       |
|
A prima facie analysis of the security structure in Michigan reveals a fragmented, outdated, and ill-prepared system in desperate need of modernization and consolidation. Michigan is comprised of 83 counties, 1,242 townships, 274 cities, and 259 villages adding up to 1,858 incorporated municipalities. Some of these municipalities share police departments, so to be on the safe side I estimate that there are over 1,500 independent police departments in the state of Michigan. The vast majority lack encrypted communications making them vulnerable to eavesdropping (with an inexpensive scanner from Radio shack) and even less have the capability to communicate across departments. For both security and efficiency purposes I would like to implement an encrypted standardized digital communication system similar to what our military uses. This is important for mobilizing security forces in a crisis situation as well as for sharing information quickly on a daily basis. My next modification is where things get interesting. For added protection in the field I would like to upgrade our police force to utilize cost effective bullet resistant full body armor suits. Kevlar and, more recently, Spectra have been the primary materials for making bulletproof vests. Both are very expensive materials and, of the two, Spectra is the only one which would be considered appropriate for a full body suit. The third alternative is a ballistics grade non-Newtonian gel or foam such as D30.
The astute reader may be wondering how fire trucks fit into this scenario. Allow me to introduce what I like to call my waterless fire suppressant system. I initially designed this concept to deal with the forest fires in California, but it is equally capable of suppressing a residential fire.
Among my favorite technologies I would like to leverage is known as augmented reality. Open source augmented reality projects have matured significantly over the last few years and with a few modifications for police use it would be an indispensable asset in the field. It may be a few years before my approach to security is polished enough to implement, but at the very least the information I provided above gives you an idea of what is possible as well as my quality of thought on the subject. According to the Fiscal Year 2011 Executive Budget, over the course of seven years “from fiscal year 2003 through fiscal year 2010, nearly $600 million in reductions” have been made “in the Department of Corrections' budget” (B-9). Further, with the anticipated passage of House Bills 4497, 4498, and 4499, sentencing reforms are expected to cut another $129 million resulting in reducing “the prison population by approximately 7,500 within four to six months of enactment." If enacted by June 2010 it "would result in the closure of 4 to 5 prisons starting in October 2010” (B-9).
As indicated in figure 1 above, by 2011, over 9,500 convicted felons are projected to be released by the state of Michigan as a bandage solution for the budget problems in Lansing. That is equivalent to over a 20 percent (9,700/45,200=21.4%) reduction in the prison population (fig. 1). As figure 2 illustrates below, instead of providing a creative solution to solving budget constraint problems, a cost shifting scheme has been implemented instead. Instead of being housed in prisons, parole programs are being used as a substitution. As a result of high recidivism rates, this approach will likely cost more for the tax payer in the long run, but it a very convenient short-term fix for now.
The prison system operates under the assumption that by spending a portion of one’s life behind bars, equivalent to the nature of the crime, the offender will somehow see the folly of his ways and be a new man upon release. Although a nice thought, this assumption is what one would consider wishful thinking. A 2002 study, Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 1994, commissioned by the US Department of Justice revealed that “among nearly 300,000 prisoners released in 15 States in 1994, 67.5% were rearrested within 3 years” (fig. 3). The study essentially suggests that the prison system has been ineffective at modifying criminal behavior and that released prisoners are more likely than not to end up right back where they started. Many factors play a role in this outcome, but ranking high among them are the failure to adequately prepare prisoners to make a transition into the workforce and the tendency for a community of likeminded individuals to reinforce suboptimal behaviors.
