Louisiana records give insight into businesses that utilize prison labor(muckrock.com)
muckrock.com
Louisiana records give insight into businesses that utilize prison labor
https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2017/jun/08/Louisiana-inmate-labor/
52 comments
A bunch of this is for the "transitional work program" which sounds more like a way for prisoners to get out of prison more smoothly:
http://www.doc.louisiana.gov/transitional-work-program
I don't know anything in particular about the program, but why do you think the business should pay the prevailing wage? How many prisoners would get hired with that requirement vs. without it? As a business owner why would I prefer to hire a prisoner instead of someone not in prison? Or am I thinking about it the wrong way? It sounds like hiring a prisoner benefits the prison system and the prisoner (and also the business as long as there is an incentive of some kind).
I don't know anything in particular about the program, but why do you think the business should pay the prevailing wage? How many prisoners would get hired with that requirement vs. without it? As a business owner why would I prefer to hire a prisoner instead of someone not in prison? Or am I thinking about it the wrong way? It sounds like hiring a prisoner benefits the prison system and the prisoner (and also the business as long as there is an incentive of some kind).
[deleted]
Because it puts the business owner ahead of their competitors and neighbors (they are gaining from the favor of the state).
You make a fair point of incentives to hire prisoners rather than others though.
You make a fair point of incentives to hire prisoners rather than others though.
There are going to be costs, but maybe this is actually a relatively low-cost option for helping to get prisoners back out into the world (and not back into prison). It is certainly cheaper than keeping them in prison. It says on that page that 10-20 percent of prisoners stay with their employer after being released. That seems low to me, but I haven't studied other solutions to this problem for comparison.
Kind of a nitpick, but that would make it pointless since, if you're paying the prevailing wage, you might as well use free (as in freedom) labor[1], since you need a lot more compliance procedures and security for the prison labor.
I think a better standard is that the labor should be competitively bid for with multiple buyers at any given time so there's actual competition for it. The prevailing wage would be lower than for free(..dom) labor, but not the pittance they're currently stuck with.
[1] yes, which to some, is a feature not a bug
I think a better standard is that the labor should be competitively bid for with multiple buyers at any given time so there's actual competition for it. The prevailing wage would be lower than for free(..dom) labor, but not the pittance they're currently stuck with.
[1] yes, which to some, is a feature not a bug
Money is fungible. If companies weren't benefiting from low wage labor they'd be charging the state more to house the inmates.
Many of the jobs are outside of the prison system.
Inside the prison system I'd be fine with making them do the accounting based on prevailing wages even if the money is going in a circle.
Inside the prison system I'd be fine with making them do the accounting based on prevailing wages even if the money is going in a circle.
It's an interesting breakdown by job. Most of it's just "general labor," but I'd love to hear the story about the person doing forced prison labor as a caterer, or even better, the person doing forced prison labor as an offshore oil platform engineer.
A lot of "interesting" jobs are for the state itself:
http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/05/prison_inmate...
http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/05/prison_inmate...
I just reviewed the wages vs min wage and i dont see how this can be true, unless these are trusted prisoners who work off-prison jobs.
Prison jobs are notoriously low paying such as cook or dishwasher which ranges from $0.10-0.15/hr.
I interviewed several prisoners at a state prison in utah (draper perhaps?) back in 2005 and got the scoop and it was very belittling to see that prisoners were paid that low.
i just dont see how it could've jumped so high in only ten years.
From the info i gathered this is not a utah phenomenon either the prisoners are paid extremeley low wages in other parts of the states as well.
Prison jobs are notoriously low paying such as cook or dishwasher which ranges from $0.10-0.15/hr.
I interviewed several prisoners at a state prison in utah (draper perhaps?) back in 2005 and got the scoop and it was very belittling to see that prisoners were paid that low.
i just dont see how it could've jumped so high in only ten years.
From the info i gathered this is not a utah phenomenon either the prisoners are paid extremeley low wages in other parts of the states as well.
For those calling this "slavery" thinking that inherently makes it illegal, I quote the 13th Amendment:
"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
Not saying I agree with the practice. But just getting other people to agree that it's slavery won't change anything.
Not saying I agree with the practice. But just getting other people to agree that it's slavery won't change anything.
Is this part of the same complex that runs prisons for profits, or a mixture of government operations and private companies?
