Buying the Vote: Corrections Corporation of America

Can you be trusted?

Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix
October 2010

Thanks to Bob Ortega, who continues to do a great job covering the private prison issue for the Arizona Republic...hit the site and check out their previous articles:

-----------------------------

More on the private-prison system

Read the documents
Arizona private-prison delay urged
Coolidge voices desire to land new prison
2010 escape at Kingman an issue for MTC's bid
La. firm says prison escapes led to changes
Private-prison bidder Geo's record an issue
Proposal to build private prison in Goodyear draws fire
Firm presents Arizona prison proposal
Arizona prison oversight lacking for private facilities
Kingman prison empty bed payments
Documents show security lapses in prisons
Public hearings on prison plans
State to expand private prisons
Kingman private prison slow to fix flaws
Arizona DOC faces systemwide security lapses

Arizona prison businesses are big political contributors

by Bob Ortega - Sept. 4, 2011 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic

Corrections Corp. of America, the country's largest private-prison operator, says it thrives by offering better service at a lower cost than state-run prisons. It's an argument echoed by the three smaller rivals bidding on a 5,000-bed private-prison contract with the state of Arizona.

But when it comes to other ways of winning business, such as employing platoons of lobbyists, doling out campaign contributions and working through political connections, CCA stands head and shoulders above its competitors, in Arizona and across the country.

Read prisons cost report

It isn't easy to disentangle the complicated political and financial connections between a company and the public officials whose policy decisions can help or harm its business. But critics accuse CCA of using its financial might and political connections to influence decision makers and muscle its way to multimillion-dollar deals behind closed doors.

"They spend a lot of money, and clearly, they spend it because it benefits their interest, which is winning contracts," said Bob Libal, a senior organizer at Grassroots Leadership, a Texas group that opposes prison privatization.

The company says its lobbying activities are meant only to educate lawmakers. Critics who argue that putting prisons in private hands creates a perverse incentive for companies to push for tougher prison terms level similar charges against competitors Geo Group Inc., Management and Training Corp., and, to a lesser extent, LaSalle Corrections, the other companies bidding for new Arizona contracts.

Arizona's Department of Corrections plans to award one or more contracts after Sept. 16 for an expansion of private prisons ordered by state lawmakers and signed by Gov. Jan Brewer last year. This follows a failed effort in 2009 that would have allowed privatization of all but one of Arizona's 10 state-run prisons.

Just before a series of recent community hearings to assess competing bids, Geo and MTC hired additional lobbying and public-relations firms in Arizona. But both are playing catch-up to the efforts of Nashville-based CCA, which has outspent its rivals in campaign contributions and has cultivated more political connections.

Political footprint

The nation's largest and oldest corrections company, CCA runs more than 60 prisons and immigrant-detention centers across 19 states and the District of Columbia. It has by far the largest political footprint of the dozen or so companies that operate private prisons in the U.S.

CCA has spent about $17.6 million lobbying Congress and federal agencies over the past decade, according to records compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan organization that tracks the effect of money on U.S. politics. The agencies include the Department of Homeland Security and its Immigration and Customs Enforcement division, which contract with private operators such as CCA for immigration-detention centers.

Thirty of CCA's 35 lobbyists on Capitol Hill previously worked for members of Congress or for federal agencies. Two CCA senior executives are former directors of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, including Harley Lappin, whom CCA hired in June as chief corrections officer a week after his retirement from the bureau. CCA is a major bureau contractor. Another CCA vice president, Bart VerHulst, previously worked as chief of staff for then-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee.

Since 2000, the company has won $3.84 billion in federal contracts, including just under $546 million for federal contracts in Arizona, according to government records. CCA's six prisons in Arizona hold inmates from other states, federal prisoners and immigration detainees. Its bid calls for moving out prisoners from Hawaii and California at its existing Red Rock and La Palma prisons in Eloy and moving in Arizona prisoners.

CCA lobbies heavily on the state level, employing 178 lobbyists in 32 states over the past eight years, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics, a nonpartisan group that gathers lobbying and campaign-finance data.

In Arizona, the company has cultivated high-level connections. Former U.S. Sen. Dennis DeConcini sits on CCA's board of directors. Perhaps the highest profile among CCA's 22 registered lobbyists in Arizona belongs to Chuck Coughlin, president of HighGround Public Affairs Consultants and a senior political adviser to Gov. Jan Brewer. Besides CCA, HighGround's 23 lobbying clients include Maricopa County and Salt River Project.

Coughlin served as chairman of Brewer's transition team when she took office in 2009 and as her campaign manager in 2010. He also has managed election campaigns for Senate President Russell Pearce.

Other heavy hitters with ties to CCA include Paul Senseman, a lobbyist with Policy Development Group, who served until last fall as Brewer's spokesman and whose wife, Kathryn Senseman, lobbied for that group while he worked for Brewer; and Bradley Regens, who joined CCA in 2007 after nine years as an Arizona legislative staffer, including two years as director of fiscal policy for the state House of Representatives.

Brewer has advocated for privatizing Arizona prisons. But even other privatization supporters say her CCA connections raise red flags.

"I've questioned Brewer's choice of staff in the past for the same reason; she has a lot of contract lobbyists, and I have a problem with that," said Sen. Ron Gould, R-Lake Havasu City. "At the very least it gives the public the appearance that these companies have too much influence, and you have to wonder what's going on when they leave Brewer's office and go right back into lobbying."

Brewer's office did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

Since 2003, CCA employees and affiliates have given nearly $2 million in campaign contributions to state-level candidates and ballot issues across the U.S.

In Arizona, CCA associates and its political-action committee have reported giving about $35,000 in political donations over the past decade to Brewer, Pearce, former House Speaker Kirk Adams, House Speaker Andy Tobin and many others. A big chunk of that, $11,520, was given for last year's election campaigns.

Arizona lobbying firms that represent CCA made about $35,000 in political contributions in the 2010 election cycle. Whatever influence contributions may bring, they are wielded on behalf of many clients.

CCA has spent far more in other states as has its nearest rival, Geo Group.

"They don't have to spend the money here," said Rep. John Kavanagh. "They don't really have to convince us."

