Mandatory Minimum Sentencing, may it stay dead

     The Justice Department has announced that it will no longer pursue mandatory minimum sentencing for certain drug offenses.  This is good news for a variety of reasons. 

Since its introduction in the 1980s, MMS has contributed to exploding prison populations, budgets, and decreasing conditions.  The shortage of prison space and funds has led to the rise of a for profit prison industry, which lobbies hard for the maintenance and expansion of mandatory minimums while housing prisoners who are the responsibility of the state in substandard conditions, reaping profit for incarceration.  Call it my knee-jerk Socialist reaction to privatization, but that’s not the sort of thing we should be incentivizing!

     Mandatory minimums were officially conceived as deterrent to growing drug use.  Clearly this has not worked; since the mid 1980s prison populations have nonupled, spurred by unequal enforcement of the laws and unequal application of even mandated sentences.  Prison has not proven effective at curbing drug problem- it is time to experiment with limited legalization, and begin treating this as a public health matter.  Salt Lake City for one, (hardly a bastion of bleeding heart liberals or whatever the kids are calling us nowadays), has done a lot towards implementing this.  There will always be a problem with encouraging people to seek treatment for a problem that is punishable by law.  Legalization is the best way to cut off funding for criminals, making the streets safer, and maybe even the people healthier. 

     It is also important to remain cognizant of the limits of this action.  Firstly, it will apply only to certain federal cases, leaving the majority of case procedure unchanged, including all at the state level.  Secondly this does not seem likely to have any bearing on those already incarcerated on insignificant drug charges.  Thirdly, barring a change in the law, Mandatory Minimums can be restored at any point, and presumably will be under the next Republican administration.  Still, in short term, there will be fewer incarcerations- how few I don’t know, but it’s an improvement, or at least a mitigation of a serious problem.  Now we need to follow this up with state action along similar lines, and the establishment of decent treatment options.

     And yes, I’ve got to say, my fury at the president’s conservatism is why I started this blog in the first place, and that fury still remains powerful, and I dare say justified.  For the most part, however, law enforcement has been one area where we have seen noteworthy improvement, and however atrocious the president and attorney general’s record on Civil Liberties, I must say

                “Whatever the reasons behind it, nice one, Barack.”  (Can we please have a public works program now?  Or at least nationalize something?)

Solidatität, meine Genossen und Genossinnen

Genosse Graham 

the Murder of Trayvon Martin, and America's Gun Culture

Solidarität, Genossinnen und Genossen

I've been wondering for a while how to write about this- or even if I should.  I'm very conscious of Alcoff's caution against speaking for others- even a well meaning outsider speaking on behalf of an oppressed group, even in the best case scenario, diminishes the attention paid to the legitimate spokespeople of that group.  Nothing I say here changes the fact that I'm white (and of Prussian descent at that)- part of the oppressor class at least as far as race relations go, and that the issues of profiling, lynching, police brutality, and a disparate legal system disproportionately affect African Americans, and are indeed holdovers from Slavery and Jim Crow.  On some level, I am less qualified than a black person to speak about this.  Despite that, I think I ought to say something- a question arises of whether I will do the most harm openly speaking about the suffering of an oppressed group to which I do not belong, or by remaining silent at an important time.  I can't pretend to offer a convincing explanation for this exercise in cultural Imperialism, but I want to talk all the same.

The facts are- an armed man assumed an unarmed black youth was a criminal, and stalked him after police specifically told him not to do so.  A conflict resulted- and the unarmed boy was shot dead.  The killer was exonerated on the grounds that an unarmed teenager posed a threat to his life in the fight that he himself had started.

Several things are fundamentally wrong here- for one it's nigh impossible to see a similar outcomes had the ethnicities of the attacker and victim been reversed, making this another visible symptom of our unequal legal system which harasses, prosecutes, convicts and executes black citizens far more often per capita than whites.  I had the opportunity to speak with a St. Louis Park Ranger about the matter, to which he responded that there's "no such thing as an innocent black man", revealing with horrific clarity the depth of the system's bias against African Americans.  But putting that aside for a moment, as it is conceivable that Zimmerman acted within the bounds of Florida self-defence (yes I prefer British spellings)  law (itself another abomination), we must still focus on the horror of armed vigilantes picking fights with unpopular minorities.  This case seems familiar- the angry, white, madman railing against the scary black criminals who always get away because the police go easy on them...  What planet is he living on?  But because this is America, operating under an outmoded law designed to support the rebellion of the landed aristocracy against civil order which has since been appropriated to expedite the repression and murder of convenient targets, the power of angry racists is serious, no matter how wild their delusions.  (While canvassing for Nixon's gubernatorial bid in 2008-don't ask, I'm already ashamed- I met a fellow who insisted the greatest threat to public order was black families registering their dogs to vote in a mass bid to gain extra leverage over innocent white folks.  No joke- though I grant he did make a pretty good argument for the franchise being restricted, albeit in his case not that of the 15% of the population he labelled as canine co-conspirators).