It's definitely an improvement compared to the State of Louisiana selling children born to female prison inmates to bidders / Slave Owners on the steps of a Courthouse before the Civil War. Yes, this actually happened. About 10 times over the course of a few years. Source: I knew the guy who did the research and published the findings.
slavery
Sounds what you get if you sell what essentially are sovereign duties of a state to the highest bidder: An extremely lucrative system of modern-day slaves that have to shell out their hard earned below-market dollars to a rigged monopoly system completely provided by my buddies (of 10$/min landline calls, cash transfers with 50% fee, all kinds of shady "service charges") to extract the maximum amount of cash while they're in.
So what do you do if you're sitting on such a gold mine? Well, I'd probably fuel an endless and hopeless war on drugs, introduce mandatory minimum sentences and take a really, really tough stance on those immigrants. Keep 'em coming.
Completely coincidentally, the US has the highest incarceration rates on any halfway civilized nation on the planet by a large margin.
Free markets for the win.
So what do you do if you're sitting on such a gold mine? Well, I'd probably fuel an endless and hopeless war on drugs, introduce mandatory minimum sentences and take a really, really tough stance on those immigrants. Keep 'em coming.
Completely coincidentally, the US has the highest incarceration rates on any halfway civilized nation on the planet by a large margin.
Free markets for the win.
>fuel an endless and hopeless war on drugs, introduce mandatory minimum sentences
Also, don't forget about clandestinely supporting terrorists like the Nicaraguan Contras who were smuggling billions of dollars of cocaine into inner cities in the US.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_involvement_in_Contra_co...
Also, don't forget about clandestinely supporting terrorists like the Nicaraguan Contras who were smuggling billions of dollars of cocaine into inner cities in the US.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_involvement_in_Contra_co...
When you work for no pay in a communist prison camp, we call it a slave labour camp. And why wouldn't we? There are no slaves in America.
When you work for next to no pay in an American prison (And are then billed for room and board when you are released...) Well, that's something else.
How many millions of lives has this institution of liberal democracy destroyed?
When you work for next to no pay in an American prison (And are then billed for room and board when you are released...) Well, that's something else.
How many millions of lives has this institution of liberal democracy destroyed?
The constitutional amendment barring slavery carves out an exemption for criminal punishment. I don't think you're technically constitutionally protected from being a slave if you're in prison.
That's pretty fucked up.
That's pretty fucked up.
> nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law
The 14th amendment's exception from prisoners is broad but kind of essential for the whole concept of incarceration to work at all it seems. Amendments are left generally broad because it's so hard to fix any mistakes and Congress can always put further protections in place should the need arise.
The 14th amendment's exception from prisoners is broad but kind of essential for the whole concept of incarceration to work at all it seems. Amendments are left generally broad because it's so hard to fix any mistakes and Congress can always put further protections in place should the need arise.
> How many millions of lives has this institution of liberal democracy destroyed?
How is this an institution "of" liberal democracy? I can either interpret that as liberal democracy as destroying lives, or that working while incarcerated is a feature of liberal democracy. I don't think either are true.
How is this an institution "of" liberal democracy? I can either interpret that as liberal democracy as destroying lives, or that working while incarcerated is a feature of liberal democracy. I don't think either are true.
It's clearly a product of liberal democracy, and it's liberal in the sense of allowing such business ventures to exist and to indeed to be voted for by the public (manipulated by advertising and ark money, of course, but nevertheless).
The problem of liberalism is its failure to adequately guard against such institutional abuses, just as the problem of communism is its failure to guard against being hijacked by authoritarians. In the 25 years since the fall of the Soviet Union and the general consensus that communism was an ideological failure, western democracies own ideological limitations have been examined and found wanting in many respects. Chief among these are an incarceration rate that far exceeds that of the most stereotypically autocratic nations, and the deplorable conditions therein.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarcera...
Liberalism all too easily degenerates into mere license, and has demonstrably failed to result in liberation for those who suffer unjustly under the yoke of authority. To some extent the blame falls on a myopic utilitarianism that equates its quantitative capability with omniscience, and by assuming its own goodness as axiomatic has lost the ability to evaluate its own moral anchorings, instead drifting about aimlessly on the currents of its own desire.
The problem of liberalism is its failure to adequately guard against such institutional abuses, just as the problem of communism is its failure to guard against being hijacked by authoritarians. In the 25 years since the fall of the Soviet Union and the general consensus that communism was an ideological failure, western democracies own ideological limitations have been examined and found wanting in many respects. Chief among these are an incarceration rate that far exceeds that of the most stereotypically autocratic nations, and the deplorable conditions therein.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarcera...
Liberalism all too easily degenerates into mere license, and has demonstrably failed to result in liberation for those who suffer unjustly under the yoke of authority. To some extent the blame falls on a myopic utilitarianism that equates its quantitative capability with omniscience, and by assuming its own goodness as axiomatic has lost the ability to evaluate its own moral anchorings, instead drifting about aimlessly on the currents of its own desire.
Liberal democracies get extremely holier-then-thou about slavery - state-sponsored or otherwise. Yet, they have no natural means of preventing it from happening inside them!
My point is that we turn a blind eye to it happening at home. People working in the GULAG were also paying their 'debt to society'. Not all of them were political prisoners, either.
My point is that we turn a blind eye to it happening at home. People working in the GULAG were also paying their 'debt to society'. Not all of them were political prisoners, either.
So is the "institution" the different perception of local incarceration vs incarceration in other countries, or the incarceration itself?
It's a difference in perception - cognitive dissonance. There are obviously differences in the incarceration (Our prisons ruin many lives - but Soviet ones ended them. Depending on the year, mortality rates were between 1 and 20% - the highest were during the war.)
Ah. The original comment seemed to imply it was the prisons that were a feature of liberal democracies, which seemed a weird leap to take. I agree with you in general. The penal system is just one of many systems that's overly politicized in a national context. It's part of the general problem of the U.S. not being very good at relative comparisons with other countries without reverting to a nationalistic dick-measuring contest.
It's the nasty downside to American Exceptionalism. On one end, it spurs people to attempt to be better because they expect they should be better, on the other it causes people to infer differences between our attributes and those of others that we don't particularly like, even when in practice those differences don't amount to all that much.
It's the nasty downside to American Exceptionalism. On one end, it spurs people to attempt to be better because they expect they should be better, on the other it causes people to infer differences between our attributes and those of others that we don't particularly like, even when in practice those differences don't amount to all that much.
Correlation not causation. For-profit prisons are a byproduct of America's fascination with incarceration. Incarceration rates started skyrocketing in the 1970s. The number of people in private prisons, in contrast, was minuscule even in 1990: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/06/history-of-ameri....
> Correlation not causation. For-profit prisons are a byproduct of America's fascination with incarceration
Nothing that OP mentioned is specific to for-profit prisons.
The prison-industrial complex is perfectly capable of existing and generating incredibly lucrative profits for the industry even if the prisons themselves are ostensibly either state entities or structured as non-profits. The "for-profit/private" vs. "public/state-run" distinction only changes how the money gets accounted for on paper; ultimately, the same entities are capable of making the same amount of money on either form of incarceration.
Nothing that OP mentioned is specific to for-profit prisons.
The prison-industrial complex is perfectly capable of existing and generating incredibly lucrative profits for the industry even if the prisons themselves are ostensibly either state entities or structured as non-profits. The "for-profit/private" vs. "public/state-run" distinction only changes how the money gets accounted for on paper; ultimately, the same entities are capable of making the same amount of money on either form of incarceration.
That's a very grim picture you paint; I don't believe the majority of US citizens would be OK with this, if there was an awareness.
Must be incredibly hard to come out of a system like that rehabilitated, and not very bitter.
Must be incredibly hard to come out of a system like that rehabilitated, and not very bitter.
insightful, earned the upvote
It's not obvious to me that prison labor is immoral or equivalent to slavery. As long as the working conditions are humane and the garnished wages are principally used to subsidize the cost of their incarceration, I see no issue. Personally, I think prison policy improvements should start with common ground (e.g., guards shouldn't beat prisoners, prisoners should get prompt medical attention, etc) before we start worrying about issues that boil down to prisoner comfort.
Regardless of whether it's immoral or not, it creates perverse incentives as if institutes a captive workforce with less rights than normal workers, which can be extremely lucrative to businesses and the state. That last thing we need on top of the other problems we have with the prison industry in this country are businesses lobbying for harsher sentencing because it gets them cheaper labor. We already have prison guard unions lobbying for harsher sentencing, and that has not gone well.
