FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

U.S Prisons Are Ending In-Person Visits, Cutting Down On Reading Books

by

The United States continues to have the largest prison population in the World; with only 5 percent of the World’s population, it hosts over 20 percent of the World’s prison population. Instead of rectifying the mass incarceration crisis in the United States, federal and state prisons are scaling back the rights of inmates, often in favor of corporations seeking to profit off the prison industry.

In New York, Directive 4911A was enacted last month at three prisons in the state and could soon be applied to all prisons statewide. The program limits the packages prison inmates can receive to products distributed by six vendors. So far out of five vendors with available product lists, only 77 different books are available to be purchased, 24 of them coloring books and 21 puzzle books. Several New York State Prisons were already under a “TV Facility” directive, meaning prisons with televisions restricted inmates to just two food packages per year.

Activists and organizing against the directive pushed New York Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo to announce on January 12, “I am directing the Dept. of Corrections to rescind its flawed pilot program that restricted shipment of books & care packages to inmates.” Though he added that New York will continue to seek ways to “redouble efforts to fight prison contraband.”

In December 2017, the New York Times reported that the State of Texas has 10,000 books on its ban list, including several classic novels, while white supremacist texts like Hitler’s Mein Kampf managed to not make the list. The same month, the state of Mississippi issued a ban on books from non-profit agencies to prevent a non-profit called Big House Books from being able to donate books to prisons in the state.

In the wake of this trend across the country from state prison systems banning books being sent to inmates, the State of New Jersey banned  Michelle Alexander’s book, The New Jim Crow, in several of the state’s prisons, only to reverse it after the ACLU protested, calling the ban “unconstitutional.”

As several states enact rules and regulations that further restrict the daily lives of inmates, prisons across the country are further scaling back the rights of inmates by replacing in-person visitation with video call systems run by for-profit companies. Outside of New Orleans, Louisiana, in late 2017 the Jefferson Parish Correctional Facility completely replaced in-person visits with video calls that cost $12.99 per 20 minute phone call. According to the Prison Policy Initiative, 74 percent of prison facilities that implement video call systems do so in tandem with scaling back or replacing them with in-person visitations rather than providing them as a supplement for families and inmates. At least 600 prison facilities across the United States have implemented video call systems. “When your relationship is mediated with a video screen that can become difficult for children who maybe might become distracted or wondering why they can’t see their parent, incarcerated parent in person. This is one of the most difficult times in a person’s life. going through incarceration, “said Lucius Couloute, a research associate at the Prison Policy Initiative, in an interview with me. “It’s a dehumanizing experience. Video calling systems are not bad in and of themselves but when you latch on exorbitant prices, the removal of in-person visits, all that contributes to what is really an exploitative industry that hurts incarcerated people more than it helps them.”

In-person visits and encouraging inmates to read have both been demonstrated to reduce recidivism. In a November 2011 study, the Minnesota Department of Corrections compared recidivism rates for 16, 420 ex-prisoners over a five year period, and found that those who had in person visits were directly correlated to a reduction in recidivism of those individuals. “Any visit reduced the risk of recidivism by 13 percent for felony re-convictions and 25 percent for technical violation revocations, which reflects the fact that visitation generally had a greater impact on revocations. The findings further showed that more frequent and recent visits were associated with a decreased risk of recidivism,” the study noted. In 1991, University of Massachusetts Professor Bob Waxler started a prison program called ‘Changing Lives Through Literature.’ In the program’s first year, participants exhibited a 19 percent recidivism rate, compared to 45 percent for a control group, and these findings have been replicated several times.

But rather than U.S. Prisons and public policy working to reduce mass incarceration, recidivism, and provide inmates with the infrastructure and support systems required to integrate them back into society, the rights of inmates and their families are being rescinded as part of policies that serve the best interests of the prison industrial complex and the corporations that thrive off it.

More articles by:

Michael Sainato’s writing has appeared in the Guardian, Miami Herald, Baltimore Sun, Denver Post, Buffalo News, the Hill, Alternet, and several other publications . Follow him on twitter: @MSainat1

Weekend Edition
February 23, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Richard D. Wolff
Capitalism as Obstacle to Equality and Democracy: the US Story
Paul Street
Where’s the Beef Stroganoff? Eight Sacrilegious Reflections on Russiagate
Jeffrey St. Clair
They Came, They Saw, They Tweeted
Andrew Levine
Their Meddlers and Ours
Charles Pierson
Nuclear Nonproliferation, American Style
Joseph Essertier
Why Japan’s Ultranationalists Hate the Olympic Truce
W. T. Whitney
US and Allies Look to Military Intervention in Venezuela
John Laforge
Maybe All Threats of Mass Destruction are “Mentally Deranged”
Matthew Stevenson
Why Vietnam Still Matters: an American Reckoning
David Rosen
For Some Reason, Being White Still Matters
Robert Fantina
Nikki Haley: the U.S. Embarrassment at the United Nations
Joyce Nelson
Why Mueller’s Indictments Are Hugely Important
Joshua Frank
Pearl Jam, Will You Help Stop Sen. Tester From Destroying Montana’s Public Lands?
Dana E. Abizaid
The Attack on Historical Perspective
Conn Hallinan
Immigration and the Italian Elections
George Ochenski
The Great Danger of Anthropocentricity
Pete Dolack
China Can’t Save Capitalism from Environmental Destruction
Joseph Natoli
Broken Lives
Manuel García, Jr.
Why Did Russia Vote For Trump?
Geoff Dutton
One Regime to Rule Them All
Torkil Lauesen – Gabriel Kuhn
Radical Theory and Academia: a Thorny Relationship
Wilfred Burchett
Vietnam Will Win: The Work of Persuasion
Thomas Klikauer
Umberto Eco and Germany’s New Fascism
George Burchett
La Folie Des Grandeurs
Howard Lisnoff
Minister of War
Eileen Appelbaum
Why Trump’s Plan Won’t Solve the Problems of America’s Crumbling Infrastructure
Ramzy Baroud
More Than a Fight over Couscous: Why the Palestinian Narrative Must Be Embraced
Jill Richardson
Mass Shootings Shouldn’t Be the Only Time We Talk About Mental Illness
Jessicah Pierre
Racism is Killing African American Mothers
Steve Horn
Wyoming Now Third State to Propose ALEC Bill Cracking Down on Pipeline Protests
David Griscom
When ‘Fake News’ is Good For Business
Barton Kunstler
Brainwashed Nation
Griffin Bird
I’m an Eagle Scout and I Don’t Want Pipelines in My Wilderness
Edward Curtin
The Coming Wars to End All Wars
Missy Comley Beattie
Message To New Activists
Jonah Raskin
Literary Hubbub in Sonoma: Novel about Mrs. Jack London Roils the Faithful
Binoy Kampmark
Frontiersman of the Internet: John Perry Barlow
Chelli Stanley
The Mirrors of Palestine
James McEnteer
How Brexit Won World War Two
Ralph Nader
Absorbing the Irresistible Consumer Reports Magazine
Cesar Chelala
A Word I Shouldn’t Use
Louis Proyect
Marx at the Movies
Osha Neumann
A White Guy Watches “The Black Panther”
Stephen Cooper
Rebel Talk with Nattali Rize: the Interview
David Yearsley
Market Music
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail