I'm quite surprised by this. On the one hand, sure, prison costs exceed those of various prevention and rehabilitation programs. But I'd actually thought that Texas, or at least the US southwest, was really into the private prison system, championed as a triumph for free enterprise, privatization of public institutions (as more cost-efficient than the government), and I thought that they felt this was working for them.
Good to see that they're acknowledging that it's not. Are the rehabilitation and reform and treatment programs privatized?
This is a corker:
Levin believes government should still be tough on violent criminals and respectful of crime victims, whom he considers "consumers" of justice.
He's a Democrat, but I 'm encouraged (I think) by this report from the Auditor General here in Pa.
A big question here, I think, is how the reform is implemented with regards to race.
3: I had a similar question about religion and the involvement of charitable religious organizations.
3, 4: Presumably the only thing of interest to Republican reformers is the potential cost savings. It's a utilitarian calculation. As far as I know, not much else enters into their calculations; of course if whatever-you-call-'em unintended costs or consequences follow from continuing to disproportionately disfavor blacks or favor Christians, they'll notice that a decade or so down the road. The big picture is not their strong suit.
It often takes the cheap to win. The worst problems with over-institutionalized patients with mental illness were not solved by civil libertarians acting alone.
7: (a.) I have come to the view that some clients ought to be closer to being institutionalized. There are some beautiful grounds with houses next to old sate hospitals in Boston proper which are accessible by public transportation. They're in much nicer neighborhoods than most group homes.
Community-based supports on the cheap in a fragmented system are turning into a disaster and an administrative nightmare with an extra high burn-out rate even for public human services jobs
(b.) I hope that California drops its 3 strikes and you're out rule. They're mandated to reduce overcrowding from something like 3 times capacity to 2 times capacity, and lord knows they don't have money to build new prisons.
8.1: I'm of similar opinion, an opinion acquired by working with experienced researchers. I'm just saying that it was pretty bad in the old days. And that fiscal conservatism was a big part of the mix that ended the life-long hospital stays.
Here's the way I see it: If progressives swallow their pride and go along with the conservatives, big win for everyone including many prisoners, but in that event there is always the possibility of either side ratfucking the other one for a big political win, so we'll probably just end up with keeping the status quo.
Presumably the only thing of interest to Republican reformers is the potential cost savings.
I think you'll very rarely go wrong sticking stubbornly with the presumption that the very last thing of interest to Republican reformers is the potential cost savings, no matter what situation you're talking about.
11: Really? Aren't Republican governors looking into alternatives to incarceration because they're faced with significant state deficits? They're unwilling to raise taxes, so they have to cut costs.
I'm afraid I don't know what you mean.
On the local NPR segment the other day, they said that it is legal for Texas state politicians to use campaign contributions for housing and to supplement their personal income. Furthermore, their salary from the government is $7200/year, and so the system is rigged to basically force them to support themselves via contributions. (I think this was senators.)
Is this just Texas? I was pretty appalled that this is legal and practically mandatory.
11: For that reasons, I was quite hopeful when I saw the article JP had listed in 2. Also, the state rep from the district down the road got picked-up smoking pot in public and was plea bargained down to community service and a huge lie (or something). Probably because his whole family is in politics, but maybe because nobody wanted to jail him for that.
The thing about Nixon going to China wasn't just that he could do it without people calling him a peacenik. The thing was he needed to do it to check Soviet power. Yes, if a democrat were in office, the president would have gone to China, because they would be accused of being weak. But if Nixon had been in office and there had not been a pragmatic reason to go to China, there will still be no Chinese visit.
Similarly with Republicans showing mercy to convicts.
16: I love "Burn them all and then buy carbon offsets to make their executions more green-friendly."
15: I heard he wanted to nail a panda.
I see now that the analysis in 10 is not optimal (although a likely equilibrium).
but in that event there is always the possibility of either side ratfucking the other one for a big political win, so we'll probably just end up with keeping the status quo.
Prisoners' dilemma.
21. Yes, I should have put in "QED" or "infinite recursive..." or something. It didn't seem important enough to correct.
20,21: You know how when you're waiting for someone to let you in a long line of traffic or something like that, and finally someone does and even though they are in fact the only person who actually did what you wanted, you might find yourself stupidly saying something sarcastic to them because they are only one available ...