In the end I don't think having prisoners work is in itself a bad thing either. I do think most the systems we have in place that allow for that cause major problems through externalities, and I'm not sure how to allow one while effectively preventing the other.
In the end I don't think having prisoners work is in itself a bad thing either. I do think most the systems we have in place that allow for that cause major problems through externalities, and I'm not sure how to allow one while effectively preventing the other.
I don't think the right to your own work and it's profits are an issue of comfort. If you are to lose that right via prison perhaps that's okay. It's not okay to then force that labor out of a person who is non-willing / force labor is slavery.
My mother when leaving prison was given a bill for her stay - as if she were staying at a motel. So not only was she then a felon with little hope for a 'good job' but also was laden with debt, which fortunately had very tolerant pay back policies.
My mother when leaving prison was given a bill for her stay - as if she were staying at a motel. So not only was she then a felon with little hope for a 'good job' but also was laden with debt, which fortunately had very tolerant pay back policies.
> I don't think the right to your own work and it's profits are an issue of comfort.
No person with a debt is entitled to the profits of their work, free or otherwise. The debt here is the cost of their incarceration. I don't propose they pay back the entire portion of their incarceration, but I think they should be responsible for paying back what they can while they're in prison. Within this model, you could make provisions for prisoners to elect to pay a sum after release (thereby making it optional labor as a means of repaying the debt they entered into), but this isn't without its own moral quandaries.
The crux of the issue in my mind is that someone needs to pay for incarceration, and while tax payers are going to have to pay a large portion regardless, the incarcerated should contribute what they can. Of course there are likely many injustices in the justice system which would cause this policy to impact some groups more than others (males vs females, for instance), but those issues are orthogonal to this, and consequently they should be addressed separately, insofar as they exist.
No person with a debt is entitled to the profits of their work, free or otherwise. The debt here is the cost of their incarceration. I don't propose they pay back the entire portion of their incarceration, but I think they should be responsible for paying back what they can while they're in prison. Within this model, you could make provisions for prisoners to elect to pay a sum after release (thereby making it optional labor as a means of repaying the debt they entered into), but this isn't without its own moral quandaries.
The crux of the issue in my mind is that someone needs to pay for incarceration, and while tax payers are going to have to pay a large portion regardless, the incarcerated should contribute what they can. Of course there are likely many injustices in the justice system which would cause this policy to impact some groups more than others (males vs females, for instance), but those issues are orthogonal to this, and consequently they should be addressed separately, insofar as they exist.
> No person with a debt is entitled to the profits of their work, free or otherwise. The debt here is the cost of their incarceration. I don't propose they pay back the entire portion of their incarceration, but I think they should be responsible for paying back what they can while they're in prison.
This is morally bankrupt. You are locking people up, against their will, taking away years of their productive working life - and then sending them a bill for it.
This is a debtor's prison by another name. (Which are, by the way, widely recognized among the Western world, including in the US, to be immoral, and illegal - in theory.)
This is morally bankrupt. You are locking people up, against their will, taking away years of their productive working life - and then sending them a bill for it.
This is a debtor's prison by another name. (Which are, by the way, widely recognized among the Western world, including in the US, to be immoral, and illegal - in theory.)
You misread my comment. I was explicit that the debt is canceled at the end of their term. You're also neglecting that imprisonment is a consequence of committing a crime (the accuracy of our legal system being an orthogonal matter), and criminals are accepting that risk in committing the crime, so it's not exactly involuntary.
It's literally slavery: you're compelled to labor while being unfree to leave. We call lots of other things in history slavery that meet those criteria.
It's slavery as the punishment for a crime, but it's slavery without qualification.
It's slavery as the punishment for a crime, but it's slavery without qualification.
There's even an exception for it in the 13th amendment. Some slavery is still legal under the US constitution, as amended, which is probably a fun/easy bar bet to win.
Not sure how the wider legal landscape treats this, especially whether other laws narrow the exemption to apply only to the "involuntary servitude" portion of the amendment, but if a state wanted to try to actually enslave people as punishments for crimes in the US they'd probably at least have a lively court case on their hands, and they might even win it, depending on how the rest of the laws are structured—the constitution alone wouldn't be enough to guarantee defeat.