In his view, a majority of the state legislators philosophically support the notion of privatizing government services when it makes economic sense. Kavanagh said he believes that Corrections Department studies in recent years showing private-prison beds cost more than state-run prisons "don't properly take into account secondary expenses," such as pensions for state corrections officers and differences in insurance rates. However, several academics who study corrections said Arizona conducts the most thorough cost comparisons of any state.

Corporate ties

CCA has other connections with legislators in Arizona and elsewhere, most notably as a longstanding corporate member of the American Legislative Exchange Council.

The council describes itself as a nonpartisan national association of state legislators; in fact, it is a partisan vehicle that brings together about 300 large corporations and 2,000 predominantly Republican legislators on task forces that produce model bills that lawmakers can introduce in their state legislatures.

Recent ALEC policy initiatives focused on an anti-regulatory, anti-union, anti-Obama health-care, pro-free-trade agenda.

The council doesn't release corporate or legislative membership lists. But a May 12 e-mail from Rep. Debbie Lesko, ALEC's public-sector Arizona chairwoman, lists 51 current Arizona legislative members, more than half of both the state Senate and state House. There are 50 Republicans and one Democrat, Rep. Richard Miranda of Tolleson. Lesko's e-mail, inviting lawmakers to the council's annual meeting in New Orleans, was leaked and posted online by a Tucson blogger; Lesko confirmed its contents.

Corporations, from Walmart and Exxon Mobil to Koch Cos. and Salt River Project, provided 98 percent of the council's funding last year, according to a tax filing obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. Lawmakers pay $50 a year to join; corporations pay from $7,000 to $25,000 a year for membership, plus more to sit on task forces, or to sponsor events hosting legislators and, often, their families. Corporations also fund ALEC "scholarships" that pay for lawmakers' travel and lodging.

CCA spokesman Steve Owen said his company left ALEC last year. But for the past two decades, a CCA executive has been a member of the council's Public Safety and Education Task Force as it produced more than 85 model bills and resolutions that required tougher criminal sentencing, expanded immigration enforcement and promoted prison privatization. Laurie Shanblum, CCA's senior director of business development, was the private-sector chair of the task force in the mid- to late '90s, when it produced a series of model bills promoting tough-on-crime measures that would send more people to prison for a longer time.

They included a "Truth in Sentencing Act" requiring that convicts serve at least 85 percent of any sentence, and 100 percent of a sentence for violent crimes; a "Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Act," imposing longer, mandatory sentences for all drug offenses; a "Third Strike" law mandating a life sentence for a third violent felony conviction; and dozens of other bills that called for violent juveniles to be tried and sentenced as adults, and for longer sentences for child-porn crimes, drunken driving, repeated retail theft and many other crimes.

Critics, many with ties to public-union or human-rights groups, have charged that such bills, by sending more people to prison longer, drove up demand for the prison space and services CCA sells.

Starting in the 1990s, the ALEC task force also produced model bills directly promoting prison privatization. These included bills to let private prisons house inmates from other states without permission of local governments, require privatization of prisons and correctional services and encourage contracting for prison labor.

Council members from Arizona, including Pearce, and a long list of former legislators going back to the early 1990s including Wes Marsh, John Verkamp, Jay Tibshraeny and Thayer Verschoor, subsequently introduced bills here that were near-duplicates of the ALEC model bills.

Lobbying costs

Geo Group Inc. of Boca Raton, Fla., the country's second-largest private-prison firm, has spent freely in recent years on lobbying and political contributions as it has tried to compete with CCA.

Geo, which is in the running for the new contract, operates 53 correctional and immigration-detention facilities in 17 states, plus an immigration facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. In Arizona, Geo operates three contract state prisons: the Central Arizona Correctional Facility and Florence West, in Florence, and Phoenix West.

Geo has spent $2.4 million since 2004 lobbying Congress and federal agencies including Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Two of Geo's four federal lobbyists formerly worked on Capitol Hill.

Geo has won $2.69 billion in federal contracts over the last decade, according to government records.

On the state level, Geo Group has used 68 lobbyists in 16 states over the past eight years, according to the National Institute for Money in State Politics. Over that time, Geo employees and affiliates spent more than $2.6 million in campaign contributions at the state level across the country.

In Arizona, Geo has seven registered lobbyists, including three at KRB Consulting Inc., a firm it hired in early July in advance of Department of Corrections hearings on the pending private-prison contract. KRB's Kristen Boilini worked for the Mofford and Symington administrations from 1989 to 1994; the firm's Nick Simonetta is a former state Senate staffer. Geo also recently hired the Arizona publicity firm of Leibowitz Solo. The firm's principal, David Leibowitz, is a former Republic columnist. Another Geo lobbyist is former legislator John Kaites, at Public Policy Partners.

In the 2010 election cycle, Geo Group's lobbyists made about $39,000 in campaign contributions to Brewer, Pearce, Adams, Kavanagh and others. Most of those firms also represented many other clients.

Geo associates and its political-action committee have given more than $28,000 in campaign contributions over the last decade, including at least $7,960 before last year's election. Geo employees focused their 2010 contributions on then-House Speaker Adams and Majority Whip Tobin.

The two leaders, along with Pearce, co-sponsored a bill signed by Brewer in September 2009 that mandated the 5,000 private-prison-bed expansion, the privatization of the Department of Corrections' health-care services, and ordered Corrections to seek potential bidders to take over up to nine of Arizona's 10 state-run prisons.

That last provision was intended to raise at least $100 million, but it failed to attract a qualified bidder and was repealed in March 2010 after some lawmakers had second thoughts when Corrections Director Charles Ryan raised security concerns.

Smaller competitors

In contrast to CCA and Geo, the much smaller and privately held Management and Training Corp. of Centerville, Utah, and LaSalle Corrections of Ruston, La., have spent just under $350,000 combined on federal lobbying over the past decade.

LaSalle, the smallest of the bidders, operates 12 prisons in Louisiana and Texas. It is the only company that doesn't hold any Arizona or federal contracts; and there is no record that it has registered lobbyists or made political contributions in this state. LaSalle's managing partner, Billy McConnell, and his family have given just under $59,000 in political contributions in Louisiana since 2000.

