A United Nations human rights expert will be visiting the US to review our treatment of immigrants, and will make a stop at the T Don Hutto prison in Texas. Jorge Bustamante, an independent expert for the Human Rights Council, will visit for over two weeks, visiting the border region along with Florida, Washington DC and New York. The U.S. government is facilitating the visit.
Bustamante will present his findings to the 47-member rights council in June.
This week, the GEO Group, Inc. ("GEO") announced that it has signed a contract with the Office of the Federal Detention Trustee for the development and operation of a 1,500-bed Detention Facility to house U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) prisoners in Laredo, Texas. The new private prison is scheduled to open in 2008. The contract has an initial term of five years with three five-year renewal option periods, for a total contract term of 20 years.
Currently, Texas operates more than 12,000 proposed or recently constructed private prison beds. The majority of these beds are intended to house federal detainees from the USMS or Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). There are a few exceptions including the Reeves County Detention Center, a facility that received a contract to house incarcerated immigrants from the Federal Bureau of Prisons (FBOP) under a Criminal Alien Requirements (CAR) contract. Many of these beds are being built or proposed as speculative prison beds, but several thousand are being built on contract from the ICE and USMS.
The expansion of immigrant detention facilities significantly increased in Texas due to changes in federal immigration policy. The number of unauthorized immigrant detainees has exploded from 6,785 in 1994 to over 22,000 in 2006.
Earlier this year, the news media took the guided tour of the T Don Hutto prison, which holds children while they and their parents await their immigration hearings. Media members were allowed to film a few areas, but not allowed to interview anyone imprisoned there. But they were allowed to talk to someone from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) about what a good idea it is to lock up entire families.
Strangely, the ICE spokespeople (and the ICE website) say that the children being held at the Hutto prison are not forced to wear "prison garb," but in the video (carefully shot so that no faces are shown), it's plain that all the kids are wearing the same clothing --- the medical-style "scrubs" that are familiar to us from other prison settings. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement web page for Hutto explains, "Residents are provided with t-shirts, sweat shirts and/or medical-style scrubs. (“Jail uniforms” are not worn)." So even though 400 people who are confined there wear the same clothes, and they're not the same clothes as the people who work there, we shouldn't call them "uniforms."
Not that the clothes are the worst part of this, compared to the reports from the some of the parents and children in the prison. You can read the profiles of some of the families imprisoned at Hutto at the ACLU website. Parents have reported being separated from their kids (in separate cells), the lack of access to medical care, and that some of their children are not eating enough (due to short mealtimes and poor quality food), so have lost weight. One recurring theme is staff threatening the children with being separated from their parents if they don't behave. Not only does it sound like a prison, it sounds like the worst kind of prison. How much longer can this go on?
Shutdowhutto.org has several excellent videos that explain the problems with T. Don Hutto, Corrections Corporation of America's "prison for the whole family." They're also collecting names on an online petition with five key points on it:
Visit the site, sign the petition, and let's get T Don Hutto closed!
Tomorrow lawmakers in the Texas House of Representatives will debate HB 198, a bill that would raise the state’s cap on contracting for private prison beds. These policymakers appear to be considering expanding reliance on prison privatization in the context of an historic shift of focus in correctional policy. One the one hand, they can expand drug and alcohol treatment, revise parole standards,and modestly expand discretionary release, saving Texas taxpayers money and eliminating the prison bed shortfall -- the combination of treatment and discretionary release can save over half a billion dollars not just in the cost of incarceration, but also the savings from decreased crime. Or, lawmakers can enact HB 198, enriching private prison companies and digging an even deeper financial hole for the Texas Department of Community Justice.
Safety Committee Chairman Madden and Senator Whitmire have proposed to address a projected shortfall in 2012 of more than 17,000 prison beds by providing treatment for thousands of non-violent and low-level drug offenders. Dr. Tony Fabelo has laid out a plan showing how greater reliance on treatment and modest increases in discretionary release rates could eliminate the prison bed shortfall, saving Texas taxpayers more than one half a billion dollars.
The latest report on evidence-based public policy options from the Washington State Institute on Public Policy (WSIPP) shows the benefit of treatment-oriented programs coupled with intensive supervision in the community. The Washington comparison shows a modest recidivism reduction rate of just 5.7 percent for in-prison programs, compared with a 16.7 percent reduction for intensive supervision of treatment-oriented programs. This comparison falls nicely in line with other recent research from WSIPP, showing that Washington state’s drug courts produce $1.74 in crime-reduction benefits from every dollar invested in that community-based treatment delivery system.
It's growing increasingly clear that where the state provides treatment makes a difference. Earlier this year, California’s Inspector General released a report on in-prison substance abuse programs, finding that the state’s correctional managers had squandered more than a billion dollars on a totally ineffective in-prison substance abuse treatment delivery system.
A key finding was that California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation correctional facilities were often not amenable to the therapeutic community treatment model, and that prison managers were not able to hold contractors accountable to delivery of the essential components of quality treatment. The effort was deemed a “complete waste of money.”
Texas lawmakers should consider this research carefully before they build new "treatment prisons," especially private ones. There are serious questions raised by a very considerable body of solid research about whether the private prison sector – overall – has the capacity to deliver quality correctional services. A small mountain of evidence has been collected and presented by academics and independent researchers, sponsored mostly by various units of the U.S. Department of Justice. The jury has come back in and the verdict is not favorable.
Gerry Gaes at the National Institute of Justice and Scott Camp at the Bureau of Prisons have documented much higher rates of escapes from private prisons, as well as more contraband violations as evidenced by higher rates of positive urine tests for drug use.
It is likely that prisons where drugs are more available are also experiencing more incidents of other security problems. (Read another comparison).
