(I commented on this earlier, but feel compelled to speak more at length.)
The state of Arizona, in the hands of the GOP, continues to compete against the rest of the nation to become the ideal conservative state. Which generally seems to translate out to screwing the poor, the powerless, the afflicted, the strangers, and anyone else who threatens their tax rates.
And here’s the latest installment:
For the Arizona Department of Corrections, crime has finally started to pay.New legislation allows the department to impose a $25 fee on adults who wish to visit inmates at any of the 15 prison complexes that house state prisoners.
Yes, if you’re in prison, then any adult (parent, spouse, child over 18, relative, friend) that wants to visit you has to pony up $25 first.
Every place I poke at this law makes me outraged in a different way.
The Deceitful Justification: The fee was ostensibly passed to pay for background checks on visitors. Because, of course, who knows what sort of danger someone visiting in a prison might be.
But no background checks are actually being done with the money, and it’s clear that wasn’t the real reason.
Wendy Baldo, chief of staff for the Arizona Senate, confirmed that the fees were intended to help make up the $1.6 billion deficit the state faced at the beginning of the year.
“We were trying to cut the budget and think of ways that could help get some services for the Department of Corrections,” Ms. Baldo said. She added that the department “needed about $150 million in building renewal and maintenance and prior to this year, it just wasn’t getting done and it wasn’t a safe environment for the people who were in prison and certainly for the people who worked there.”
Ms. Baldo said the money would not actually pay for background checks but would go into a fund for maintenance and repairs to the prisons.
[…] “Maintenance funds for our buildings are scarce in this difficult economic time,” [a spokesman for the Corrections Department] said. “A $25 visitation fee helps to ensure our prisons remain safe environments for staff, inmates and visitors.”
So rather than actually devote taxpayer revenue to maintaining prisons the state has decided to build and to populate, or even possibly raising taxes, let’s punish …
… the people who want to visit prisoners. That’s not even a use fee. That’s just being cruel.
The Stupidity: Family visits are hugely important to prisoners. They remind them of the outside world and the desire to behave well in prison so as to expedite their release. It maintains ties beyond the gangs and bad elements within the prison. And the threat of losing visitation rights is a huge motivator in and of itself. Any penologist will tell you that this is one of the most critical elements in promoting good behavior in prison, and in reducing recidivism once prisoners are released.
So let’s discourage it! Or make it more difficult and less likely to happen. Brilliant!
The Pious “It Could Have Been Worse” Defense: The legislature and those behind this scheme seem to think that they deserve praise for not inflicting the fee on all visitors, including children.
[A]n earlier proposal presented to a legislative committee would have imposed the background check fee on everyone who visited inmates, including babies and children. But in the end, the Legislature limited the fees to people over 18.
The law also allows the Corrections Department to waive all or part of the background check fee in certain circumstances — for example, when an applicant just wants permission to telephone an inmate.
Why, they’re practically saints in their level of compassion!
Time is Money: Better yet, since this is ostensibly for a background check (which it isn’t), it sounds like this isn’t something you just go to the prison and pay for. You have to apply in advance … well in advance. Shenanigans ensue:
She was told that the best way to pay the fee was electronically, through Western Union, but was unable to get the system to work, she said.
She was then advised to send a money order. Despite confirmation by United Parcel Service that the package had been delivered, the Corrections Department told her that the $100 payment — four $25 money orders for four visitors — had not been received, she said.
Another $100 payment was sent, and on Friday — months after she began the application process — she finally got confirmation of the payment from the department.
“I have now spent $200 of my own money to get family in,” she said, adding that it could take up to 60 days for the department to approve the applications.
So we have a payment, plus additional fees (since Western Union and money orders ain’t free). Plus weeks and months of folderol before a visitor is “approved.” Not because there’s any actual background check being done, but because it takes that long for some DoC bureaucrat to stamp a form approved.
And so when someone is first in prison, at their most vulnerable, before bad habits of thinking and behavior have gotten established, their most important potential supporters and encouragers to hang in there and do their time in peace … are shut out.
Constitution, shmonstitution: You can’t pick on a particular population without a rational reason. You can impose a tax on, say, blondes, just to raise more money for everyone. Thus:
In a lawsuit filed last month against the Corrections Department, Middle Ground [a prison reform group] said the fee was simply a pretext for raising money “for general public purposes” and as such was unconstitutional because it amounted to a special tax on a single group.
Good, Christian Values: The Right in Arizona garbs itself in Christian holiness. But consider what Jesus said about prisoners.
31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’”
Jesus equates visiting prisoners with feeding the poor, sheltering the stranger (illegal or not), looking after the sick. To do these things is to do them, for Jesus.
If you pay your new $25 fee and get an approved application, of course.
Should I mention the fate Jesus says awaits those who don’t do these things (or, perhaps, who make it more difficult to do them)?
So, let’s summarize — what we have here is an arguably illegal tax (aren’t conservatives always railing about how “fees” are actually “taxes”?), passed for admittedly bogus reasons, imposed on people who not responsible for what’s going on and are probably among the least likely to be able to afford it, that makes prison conditions and the chance of rehabilitation worse, that’s ineptly administered, and that flies in the face of Christ’s teaching.
Bravo, Arizona GOP! Glad to see your priorities are straight, and your tax rates are so being kept so low! Heck, you can probably afford to throw a bunch more folks in prison now!
Next up — let’s come up with a fee on those who help widows and orphans!
Give yourselves a nice pat on the back, you sack of cruel, money-grubbing sociopaths …
(It’s worth noting, as one of my correspondents in the other thread did, that in the UK they think prisoner visitatation is so important as both a rehabilitative tool and as a social/moral imperative, that they actually have a program to help people who can’t afford the cost to go to a prison to visit a close relative or partner. Which, I’m sure, would make some heads explode over on this side of the pond to even suggest such a thing. Which, to me, is a sad commentary on Us.)
(via Ed Brayton and Jonathan Turley)