MTC's prison operations are a little more than a third the size of Geo's or CCA's. It runs 20 facilities in seven states, including two prisons under contract with Arizona's Department of Corrections, at Kingman and Marana. However, the company, which also runs Job Corps job-training centers for the U.S. Department of Labor, has amassed $3.26 billion in federal contracts since 2000. About $466 million of that amount is corrections-related.

MTC also has spent less than its larger rivals on lobbying and campaign contributions in recent years, though it recently ramped up its efforts. On Aug. 10, MTC hired the Dunn Stewart Group as lobbyists. Terry Stewart, a former Arizona Department of Corrections director under whom current director Ryan served as deputy, represented MTC at recent public hearings in San Luis and Coolidge. MTC also employs former Corrections assistant director Carl Nink.

MTC won the bid in 1993 for Arizona's first private contract prison, at Marana. The idea was championed by then-Rep. Bob Burns, an ALEC leader in the state. The debate over prison privatization in Arizona dates from at least the mid-1980s, when Govs. Bruce Babbitt and Rose Mofford three times vetoed proposals. Throughout the 1990s, privatization supporters in the Arizona Legislature consistently have been affiliated with ALEC.

"You can follow the money and connect the dots and there are a lot of troubling connections," said Rep. Chad Campbell, D-Phoenix, the House minority leader.

Campbell has asked Brewer to delay any new contracts until the Department of Corrections completes a study, due in January, to provide a comprehensive comparison of private and public prisons. Such biennial studies are required by state law but have not been conducted to date.

"I don't see the governor or legislative leadership complying with the law. . . . I don't see any evidence they're doing the due diligence to make sure this is a good deal for the taxpayers," Campbell said.

AHCCCS Transplant funds restored, at a high cost to others.

"The dying are taxpayers, too."
AZ State Capitol/Wes Bolin Plaza
February 28, 2011

http://www.azahcccs.gov/shared/Downloads/News/MedicaidReformPlan.pdf

Under the plan that restored the 2010 AHCCCS (medicaid) cuts, over a hundred fifty thousand "childless adults" in AZ won't receive health care coverage when they get ill, "saving" the state $190 million. Folks whose medical bills reduce their spendable income to less than 40% of the federal poverty rate are also screwed ("saving" the rest of us $70 m).

Not only do we lose federal funds for health care now, but it's guaranteed that we'll be spending more than twice as much incarcerating the mentally ill patients who lose their benefits and can no longer obtain the medications or treatment they need when they decompensate - because the people who voted for this woman are much more willing to spend their taxes on prisons (which so many profit from) than health care for the poor...no wonder we have one mentally ill person in our hospitals for every ten we decide top incarcerate, with little or no care.

That's appalling.

Give my Taxes to AHCCCS!

Thanks a lot, Brewer. You're a real swell human being.

----------------

Janice K. Brewer, Governor
Thomas J. Betlach, Director
801 East Jefferson, Phoenix, AZ 85034
PO Box 25520, Phoenix, AZ 85002
Phone: 602-417-4000

AHCCCS
www.azahcccs.gov
Our first care is your health care

ARIZONA HEALTH CARE COST CONTAINMENT SYSTEM
DATE: April 7, 2011

TO: Interested Stakeholders
FROM: Marc Leib, MD, Chief Medical Officer

SUBJECT: Transplant Restoration

AHCCCS RESTORES COVERAGE OF PREVIOUSLY COVERED TRANSPLANTS FOR ADULTS

As part of the recently enacted budget, the Arizona Legislature adopted Governor Brewer's Medicaid Reform Plan which restores funding of previously covered transplants for adults that were eliminated effective October 1, 2010. Retroactive to April 1, 2011, AHCCCS will once again cover the following transplants for members 21 years of age and older:
•
Pancreas-after-kidney transplants
•
Liver transplants in patients with Hepatitis C
•
Allogeneic unrelated hematopoietic cell transplants
•
Heart transplants in patients with non-ischemic cardiomyopathies
•
Lung transplants
•
Heart-lung transplants

Transplants that were not covered by AHCCCS prior to October 1, 2010, including pancreas only transplants, partial pancreas transplants and pancreas islet cell transplants, are not affected by this legislation. Those transplants remain non-covered. In addition to the medically necessary transplants covered for adults, AHCCCS continues to cover all medically necessary, non experimental transplants for members under the age of 21 years as required by EPSDT.

Coverage criteria for restored transplants will be the same as the criteria in place prior to October 1, 2010. Physicians with patients they believe meet the criteria for any AHCCCS covered transplant should contact the AHCCCS health plan in which the patient is enrolled to refer the patient for transplant evaluation.

For more information, please see the AHCCCS website at:

http://www.azahcccs.gov/reporting/legislation/sessions/2010/BenefitChanges.aspx#transplantRestoration

Wrongful Deaths in Custody: Susan Lopez (ADC)

(UPDATED from March 29, 2011 post.)

As noted in the last post, a prisoner at ASPC-Perryville killed herself last week. Below is the notice of 35 year-old Susan Lopez' death from the AZ Department of Corrections. What follows is what some of the other prisoners had to say about her suicide. If you are a loved one of Susan's, please brace yourself. I'm sorry if this post is painful, but the public needs to know what's happening behind bars in this state, or more vulnerable people will die needlessly.

Susan was a mother of four children, and was apparently a Certified Nurses' Aide. By the number of people landing on my site Googling her this week, I'd say she was probably well-loved by people in her community, even though she was ignored by her caretakers in prison, where she was sent for non-violent crimes. Her history suggests that her criminal activity may have been related to the disease of addiction. Most addicts in America never acquire a record for it; many get medical treatment for their illness or join a 12-step program and give a tremendous amount back to their communities. The ones who get criminalized before they get well are less fortunate, not less worthy of recovery, and their lives are often shredded by the excess branding, shaming, exiling, and impoverishment that results from initiating criminal prosecution. It can be completely devastating.

A few extraordinary souls pick themselves up after prison and make good anyway - we like to use them as proof that incarceration itself can "help" people get back on their feet. They are the exception to the rule, however, and it's what they already have within them - not some magic instilled by going to prison itself - that gets them through hell and back in one piece, if they make it. Once caught up in the machinery of "justice", though, too many just never break free. The criminal justice system is designed to extort us and exploit our troubles, not assist us, if we're in the shoes of the accused - guilty or not. Once law enforcement is on the scene we have no control over how it plays out from there; cops have been known to kill people who are suicidal, and courts here routinely hold mentally incompetent defendants criminally culpable for the symptoms of their mental illness.