In my previous research comparing CCA’s Prairie Correctional Facility with three comparable public prisons in Minnesota, I was able to study the impact of CCA’s employment policies on prison programs and services. CCA was not required to hire certified teachers, and most of their instructors did not hold professional credentials. At the public prisons, the education programs were inspected and licensed by the state education authorities, and all teachers were certified to meet state standards for public education. I found that the rate of GED attainment was much lower in the private prison system (you can read more about this is in Capitalist Punishment: Prison Privatization and Human Rights, and my chapter "Lack of Correctional Services: The Adverse Effects on Human Rights.”) The GED rate completion rate was 55 per thousand prisoners, compared with 74 per thousand for prisoners confined in the state-run facilities.
Jim Austin and Gary Coventry’s national survey of private prisons for the Bureau of Justice Assistance found that private prison guards are assaulted by prisoners at a rate that is 49% higher than the rate of assaults experienced by their public prison counterparts.
These shocking deficiencies can likely be traced directly to personnel policies and practices regarding compensation and qualification requirements. National figures show that turnover for private prison guards run more than three times higher than turnover for correctional officers employed by public prison agencies Cite my chapter again –- 52 percent compared to 16 percent respectively.
In my research for the RAND Corporation I found TDCJ’s Institution Division policies and practices for contracting, monitoring, and enforcement of contract requirements to be exemplary of the best practice in the field. Yet given evidence that overall, private prison performance has been found to be gravely deficient on these critical outcome measures, it would seem only prudent that more information is needed about certain critical issues before anyone can wisely make a decision to expand use of prison privatization of any type in Texas.
A federal judge gave the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency a heads-up this week, ruling that families confined in the T. Don Hutto facility will probably prevail in court on charges that the prison is substandard. One big problem with the current situation: children whose parents are seeking asylum in the United States should not be held in a modified medium-security prison.
It boggles the mind that the government is defending itself for locking up children in this prison. The Flores case, settled in 1997, set clear standards for the treatment of minors in immigration custody. Children awaiting immigration hearings should live with family members, or in a foster home setting if necessary. They should be held in "non-secure" settings (translation: not a place encircled with barbed wire). They should have access to schooling, medical care, and proper nutrition.
T. Don Hutto, operated by Corrections Corporation of America for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), has never even come close to the spirit of the law, much less the letter of the law. It originally offered one hour of education a day, and twenty-minute mealtimes for the children, with no other nutrition available. Children wear prison garb, and are held at times in cells where toys are not allowed. Some children have been threatened that they'll be separated from their parents as punishment.
The immigration agency was hoping to promote this new "family-style" prison for an untold number of people, although Hutto at this point holds about 400 people, half of them children. Ten families are involved in the lawsuit over the substandard conditions, represented by the ACLU.
The judge, like any reasonable person would, puzzled over the actions of the federal immigration agency in this case:
"The Court finds it inexplicable that Defendants have spent untold amounts of time, effort, and taxpayer dollars to establish the Hutto family detention program, knowing all the while that Flores is still in effect."
Yes, it would actually be easier to just comply with the law than for ICE go to the trouble to fight this lawsuit for a prison that was illegal to begin with. Plus, let's face it: it would be way less morally reprehensible.
The judge has set a trial date for August, 2007.
So far in 2007, one in three Texas jails have failed state inspection because of problems with sanitation and safety. About 19 county jails that are publicly and privately managed have failed inspection. More people enter and exit county jails than state prisons on an annual basis. What happens in county jails does not stay inside of county jails -- it goes home with jail guards at the end of their shift and with the hundreds of thousands of jail detainees that cycle through county facilities each year. The safer prisoners and correctional officers are inside of county jails, the safer all Texans will be.
New legislation proposed by State Rep. Sylvester Turner (D-Houston) would require the agency that oversees county jails to contract with special monitors to review and monitor facilities that have failed three consecutive annual inspections. This would help improve conditions in county jails across the state. Given that most people in jails are being released back into the community in less than a year, how safe our jails are relates directly to how safe our communities are.
For the past three years, the Texas Commission on Jail Standards has found the Harris County Jail in noncompliance with Texas jail standards, primarily for conditions related to crowding. A state inspector concluded in 2005 that those conditions led to "safety" and "sanitation" issues. Additionally, the Dallas County jail has failed four annual inspections in a row. During an inspection earlier this year, holding cells were found to be over capacity.
Increasing mechanisms for accountability will enhance compliance with the state’s minimum standards. Effective oversight of county jails will identify and correct safety problems in local jails, both public and private. In combination, these mechanisms can work to provide the levels of transparency and accountability that we should expect from our public institutions. Without safe jails, we're shooting our public safety efforts in the foot.
I was fascinated to discover Sprung.com, the website of a company that's proud to display its catalog of ready-made prisons. Sprung is one of the companies assembling these insta-prisons across the country: domes made of fabric stretched over an aluminum frame, that are becoming more widely used as jails, immigrant detention centers and private prisons. For example, the Willacy immigrant detention center in Raymondville, operated by MTC Corporation, (pictured here) was constructed in 90 days, although not necessarily by Sprung.
The Sprung website boasts of their ability to build prisons quickly and "efficiently." Their web gallery of industries they serve includes churches, global military use, retail use, and a corrections gallery. The most telling photo in the corrections gallery is of a group of male prisoners eating at a long dining room table in one of these shiny white domes, with a whole table next to them sitting empty, waiting to be filled. The caption of the photo reads "Businesses can open ahead of schedule or expand production quickly."
Right, because in the private prison business, locking up more people = "expanding production." Just unpack the prisons, assemble them, fill them with people, and don't ask too many questions about why we're spending this money and who is winding up locked up in there.
At a recent Corrections Committee hearing, private prison lobbyists explained they could provide the state with hundreds of new prison beds if some standards for health and safety were eliminated. read more »