The core of an effective proposal should begin by solving prison budget shortfalls by putting prisoners to work. If one can provide a cheaper alternative to companies which outsource labor to countries overseas, then the opportunity costs of those companies’ will eventually get to a point where they will take advantage. This approach is intended more for non-violent offenders, but the basic idea is for prisoners to literally pay their debt to society, rather than continue to act as a financial burden upon it. The program is voluntary and prisoners can keep the leftover money they make, but essentially the company trains the prisoners, the prisoners get to work and learn a skill, and then the state deducts a portion of the paycheck to cover incarceration costs as well as restitution to victim’s families. This keeps the prisoners occupied and when they leave prison, instead of going back to a life of crime, they now have a skill which they can use to make a living. This concept has already been put to use in some areas under the Prison Industry Enhancement Certification Program also known as the PIE program. “More than 100 companies participate in the PIE program, established in 1979, and the number of working prisoners has more than doubled in the last decade” (Farrell). The program has continued to grow over the years and the data suggests the program has been very successful (http://fds.duke.edu/db?attachment-25--11655-view-1047). Ironically, according to Shawn Bushway, associate professor at the School of Criminal Justice at the University of Albany, the workers who perform the best are those with life sentences (Farrell). According to, Prison Industry Enhancement Certification Program, a U.S. Department of Justice document highlighting the features of the program, the key advantage of the PIE program is that certification “exempts State and local certified departments of corrections from normal restrictions on the sale of prisoner-made goods in interstate commerce” (1). “The following 36 jurisdictions have been certified under the program: Alaska; Arizona; California; Colorado; Connecticut; Delaware; Florida; Hawaii; Idaho; Indiana; Iowa; Kansas; Louisiana; Maine; Maryland; Minnesota; Missouri; Montana; Nebraska; Belknap County, New Hampshire; Stafford County, New Hampshire; Nevada; New Mexico; North Carolina; Oklahoma; Oregon; Red River County, Texas; South Carolina; South Dakota; Tennessee; Texas; Utah; Vermont; Virginia; Washington State; and Wisconsin” (2). Most notably not among those on this list is Michigan. Michigan must take the necessary steps to obtain certification for the PIE program in order to address funding problems as opposed to cost shifting schemes which jeopardize the safety of Michigan’s citizens. As an added benefit, prisoners will receive the job skills which will keep them employed and out of trouble once released after serving a fair length of time for their crime. The second stage of reform within the prison system itself must address prisons functioning as de facto criminal colleges (Milton). Many criminally minded individuals take advantage of incarceration as a networking opportunity and upon release become more proficient at their legally challenged careers. Therefore, it is in the best interest of true prisoner rehabilitation that prisoners should no longer be authorized to communicate with one another or at the very least between prisoner communications should be severely limited. The objective being to isolate prisoners from their environment so that it is easier to promote the adaptive behaviors necessary to operate in society as opposed to bringing them farther from it. 6/17/2010 Brad Pratt: Michigan Prisoner ReEntry Program Initiative Employee • Combine the Department of State Police and the Department of Corrections into the Department of Public Safety (See www.Alaska.gov for reference).
Having 1 Director over both department and 1 Deputy Director over each department would save the cost of 1 Director's position and 2 Deputy Director's positions.
• Each correctional facility is run by a prison warden, deputy warden, and 2-3 assistant deputy wardens. In most cases prisoner programs is assigned one of the assistant deputy wardens, but also could be ran by the school principal (in each facility) or the recreations director (in each facility). Since a principal is the most crucial position- either the assistant deputy warden or the recreation director position could be cut. • In 2009, all prison camps where closed, in order to cut cost. Unfortunately this was a near sighted cost cutting expense. Because of the expense of running a higher level facility. When a parole violator is now re-incarcerated it now costs the state on average of $38,000 per year (per prisoner) to house them in the higher level. Whereas in the camp system (because of the low overhead) it cost between $11.000 and $18,000 per year (per prisoner). Unfortunately under any plan (MPRI, PIE, etc) there will be parole violators. The prison camps (in most cases) are still owned by the state and standing vacant. This would be the easiest cost cutting expense to remedy. • In 1996, the Truth in Sentencing Act was started in the State of Michigan. Since then (usually along party lines) the Good Time Act has been tried to be instated and failed. An alternative to the cost of the Truth in Sentencing Act and the revolving door of the Good Time Act- would be an Earned Time Act. In which a prisoner would have to put forth effort to receive time. Such as truly working toward Court and State appointed criteria. Examples would be: instead of paying prisoners (at a cost of between 11 to 50 million dollars a year) to go to GED, Assaultive Offender, Narcotics/Alcoholics, MPRI Classes regardless of how they perform. Under this Act prisoners would receive only indigent pay ($8 a month strictly for hygiene and postal items-required by policy). While attending these classes they will be evaluated on their progress via a CSJ 360 work progress evaluation form. Much like a work trade in the free world, if they work an 8 hour day and put forth effort, they will receive a CSJ 360 that has good scores and receive 8 hours off of the sentence of every 8 hours they perform well. If they put forth no or little effort they will not receive any time off of their sentence. Also if the prisoner receives a CSJ 240A Major Misconduct for Major Prison Rule Violations, the hearings officer (a certified attorney- because a CSJ 240A is a legal document) can take some or all of the earned time that has been acquired away for bad behavior. Once the State or Court ordered classes have been completed at a higher level and if a prisoner qualifies- an evaluation can be completed and a prisoner can be assigned to an unsecured level 1 prison or a Camp (if reopened) where they can work in food service, as a housing unit porter (janitor) or even on public works (outside of the facility) and continue to earn the credits. • Another knee-jerk reaction to cutting cost is prison privatization. Unfortunately the low cost is only upfront. Prisoners are known for filing lawsuits for any and everything seen to them as a violation. Most are frivolous and unwarranted; under state custody the State Attorney General can declare State Immunity to these court cases. In the case of Private Prisons each and every court case has to be tried- costing the state (not the prison) the more than the savings of having the privatized system by millions of dollars. Please refer to the Texas and Florida Department of Corrections for reference. Each have closed their private prisons because of cost in court cases and in violations in some cases even violations which included prison escapes.
|