There are no easy answers for addiction, of course; the ones out there are really as diverse as the population of addicts. I've seen courts be far too quick to take a one-size-fits-all approach and send people off to prison because AA didn't fit them and they screwed up their probation or couldn't pay off their restitution in time. A lot of folks think that the state is actually benevolent and calling the police on a loved one who's addicted might help speed along their recovery process by raising the bottom they have to hit before committing themselves to breaking the cycle, but that's especially misguided because of what I just described. I would only resort to such drastic action today if it was the only way to protect someone's life or limb in a crisis.

Most addicts who land in prison are admittedly there for crimes supporting their habits, too, like theft or fraud. That doesn't make them dangerous, though, or justify the violence of imposing imprisonment on them at outrageous public expense - especially while simultaneously refusing to cover treatment services for them to get well. Once you're a criminal, however, every relapse - which is "part of recovery" for the rest of us - is a potential parole violation or a new charge as a "repeat offender", and as your record gets longer judges get less sympathetic...

All of which appears to have happened to Susan.

Susan's guilty plea is on the internet; the sentencing minutes should be updated and posted soon. Her Graham County sentence is what's in question; that's the one that hasn't been posted as of yet. You can check current court records by searching her name with her month and year of birth (June 1975). She had a whole lot of petty stuff pile up on her in several different counties at once - apparently accumulating over several years then catching up to her once she was in custody.

I think if all her charges were in one county, she would have had more dismissed in a plea agreement; the poor woman was just pounded by court appearances this winter. By the looks of it, the respective county attorneys filed every single charge they possibly could to intimidate her into the deals she entered: she could have been facing the rest of her life in prison for forgery-related crimes if she lost at trial. They really do hurt people who resist them: I know one fellow doing 52 years for fraudulent schemes (largely because he accused the prosecution and judiciary of racism then lost in court).

I find it astounding that the judges who sent this mother off to prison were prepared to expend anywhere from $60,000 to over $120,000 in public funds just to punish her - that's what really seems criminal. Our legislature is equally as complicit. It's unbelievable that given such an investment no one could even bother to sit down to help Susan figure out how long she would be locked up and away from her family. There are sources of possible confusion evident in Susan's posted ADC records - her death notice lists her as being 40 though she was born in 1975, and her obituary indicates a different middle name than her court and ADC records. All the court documents indicate it's the same Susan, though. How hard could it have been to help her sort this out and cope with it? A little bit of attention could have saved her life.

Unfortunately, the nightmare that unfolded for Susan immediately prior to her suicide seems to be the standard MO at the Arizona Department of Corrections, though I've had some good experiences with at least one CO at ASPC-Tucson, and I know there are other exceptions - like former ASPC-Eyman DW Carl Toersbijns. It's not the individual CO's so much anyway - it's the staffing schedules, inadequate training, and an abusive institutional culture that results in deaths like Marcia Powell's, Brenda Todd's, and Susan's. There isn't the expectation that officers respond with compassion to prisoners, of course - they're all just criminals trying to manipulate them because that's what they do best.

If ADC policies and culture reflected a fundamental value for human rights, there would be less abusive and negligent conduct by employees. The leadership makes their disdain for their prisoners clear to all, however, and throws criminals on the legislature's alter for live sacrifices to offer their constituents without thought for the consequences of new fees and restrictions for prisoners and their families - who are also taxpaying constituents, I might add. The description of the main officer who ignored Susan's pleas for help is consistent with what I would expect from the current ADC, sadly.

At most the officer(s) involved might get written up - unless this becomes a politically charged case, and the ADC decides to sacrifice the officer to minimize the appearance of institutional negligence, as was alleged by CO's over the death of Marcia Powell. The pattern and practice of ignoring women begging for help in AZ state prisons is unlikely to change any time soon, then - not without serious litigation, anyway. The state is far more concerned with avoiding liability than it is with taking responsibility, despite the moralistic garbage it shoves down prisoners' throats about why they must be brutalized the rest of their lives for the smallest of crimes.

To Susan's family, on that note: take your time grieving, but file a notice of claim against the state within six months for each survivor, or you'll be precluded from suing in state court in the future. The ADC needs to be held responsible for their neglect; so many women out there are still suffering, and have no other hope for relief. I'll do what I can to put survivors in touch with attorneys who can help file claims for wrongful deaths - there are far too many happening like this. I'll also do what I can to help you compile evidence; that's what I've been doing in these blogs for nearly two years now.

My number is 480-580-6807; my email is prisonabolitionist@gmail.com; my name is Peggy. My office is at 1009 N. 1st St. #8, Phoenix, next to the Firehouse Gallery. Contact me anytime.


Anyone can contact the US Department of Justice to complain about all the prison suicides under Brewer, by the way. Ask for a CRIPA Investigation into the AZ Department of Corrections.

The address is:

Jonathan Smith, Chief

US DOJ Civil Rights Division,
Special Litigation Section

950 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, PHB

Washington, DC 20530

SOS DOJ: CRIPA Arizona.

Dodge Theater, Phoenix, AZ.

Halloween Night, 2010.

-------from the AZ Department of Corrections' website (posted 3/30/2011)-----

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
1601 W. JEFFERSON
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85007
(602) 542-3133
www.azcorrections.gov


JANICE K. BREWER, GOVERNOR CHARLES L. RYAN, DIRECTOR

NEWS RELEASE
For Immediate Release

For more information contact:
Barrett Marson
bmarson@azcorrections.gov
Bill Lamoreaux
blamorea@azcorrections.gov

March 28, 2011 Inmate Death Notification

Phoenix, Az. – Inmate Susan Lopez, 40, ADC #184221, died Friday night from an apparent suicide.

Lopez, sentenced out of Cochise and Graham County, was serving 6 years for forgery. She came to ADC Dec. 2, 2010 and was held at the Santa Cruz Unit, ASPC-Perryville.

The death is under investigation by the department.