Not sure how the wider legal landscape treats this, especially whether other laws narrow the exemption to apply only to the "involuntary servitude" portion of the amendment, but if a state wanted to try to actually enslave people as punishments for crimes in the US they'd probably at least have a lively court case on their hands, and they might even win it, depending on how the rest of the laws are structured—the constitution alone wouldn't be enough to guarantee defeat.
Regardless of what you want to call it, it is forced labor, which is still a definition of slavery, even if it is a more expansive one.
Where in this article does it saying anything about any labor being "forced" or even compelled (such that any necessity of life is denied any who choose not to participate in these activities)?
You are stretching a definition of "slavery" to encompass simple incarceration. That cheapens the word.
Is there actually forced labor in present-day civilian prisons? (Courts-martial have traditionally been allowed to impose sentences "at labor", but I have not observed this in the civilian case).
You are stretching a definition of "slavery" to encompass simple incarceration. That cheapens the word.
Is there actually forced labor in present-day civilian prisons? (Courts-martial have traditionally been allowed to impose sentences "at labor", but I have not observed this in the civilian case).
Fine, call it what you like, my point is that it's not the moral equivalent of conventional slavery.
It's not chattel slavery, but 'conventional slavery' doesn't have to be chattel slavery to be slavery.
Across history, there have been many forms of slavery that were not chattel slavery. This is one of them. They have all been morally repugnant.
Across history, there have been many forms of slavery that were not chattel slavery. This is one of them. They have all been morally repugnant.
Prison work has never been widely regarded as morally repugnant (don't conflate with debtors' prisons, which are fundamentally different), so this necessarily is not one of your aforementioned forms of slavery.
At the end of the day, incarceration costs money, and the people responsible for the incarceration would ideally foot the bill. Obviously the incarcerated rarely have such means, but I don't think it's unreasonable to ask them to pay a little bit more than the average law-abiding citizen. I don't have a strong opinion about how they repay their debts--whether it's garnished wages while in prison or after their release, but it should be one or the other. Actions have consequences, and a fundamental purpose of prison is to remind people of that. Moreover, work is a rehabilitating endeavor--it build skills, confidence, and character. It's mutually beneficial.
At the end of the day, incarceration costs money, and the people responsible for the incarceration would ideally foot the bill. Obviously the incarcerated rarely have such means, but I don't think it's unreasonable to ask them to pay a little bit more than the average law-abiding citizen. I don't have a strong opinion about how they repay their debts--whether it's garnished wages while in prison or after their release, but it should be one or the other. Actions have consequences, and a fundamental purpose of prison is to remind people of that. Moreover, work is a rehabilitating endeavor--it build skills, confidence, and character. It's mutually beneficial.
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/06/the-clintons-had-slav...
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Technically, it is apparently legal. But it is still slavery.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Technically, it is apparently legal. But it is still slavery.
to me one of the most interesting things about this issue is how it trended recently because someone actually read and thought for a moment about what Hillary Clinton wrote about in her best-selling book "It Takes a Village", about how they used prison labor during her time in the Arkansas governors mansion:
http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-prison-labor-african...
the fact that this was only widely noticed 20 years after publication is amazing
http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-prison-labor-african...
the fact that this was only widely noticed 20 years after publication is amazing
This really needs more recognition. The fact that this practice is so normal is appalling.
I agree.
I think this story is an enormous opportunity to get bipartisan opinion against abuse of prison labor. What better way to get popular support against AG Session's incarceration increase than to tie it to a deeply unpopular politician with his constituency?
I think this story is an enormous opportunity to get bipartisan opinion against abuse of prison labor. What better way to get popular support against AG Session's incarceration increase than to tie it to a deeply unpopular politician with his constituency?
i see you deleted your previous comment saying that the way this 20-year-old passage has suddenly been noticed is "banal" and passage itself is not newsworthy, because HRC was not newsworthy anymore until she ran for president.
the point of my observation is that this passage only became a widespread topic AFTER the recent election, after a sharp-eyed and thoughtful reader commented on it via Twitter and it went viral last week.
the point of my observation is that this passage only became a widespread topic AFTER the recent election, after a sharp-eyed and thoughtful reader commented on it via Twitter and it went viral last week.
Yeah, I deleted it. I was agreeing with you. The comment was focusing on the circumstances, when the value is recognizing the opportunity.
[deleted]
Even better if the prisoners keep a substantial portion of that.