The fact remains that many relish the thought of using violence against those they hate, and that this attitude is romanticized in many aspects of our culture.  The entire gun control debate is framed around the (!)glorious(!) image of a powerful, armed man shooting those who would do him or "his" women harm.  The last time I mentioned this issue my interlocutor offered this defence of totally unregulated gun ownership- it's better to kill your woman than to let her fall into the hands of a criminal.  Perhaps I'm oversimplifying things, but I think the cult of the weapon is much broader- a cult of "simpler times", when a man would need to have the power to kill those with whom he disagrees, and to maintain a hold over a dutifully adoring wife, who was as much his property as the slaves he'd keep toiling under the lash for personal profit.  Most of those I've met who champion unrestricted weapon ownership are desperately eager for a chance to use weapons to defend themselves against the perceived criminals of their choice.  It's pretty clear Zimmerman was one of these- he kept hanging around the police station, trying again and again to join, then joining some self-important neighborhood watch around a gated community, apparently for an excuse to intimidate and harass black people.  In the weeks following the shooting, policemen began selling portraits of Martin as targets for shooting practice, while unrelated incidents of brutality-like an unarmed couple in Cleveland being shot 137 times, an unarmed vandal being repeatedly tasered to death amid cheers and laughter,- and violence continue pouring in.  The Chief of Police of Gilberton Pennsylvania has summoned a supporting force of Tea Party Militia after the Mayor had the audacity to question his use of his badge in political videos in which he shoots mockups of Minority Leader Pelosi and calls for the murder of all Democrats in the city, (to say nothing of Socialists like yours truly).  We idolize violence, and as a racist country, we encourage race-based violence.

We've got a serious problem with racial discrimination as it is (The Supreme Court's myopia notwithstanding), and gun nuts eager for their chance to fight and kill, living some irresponsible fantasy of suppressing a slave riot on the old plantation are among the ugliest symptoms.  America may not have invented race-based oppression, but we're damned good at it, and at pretending it doesn't exist.  As long as someone's out there yelling for "States Rahts", or "Self Defence", it will always be that much more permissible to kill black people in cold blood.  We always obfuscate the issue, but the underlying pattern is that racist movements enrich militia movements, while militia movements provide insular homes for the honing of racist practice.  What happened in Florida is the necessary outcome of a society that values the freedom to lynch.

In Dejected Solidarität, Genossen und Genossinnen
Genosse Graham

Alternatives to "Sparpolitik" Austerity

Hello, Genossen und Genossinnen.  It's Sunday and I'm writing- aren't I newly consistenyly productive?:)

An important part of any theory of economic stimulus in a market economy is how to move the most capital through the most transactions, reflecting increased demand, triggering increased consumption and profit for business overlords.  (honestly, doesn't sound so good, does it?).  But this goal of capitalists can be used to illustrate the folly of budget cuts, particularly cuts to welfare and food assistance programs. 

Put simply, the less money someone has, the greater the share of it they will need to spend on necessities.  This means that providing for the poor, oppressed and unemployed, aside from questions of morality, is actually the best way, dollar for dollar to fuel the capitalist machine.  (I'd like to fix that by removing profit motive form vital sectors of the economy, but let's shelve those plans for this discussion).  I support three courses of action (Actually many but I'm going to talk about these three) to maximize economic action and help the needy.

Firstly and most importantly, as this will fund all other undertakings, fix the payroll tax.  It's structured in a horribly regressive manner, having its greatest impact on the poor, while leaving income over a million dollars immune to taxation!  Aside from questions of morality (remember-think like an economist here), this is terribly inefficient!  Rich people spend proportionally less of their money on economic activities that immediately benefit the community- no matter how much money you have, at some point you will no longer need to spend more on foodstuffs, utilities and so on.  Money sent into savings accounts or overseas investments is simply not being used to further the interests of the community- neither by the Socialist standard of providing for the public good, nor by the Capitalist standard of increasing demand.  We need a tax system that reflects this, because moderate progressive redistribution is actually good for business, and redistribution is a way to remedy systemic abuses.  Tax the Workers less, and tax the Capitalists more- it will increase demand, and may actually alleviate some suffering!

Second- Raise the minimum wage.  If the original minimum wage standard had been maintained, it would now be at some 12 dollars per hour.  7.25 minus a regressive payroll tax isn't enough to support a family, while megastores with underpaid workers end up costing the government billions in assistance to the exploited and destitute.  More money in the pockets of the Worker means less suffering, and more immediate demand for goods- (the promotion of consumption is unwise, but try explaining that to businessmen!  Ultimately, we do want to help people, so I'm letting it slide here.)

Thirdly- Public Works, Public Works, Public Works!- I'm pretty sure my native St. Louis has enough potholes to employ the whole jobless population for at least a year.  Furthermore- if we're not doing anything else to fight climate Change, why not some quality reforestation while we're at it?  Put people directly on the government payroll, hire professionals in construction and agriculture to train, oversee, and manage with the goal of employing people to the public benefit.  Train our wasted human capital to build proper infrastructure!  We need a new power grid, better rail systems, electric car charging stations, and environmentally sustainable dams.  (I'm also in favor of more tall, menacing towers and moats filled with homeless alligators and confused bull sharks, but this is my compromise proposal:).

Nothing remotely original, but it needs constant saying.  If the myth of Austerity=>prosperity is being trumpeted, we need to make social justice worth the while of business elites.  (I admit, I feel dirty advising anything on business-friendly grounds, but oh well).

Solidarität, Genossen und Genossinnen
Genosse Graham

P.S.- I'm considering reposting some old works in German- any advice on where to start?