-----via personal email, March 26, 2011 re: suicide on Santa Cruz-----

"Perryville - 16 yard: Inmate 184221 LOPEZ Susan died last night by hanging. Was told she was a low risk inmate who was put in 16 yard after returning from going to court.

She had just been brought back to from court where she was sentenced to 3 years concurrent on a charge but the counselor told her the computer said she got 6 years-consecutive. She begged for help and was ignored. Her counselor did nothing to try to get that corrected and would not allow her to talk to anyone about it.

She had been seeking help for several days and begged for help. The counselor did nothing. She asked for help from other officers.

Her husband called to say their daughter was having surgery in the hospital - a family emergency. She tried to get the counselor to let her call home on this emergency. He would not help her."

----received from ASPC-Perryville/Santa Cruz via US Mail on March 30, 2011 (dated 3/28/2011)-----

We must do everything we can to keep this from happening again.

State of AZ robbing and killing us to pay Paul.

Hey folks: there's some bad stuff going down at the legislature and in executive offices at the Capitol now that they're back at work - check out Middle Ground Prison Reform's take on it and call to action. If Donna Hamm thinks it's worth contacting legislators about these proposals (which include new fees for families and prisoners), it's worth it.

Also on the budget issues: I was just at the legislature the other day demonstrating about the Governor's proposal to cut some 280,000 more people off of AHCCCS. (violating a voter-initiative that extended the coverage in the first place). I think she called them into special session for that purpose just to keep the resistance off guard - I was the only one down there with any sign of protest (so I spread it around). I was pretty outraged that she'd call them all together to save money by killing more of the poor in this state, and wouldn't lift a finger to save those transplant patients that they collectively condemned to die.

So, what's more important to Arizonans: corporate welfare or human welfare; money or life? I know where my own priorities are, and my taxes aren't following them to pay for health care, housing or education - they're being hijacked by this fascist state to further a racist, classist, misogynistic agenda and build more prisons. Call me crazy, but that kind of thing I can't help but protest...



























The latest AHCCCS patient-killer bill, by the way, passed through
both houses on party line votes (see link above).

I just don't get this place...

Brewer: Please sack Chuck Ryan.

This letter to Governor Brewer, received in a roundabout way from the Arizona Correctional Peace Officers Association, confirms some of my suspicions. Way to go Tixoc and the ACPOA.

I'm glad they have as many problems with the falsification of records and shabby treatment of prisoners as I do. Their website is an interesting resource, and I imagine they probably have members who would willingly provide eyewitness testimony to institutional patterns of abuse, neglect and deceit to anyone investigating the ADC. Corrections' employee websites and blogs are the bomb. The ACPOA has had a running commentary from the president about the dictatorship of Chuck Ryan for quite awhile, and now they're bordering on insurrection. In fact, it looks like they're already there.

One problem, however, is that the appeal to sack Chuck Ryan goes to the very person who wanted him there to bully everyone into submission in the first place - this isn't just how Chuck runs his department, it's how Brewer runs the state. She asked that man to come run the ADC for a reason, so I'm not entirely optimistic that this appeal will make much of a difference with her - especially given her overwhelming victory in the elections. But it's still a message worth sending.

Good luck in your battle, folks. Let me know if I can help.

---------------------------

November 10, 2010


Governor Janet Brewer,

We, the Arizona Correctional Peace Officers Association, represent all members of the Arizona Department of Corrections to include: correctional officers, correctional officer IIIs, correctional sergeants, correctional lieutenants, correctional captains,correctional nurses, correctional majors, non-uniform staff and many others that proudly serve the citizens of the State of Arizona. We respectfully submit this letter as our official notice regarding a majority vote of no confidence in Agency Director Charles Ryan.

We, the AZCPOA, write this letter with great hesitation, and only after much discussion and contemplation. We hesitate because we consider ourselves a team of professional, dedicated and educated individuals, and it goes contrary to our traditions to break the chain of command. We also hesitate because we fully believe that if this letter does not have the desired result, there will most certainly be retaliation. We will most certainly pay a high price for doing what we know in our hearts to be the right thing for the State of Arizona, its citizens and its employees.

Over the past year and a half, we have been disheartened by the actions of Director Charles Ryan. He has tested our willpower and confidence in his skill to adequately lead this agency. Under his leadership, staff morale has plummeted to depths never before seen at this agency. This is a direct reflection of our lack of confidence in Director Ryan as he has not taken any steps to improve the spirits of the members of this association or members of this agency. If anything, attitudes have continued to deteriorate within the department forcing an exodus of many well respected individuals and members of our Association.

Employee issues in question regarding the leadership qualities of Director Ryan include: lack of communication in the day to day operations of the agency where information is not disseminated through his subordinates who are responsible for ensuring compliance with polices and procedures. To illustrate this point, there are many unanswered questions regarding staff rotation and why the methodology is inconsistent from complex to complex with apparent disregard to employee needs and fairness.

Furthermore, the agency has experienced a large amount of disparate punishment for similar offenses in the past and suspect there are employees that are being targeted for political reasons or just purely disciplined on emotion rather than facts or evidence at hand. It appears the merits of the investigations have no bearing on the sanction imposed thus poor judgment is used to handle these matters. It is our opinion Director Ryan fosters an atmosphere of workplace bullying and intimidation of employees to maintain a micro management type of control over the agency.

There exists, within ADOC administration, a well-known pattern of obstructing the disclosure of hazards in time to prevent accidents, injury, illness, and deaths. Tragically, in these instances, danger is not "imminent" - it is past, and too late to respond. Employees are routinely ordered to falsify documents and when they proactively seek to report identified hazards, they face punishment and retaliation. Obtaining an accurate account of the range and extent of violations will be difficult from records alone. It is unlikely that ADOC will disclose information without well-planned intervention by authorities. There is no evidence of any health and safety program existing, even on paper. There is no identifiable health and safety officer or other person bearing that responsibility and essential training is lacking to assure staff can perform certain assigned tasks safely and equipped with appropriate equipment e.g. cell extractions, transports, etc.

The entire department is devoid of any active programs for: Fire Prevention, Hazard Communication, Respiratory Protection, Medical Surveillance, Record keeping, Ventilation, Emergency Evacuation Procedures, Disaster Preparedness, Emergency Response, Training, or Education. Failure of ADOC administration to respond has resulted in secondary risks and complications - now endangering, not just the prison population and employees, but the public at large. Appropriate identification of risk requires your immediate intervention. Another day must not go by without initiating an investigation.

