "real productive" jobs outside of corrections fails to understand the nature of the workforce and our employees' commitment to doing what many others are afraid to do.

Mr. Depew's assertion that nothing good comes out of prison is belied by the decline in the inmate population over the years. Rehabilitation does indeed occur -- much to the credit of the staff who supervise, teach and otherwise act as role models for incarcerated individuals.

Those who believe in the "prison industry" concept fail to recognize reality. Given that individuals commit crimes and need to be removed from the community, the job of corrections staff is just as important and critical as jobs in industries and elsewhere.

Brian Fischer
Commissioner
NYS Dept. of Correctional Services
[> [> Subject: And my full reply to him...


Author:
Ned Depew
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 12:10:19 02/06/08 Wed

... a shortened version of which was sent to the R-S on February 6, after they informed me that the full version exceeded their word limit.


To the Editors
Register-Star Newspaper
Warren Street
Hudson, NY

Sirs:

I am disappointed that Corrections Commissioner Brian Fischer found my letter about the proposed closing of the HCF “offensive, uncalled for and inaccurate.” Although I can’t answer him on the first issue - what he finds “offensive” is a matter of his personal sensibilities - I can’t allow his other assertions to pass unchallenged.
First, he declares that “Working in corrections is not a dead-end job for anyone.” I would agree that for all those who have - as he has - risen to the level of Commissioner, that is true.
But for the vast majority of the rank and file Officers my characterization stands. An entering CO has by and large the same responsibilities and duties that he or she will maintain throughout their career until disability, resignation, death or retirement ends them, as long as they remain on the floor. Although a very few - like Commissioner Fischer - will move up the bureaucratic ladder, for most opportunities for advancement are matters of pay-grade, title, and slight changes in command responsibility. The acquired training and skills are largely non-transferable outside the Prison Industry. That is, as I said, the “very definition of a dead end job.”
The Commissioner then writes:”Each person who chooses to work in corrections contributes to the safety of one another -- and of the inmates we are responsible for.” Again, this contradicts the facts. In terms of violent behavior, New York prisons are far from safe. The rates of violent behavior are far higher than anywhere else in our society. Guards put themselves at daily risk, and they know it - which is a contributing factor to their sense of stress.
Fischer adds: “Suggesting that staff should leave and get "real productive" jobs outside of corrections fails to understand the nature of the workforce and our employees' commitment to doing what many others are afraid to do.” Without presenting some factual basis these contentions, we can’t accept them. Psychological studies of guards and prisons document the profound toll such environments take on all who spend much time there.
The Commissioner accuses me of saying that “nothing good comes out of prison.” But that is a straw-man. I accept that the function of segregating dangerous, violent criminals (a small minority of the prison population) is a necessary one. I conceded that “‘if our prisons really did a good job of "rehabilitating" inmates, then you might be able to make an argument that some good does come out of them.”
The Commissioner makes such an argument, but unfortunately, the facts from his own Department don’t bear him out. Inmate populations, as he points out, are down, but not because “rehabilitation” has reduced them. Recidivism rates are nearly as high as ever. Diverting offenders around the Corrections Department, through alternative sentencing, Drug Court , etc, is what is reducing the population.
Which is not to deny the hard-working and dedicated men and women who labor in prisons their credit. In a failed system, they struggle courageously with a “thankless, boring, brutalizing job” (again, frank studies based on interviews with prison personell bear this description out). That they are able to succeed in keeping some prisoners safe and helping turn their lives around is a well-deserved satisfaction. That they are so rarely able to do so is the source of a built-in frustration of their job, that contributes to their stress.
I have great sympathy for the prison employees. Not only for the disruption of their lives that “downsizing” always entails, but also for the special difficulties of their work. I have nothing but respect for those who are able to hang onto their humanity and empathy in this taxing (and, as I said, dead-end) situation. I also have sympathy for those who are overwhelmed by the job, for whom the depersonalization, authoritarian structures and emotional withdrawal of the job seep into their personal lives.
Has the Commissioner of the Department of Corrections never read any of the many studies that have been published about the toll being a prison guard takes on men and women? Does he deny the high rates of stress-related disorders and disability among this group of workers? This an undeniable fact, which the Department’s own record keeping bears out.
The Commissioner’s final argument - that because there is a clear need for some prisons and COs, every prison and CO is “necessary’ - is specious on the face of it.
No one is arguing that all prisons and all COs are superfluous. Only that we have a duty to capitalize on whatever gains we are able to make, to relieve workers of thankless, onerous jobs (with due regard for their needs) and to reduce the burden on taxpayers of unnecessary expense.
As a responsible citizen, I think my reasoned and factually-supported opinion as expressed in my prior letter is “called-for.” Democratic government certainly “calls for” The People to express their opinions on matters of public policy. I have answered above for the accuracy of my statements. I invite others to independently check these facts.
As far as any “offense” I may have caused, it was never my intent to insult anyone. Several people have said they were hurt by my describing CO work as a “dead end job” But that phrase didn’t imply any pejorative judgment on my part, as some have mistakenly inferred. As I pointed out above, it is descriptive of an occupation in which opportunities for meaningful advancement are limited, learned skills are non-tranferable and the responsibilities and routine of the job change very little over the course of a career.
I presented are the facts of the case as I see them. I apologize to anyone who took my remarks as a personal affront and respectfully request that they re-examine the substance of my argument.

Yours,

Ned Depew



[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.