We as institutional line staff are expected to hold a very high standard within the institutions and community, we expect that our Director and his administrators to be held to the same standard of conduct and the same standard of punishment if those standards are violated.

In closing this matter, we would like to remind you that we are not troublemakers, malcontents, or disgruntled employees. We are members of the Arizona Correctional Peace Officers Association who have given our hearts and souls to serve the agency and the State of Arizona. Our agenda is strictly based in the well being of the agency so that we may appropriately serve the communities that depend on us for public safety.

Based on these circumstances we tender this letter of No Confidence in Director Charles Ryan and ask that Director Ryan be removed from his position.


Sincerely,

Tixoc Munoz
President and Executive Director
Arizona Correctional Peace Officers Association

Private prison industry exploits greed and fear with SB 1070

Seems I missed posting the excellent NPR report on immigration and private prisons when it came out before the elections, so here's a synopsis and the link.

That's Arizona's favorite son, Russ Pearce again, to the left. He has a lot to do with all this. He's done our state - our nation -more damage than Brewer, I'd say. Follow the link below for part II of the NPR story for more on his role.

-----------from Imagine 2050------------------

Cross-post: Prison Economics Help Drive Ariz. Immigration Law

October 30, 2010 by Imagine 2050 Editors

NPR broke an incredible story this week that is sure to continue unearthing the shady dealings behind the creation and passage of SB 1070 in Arizona. The following article was published on Oct. 28, 2010 by NPR reporter Laura Sullivan. To listen the podcast of this story click here.

"Last year, two men showed up in Benson, Ariz., a small desert town 60 miles from the Mexico border, offering a deal.

Glenn Nichols, the Benson city manager, remembers the pitch.

“The gentleman that’s the main thrust of this thing has a huge turquoise ring on his finger,” Nichols said. “He’s a great big huge guy and I equated him to a car salesman.”

What he was selling was a prison for women and children who were illegal immigrants.

“They talk [about] how positive this was going to be for the community,” Nichols said, “the amount of money that we would realize from each prisoner on a daily rate.”

But Nichols wasn’t buying. He asked them how would they possibly keep a prison full for years — decades even — with illegal immigrants?

“They talked like they didn’t have any doubt they could fill it,” Nichols said.

That’s because prison companies like this one had a plan — a new business model to lock up illegal immigrants. And the plan became Arizona’s immigration law..."

Continue reading the NPR article here.

Here's part II of the report:

Shaping State Laws With Little Scrutiny

Among hundreds of bills drafted by an alliance of business, lawmakers: Arizona's immigration law...

Private Prisons in Arizona: Frank Smith v. CCA

And he wins! Of course, I'm biased. Not only am I an abolitionist, but I love this guy - Frank is my comrade and friend, fighting prison privatization for something like 20 years. He genuinely cares about what happens to communities that fall for the industry's line of BS, and what happens to the prisoners and their families who are auctioned off to be warehoused by these people with only a profit motive in mind.

Frank's with the Private Corrections Working Group, a non-profit org whose list-serve I'm on to keep in touch with what the industry is up to around the world. Anyone else who wants to be added should just email Ken at kenk@privateci.org.

In the piece that follows from ABC15, first you'll hear from CCA, then you'll hear from Frank. He knows what he's talking about.

---------------------------------------

Hear Me Out: Are private prisons necessary in Arizona?

By: ABC15.com staff

September 4, 2010

PHOENIX - The nation faces tough questions in tough times, and there are people on both sides of every issue.

Arizona is no different. But who’s saying what about the issues important to Arizonans?

Each Sunday, ABC15.com debuts an Arizona issue - along with two opposing sides on the topic.

This week we're tackling the debate over the use of private prisons in Arizona.

After a much-publicized escape at a privately-operated prison in Kingman, the use of private facilities was called in to question and even became a divisive political issue for state officials .

Some say the use of private prisons saves taxpayer money and alleviates overcrowding issues at public prisons. They argue the use of privately run facilities is a boon to the economy and even helps provide jobs.

Others contend private prisons lack the security and oversight of public prisons and any savings passed on to taxpayers are greatly exaggerated. They say escape and safety concerns are serious issues continuing to plague privately-run facilities.

So, are private prisons necessary in Arizona?

PRO-Private Prisons

CORRECTIONAL PARTNERSHIP PROVIDES THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS: By Steve Owen, Corrections Corporation of America

A History of Partnership:

For many decades, governments at all levels have turned to the private sector to provide services once delivered exclusively by the public sector. Public-private partnerships are now prevalent in air traffic control, education, toll road operations, waste management and corrections.

Correctional partnerships have been an effective instrument in the “toolbox” of government for more than 25 years. Partnership corrections providers work with states like Arizona to combine the best of both worlds – the oversight and accountability of government with the efficiency and cost effectiveness of private business.

Opponents of public-private partnerships often resort to scare tactics, innuendo and character assassination in order to try to prevent partnerships. These campaigns are often fueled by big labor unions or ideology or in the case of Arizona – both.

Value of Correctional Partnerships as "Relief Valve" to Overcrowding:

Correctional partnerships are an innovative, common-sense approach: business and government working together to ensure taxpayers get the most out of every tax dollar, while providing fair, humane treatment for America’s prison population. That’s why state, federal, and local governments turn to businesses like CCA to build, manage and maintain partnership correctional facilities throughout the United States.

Partnership prisons offer governments an immediate “relief valve” to the number one problem facing prisons today – overcrowding. Overcrowding impairs the safety and security of hundreds of prisons across the U.S. and puts our families and communities at greater risk. Overcrowding also forces prison officials to utilize space intended for classrooms and gymnasiums to house inmates, which severely limits rehabilitative opportunities.

By relieving overcrowding, partnership prisons enable more inmates to receive rehabilitation programs they need to become productive citizens when they are released. In CCA partnership prisons, on a daily basis hundreds of CCA employees provide extensive drug and alcohol treatment, education classes and vocational training to inmates entrusted to our care by our government partners.

Accountability is Paramount:

The first responsibility of any correctional system is safety and security. Partnership corrections providers follow stringent rules established by their government partners and are expected by policy makers to meet or exceed services otherwise provided by government agencies.

Cost Savings to Taxpayers:

Partnership prisons save taxpayer dollars through efficient business practices and innovative prison designs and technology. CCA is able to save taxpayers money by using our national presence to buy more at better prices for many items such as prescription medications, staff uniforms, inmate clothing and security equipment.

Partnership prisons reflect state-of-the-art designs that maximize technology and ensure the most efficient operations possible. CCA continues to upgrade the quality of our correctional services while improving costs and constantly innovating the way in which we do business.

Strong Community Partnership:

In addition to helping governments meet their public safety responsibilities, partnership prisons also give communities an economic boost. A new correctional facility typically means hundreds of permanent careers, plus hundreds of initial construction jobs. In addition, businesses like CCA pay significant property and sales taxes for the partnership prisons we own and operate.

CCA in Arizona:

Opponents of public-private partnerships are using a combination of innuendo and scare tactics to spread misinformation about CCA and the Arizona immigration crisis. Here are the facts:

--Neither CCA nor any individual employed to represent CCA has on behalf of CCA directly or indirectly lobbied the governor or legislature regarding immigration law.

--CCA has never lobbied the governor or legislature regarding any state criminal law.

--Nearly 90% of CCA facilities are accredited by the American Correctional Association, which represents the nation’s highest correctional standards, with an average score of 99.3%.

--Security is why we exceed official government standards in every one of our prisons. Security is our Number One responsibility, and it is our Number One commitment.

--The economic benefits to the taxpayers of Arizona are equally clear:

In Pinal County, CCA pays approximately $7 million in annual property taxes.

In that community, our annual payroll is estimated to exceed $120 million and we contribute more than $8 million in yearly utilities.

CCA has over 2,700 employees in Arizona and has helped spur 1,700 spin-off jobs, paying over $200 million in wages annually.

CCA related activities generated more than $435 million in economic activity in Arizona in 2009 and produced a total of $26.2 million in tax revenue collected by governments statewide.

In summary, by combining the oversight and accountability of government with the efficiency and cost effectiveness of private business, partnership prisons are providing quality correctional services while ensuring that hard working taxpayers in Arizona and states around the country get the most of every tax dollar spent.

------------------

KINGMAN FOR-PROFIT ESCAPES: OPPORTUNITY FOR REASSESSMENT: By Frank Smith, Private Corrections Working Group

The deadly escapes from Management and Training Corporation’s (MTC) prison in Golden Valley, near Kingman, has briefly lifted corporate veils, providing the public with a narrow window on the dangerous and virtually uncontrolled operations of the for-profit industry’s Arizona facilities. The incidents were perhaps inevitable.

Inadequate staffing and training, failures of alarm systems and equipment and poor policies were the proximate cause, abetted by the abject failure of state monitors to address the obvious deficiencies.

The for-profit industry took advantage of a vacuum in Arizona’s regulations concerning their construction and operations. Beginning with three facilities in 1994, the industry rapidly imported prisoners to Arizona from across the nation. In Eloy and Florence they held District of Columbia and INS, Bureau of Prisons, and U.S. Marshal’s Service federal prisoners, as well as tribal prisoners. Exporters dumping many of their most violent felons included Washington, Alaska and Hawaii.

The prisons were insecure, often cheaply and inadequately built, staffed largely by poorly trained, poorly paid transients. They quickly experienced riots, sexual assaults of women prisoners and murders. Escapes abounded through the end of the decade, scattering fugitive murderers, rapists and other violent felons in Pinal County and beyond.

This was hardly unusual. Surveys going back to the advent of Arizona’s for-profits suggest that the escape ratio from private prisons nationally is about 30 times as high as from public facilities.

Before this escape, MTC experienced riots this year at its Arizona facilities, Marana and Kingman. Competitors had riots also. MTC founder Robert Marquardt claimed that Golden Valley was their “first major glitch.” A quick check revealed at least a dozen escapes, plus race riots and murders before 2010 in Texas, New Mexico, California and Utah.

Concerned with the lack of professionalism, Governor Janet Napolitano and Director of Corrections, Dora Schriro, resisted expansion of these prisons in the state, but the legislature refused to appropriate funds for expansion of the state system. Napolitano was forced to capitulate in 2003, allowing a facility to be constructed in Golden Valley, at first intended for DUI offenders, mostly minimum custody.

To deal with overcrowding, Arizona also exported prisoners, first to Texas, then Oklahoma, Colorado and Indiana. In each of these venues, riots precipitated by inedible food quickly followed as for-profits cut costs by hiring inept staff, providing little treatment, and flagrantly disregarding contractual terms.

Though crime was dropping, Arizona’s prison population was rapidly expanding.

The industry actually helped to manufacture that crisis. It lobbied for harsher sentences, tougher parole policies, even supported adding more crimes to the books. It did this especially through its criminal justice committee participation and chairmanships within the American Legislative Exchange Council, an organization to which a majority of the country’s conservative legislators belong. These gatherings produced “model legislation” to be brought back home - bills that assured the industry more prisoners, more market, and more market share.

Legislators holding critical posts continuously forced these irrational policies on states. It was hardly coincidence that in Arizona and elsewhere, a flood of campaign contributions went to sponsors of industry-favored bills. In Arizona, appropriations committee chairs such as Bob Burns and Russ Pearce were particularly willing to accommodate.

The proponents maintained this got the best bang for the taxpayers’ bucks. To the contrary however, an extensive study by Arizona in 2005 analyzed costs in 2003 and 2004. The for-profits actually cost 8.5% to 13.5% more than comparable state facilities. Subsequent studies further failed to verify any illusory “savings.”

By 2007, the industry had added five more Arizona facilities to the six it operated before 2000. The state contracted with some to provide alcohol and substance abuse “treatment.” In fact, inmates received little in the way of useful services.

Attempts by skeptical legislators to rein in industry abuses and lack of accountability were met by ferocious lobbying defeating such bills. This year Representative David Lujan’s bill to regulate their operations, establish an escape fund to cover liabilities, insure professional qualifications of employees and establish civil penalties for malfeasance, never got out of committee. A bill providing the same transparency of operations as required from public facilities, sponsored by Representatives Sinema, C.H. and C.L. Campbell, Meza, Patterson, Ableser and Cajero Bedford, met the same fate. This mirrored CCA’s federal success in particular of denying the public’s “right to know.”

A June 21st article published by In These Times, written by Beau Hodai, revealed relationships between the industry, Governor Brewer and the Republican majorities. Brewer’s campaign manager is CCA lobbyist Chuck Coughlin. Her chief spokesperson, Paul Senseman was CCA’s chief lobbyist. His wife continues the family tradition at the Policy Development Group. Public Policy Partners, holding GEO’s account, employs Richard Bark, an author of S.B.1070. He lobbies for the Arizona Chamber of Commerce, where CCA has a “board level” seat.

CCA also contributed $10,000 to the successful campaign to raise the regressive sales tax. More state revenues mean more possibilities for contracting out prisoners.

Brewer has attempted to create the illusion of distance between her and the industry. She has scrupulously avoided answering questions about this relationship in the primary.

In order to retain its lucrative contract, MTC has apparently fallen on its corporate sword, accepting responsibility for which liability must still be shared with the state.

Responses to requests by the media for Kingman monitors’ reports, that should have shown the shortcomings of security, have been inexplicably delayed.

On August 19th Coughlin made an appearance on Phoenix televison, ostensibly to explore the catastrophic administration failure to oversee MTC’s operation. Despite the clear record that Kingman was a Republican policy initiative, he first mendaciously tried to blame the failures on Napolitano and Schriro, then diverted discussion away to the tax bill.

Expanding the smokescreen, he began to blame entities that shared zero responsibility for the situation: The SEIU and UFCW unions, the boycott, the All Star Game, “President Obama’s electoral coalition,” immigration and “the left.”

The time for obfuscations is over. The public wants solutions. It wants them now.

Avert another tragedy. Take action against prison privatization.

-------------from the American Friends Service Committee-Tucson-------------

VICTORY!!!

The bids for 5,000 new for-profit prison beds in AZ are on hold, thanks to YOUR action. But we need to make sure that action is taken immediately to prevent another private prison disaster.

SAY “NO!” TO FOR-PROFIT INCARCERATION!

The Arizona Silver Belt newspaper reported yesterday:

“The Arizona Department of Corrections has confirmed that any decisions over bids submitted by four companies to build private prisons here in our state have been delayed because of security issues raised about a privately operated prison in Kingman last month where the breakout of three violent convicts occurred on July 30.

Barrett Marson, Director of Communications for the state agency, told the Arizona Silver Belt, efforts to add an additional 5,000 private prison beds has been stalled because of concerns which have developed on how the medium-security private prison was being operated in Kingman. He said representatives of each of the four companies that submitted proposals to build and operate private prison complexes housing ADC inmates will be called in for more questioning about their proposals.” (“One bidder owns Kingman prison where breakout occurred; Globe prison and others on hold,” Arizona Silver Belt, 8/25/10)

Congratulations and thank you to everyone who contacted the Governor and Director Ryan! Your voices made a difference!

But we cannot let up the pressure until all our demands are met. Please contact the Governor again and make sure she and the state legislature take immediate action to protect us from this irresponsible industry.

What YOU can do….

Contact Governor Brewer:

• Tell her that you are glad that the Department of Corrections has called an immediate halt to all bidding processes involving private prison operators
• Ask that she go a step further and institute a moratorium on new private prison beds until the issue has been thoroughly studied and legislative action taken
• Request that the Legislature immediately hold public hearings to address the problems with for-profit prisons in Arizona
• Suggest that the Legislature also enact other cost-cutting measures that not only save money but enhance public safety, like earned release credits, amending truth in sentencing, and restoring judicial discretion

Governor Jan Brewer

602.542.4331 or 800.253.0883 ph,

602.542.1381 fax.

Make a comment online at: http://azgovernor.gov/Contact.asp

**If you can blind copy or cc us, we will have a better idea how effective this initiative is. If you receive responses, even boiler-plate ones, please forward those to us, if possible.

Why Arizona should SAY NO to for-profit prisons:

1. For-profit prisons have histories of escapes, disturbances, prisoner abuses, financial mismanagement, and other scandals.

The Kingman escapes come on the heels of a riot at the same facility in June in which eight prisoners were injured. A prison run by Corrections Corporation of America in Eloy was recently on lockdown after prisoners from Hawaii rioted over an Xbox video game. When a staff member attempted to intervene, he was severely beaten, suffering a broken nose, broken cheekbones and damage to his eye sockets. The Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) found a significantly higher rate of prisoner-on-prisoner assaults in private prisons (66% more) than in public prisons. Inmate-on-staff assaults were 49% higher in the for-profits.

For specific information on these major problems, please see the attached “Rap Sheets”or go to: http://www.privateci.org/.

2. You get what you pay for.

For-profit prison corporations are primarily concerned about the bottom line and making money for their CEO’s and shareholders. The companies cut corners everywhere they can, but primarily on staff pay and training.

The result is a facility with high turnover rates, where the staff is inexperienced and the prisoners have nothing productive to do. Such a prison is unsafe for the inmates, the guards, and the surrounding community.

Finally, there’s no evidence that private prisons can do it cheaper. Maximus, an independent, reputable research firm, compared cost savings in Arizona's public and private prisons in 2006. It determined taxpayers were spending an estimated $1,526,289 MORE annually on two privately run prisons.

3. Less Transparency and Accountability.

For-profit prison companies are corporations doing the job of government without any of the checks and balances that keep government accountable to the people. In the case of the Kingman escapes, which occurred at 9:00 pm, MTC waited until 10:20 pm to notify The Mojave County’s Sheriff’s Office. Another 80 minutes elapsed before MTC notified state officials with the Arizona Department of Corrections. The media wasn’t alerted until mid-morning the next day, and thus the public was not informed about the dangerous escapees until that time.

There is an inherent threat to democracy when an institution with so much power over the lives of so many individuals is immune to any public accountability.

Caroline Isaacs

Program Director,

American Friends Service Committee

Arizona Area Program

103 N. Park Ave., Suite 111

Tucson, AZ 85719

520.623.9141 p/520.623.5901 f

www.afsc.org/az