On Wednesday, New York City moved its juvenile justice department under the purview of its child welfare agency. The New York Times reports that the decision is expected to improve the provision of therapeutic services and thus reduce juvenile detention:

“Under the new arrangement, youths who commit crimes but are not considered dangerous will have easier access to an expanding assortment of in-home programs managed by the Administration for Children’s Services, the child welfare agency. This will allow them to stay in their neighborhoods with their families while following a strict set of rules requiring them to stay out of trouble, keep curfews and meet educational goals.”

In California, county probation departments are responsible for youth who get into trouble. The Ella Baker Center’s Books Not Bars campaign advocates for counties to implement arrangements like this one that emphasize community-based treatment over punishment. Read a full account of the decision here.

A recent Sacramento Bee op-ed by Michelle Alexander challenges Governor  Schwarzenegger to treat prison reform not simply as a quick buck for the budget, but rather as a matter of racial justice. She calls on the Governor to address the policies and practices that have led to the disproportionate representation of people of color in the criminal justice system and ensure that dollars generated from prison reform actually reach the communities that have suffered most from mass incarceration. Below we have published a longer version of Alexander’s piece, which mentions the work of the Ella Baker Center in struggling for a justice system that benefits all.

On Wednesday, February 10 at 6pm, Alexander will appear at the Ella Baker Center to discuss these ideas further  and share insights from her new book, The New Jim Crow:  Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. The event is co-sponsored by Akonadi Foundation, All of Us or None, and Legal Services for Prisoners with Children. Please RSVP to zachary “at” ellabakercenter.org if you would like to attend.

Governor’s plan for prisons ignores racial history
By Michelle Alexander

In a move nearly as audacious as his fleet of Hummers, Schwarzenegger elated many public educators and criminal justice reformers last week by publicly embracing the “books not bars” motto that had become a rallying cry of grassroots organizations, such as the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, for a decade.  He declared that California should no longer spend more money on prisons than education and proposed a state constitutional amendment that would reverse the current spending ratio.  “The priorities have become out of whack over the years,” he said.  “I mean, think about it, 30 years ago, 10 percent of the general fund went to higher education, and 3 percent went to prisons.  Today, almost 11 percent goes to prisons, and only 7.5 percent goes to higher education.”  He then asked incredulously, “What does it say about any state that focuses more on prison uniforms than on caps and gowns?”

Good question, governor.

California has long been a national leader in mass imprisonment — which is really saying something, since our nation leads the world.  No other nation in the world puts so many of its own people in cages.  The U.S. rate of incarceration dwarfs the rates of nearly every developed country, even surpassing those in highly repressive regimes like Russia, China, and Iran.  In Germany, 93 people are in prison for every 100,000 adults and children.  In the United States, the rate is roughly eight times that, or 750 per 100,000.

Until very recently, the governor didn’t seem terribly bothered by the fact that California‘s taxpayers were spending vastly more money on prison guards than school teachers.  He gave lip service to the need to reduce the state’s prison population, but in practice fought tooth-and-nail lawsuits that were designed to achieve that very result.

Last February, a federal court ordered the state to reduce California’s prison population by as many as 55,000 inmates within 3 years to provide a constitutional level of medical care to prisoners and adequate living conditions.  California prisons had been operating at twice their capacity.  Evidence of deplorable living conditions and inadequate medical care led federal judges to conclude that the state’s prison system was killing at least one inmate a month and violated the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.  Schwarzenegger, however, was unfazed.  The state vowed to appeal those decisions, decrying federal intervention into state affairs, despite the fact it was predicted that the reforms ordered by the court could save the state up to $900 million a year — money that certainly could have been spent on caps and gowns.

So what changed?

Few people seem to believe Schwarzenegger experienced a moral awakening, despite his claims that he was moved by university students protesting drastic budget cuts.  Everyone knows this is about the numbers.  He’s staring down the barrel of a $20 billion deficit, few options, and a bleak legacy.   So what if he’s playing politics and trying to pass it off as a grand gesture?  Shouldn’t we celebrate anyway?

Perhaps not.  Caution is in order — not because of what Schwarzenegger said, but rather what he didn’t say.  For example, he didn’t say that prison sentences should be drastically reduced or that three strikes laws imposing life imprisonment on people who are convicted of stealing videotapes should be erased from the books.  In fact, he said close to nothing about how spending on prisons would be funneled to schools, except to suggest that the prison system could be operated more cheaply if it were privatized.

That announcement most certainly cheered the Correctional Corporation of America — the nation’s largest private prison company — which is deeply interested in increasing the supply of prisoners who can be held captive for a profit.  Wall Street investors would be the primary beneficiaries of any large-scale privatization effort, and there is good reason to believe that problems plaguing California’s prisons will get much worse, not better, if private companies slash the amount of money spent on health care, shelter, and food, without policy changes dramatically reducing the number of people behind prison walls.

But even if prison privatization were not an issue, a much deeper moral problem remains.  When announcing his belated revelation that schools are worth more to society than jails, he failed to acknowledge — must less apologize for — the devastation caused to communities of color by the policies of mass incarceration.

The skyrocketing incarceration rates of the past three decades have not affected all segments of California’s population equally.  In the early 1980s, whites were the majority of the prison population; today, the overwhelming majority of California prisoners are African American and Latino.  Demographic changes explain only a small portion of the shift.  Gross racial disparities can be found throughout the criminal justice system, from stops and searches, through plea bargaining and sentencing.  In California (and nationwide), the explosion of the prison population and the striking shift in the racial composition of those who can be found behind bars has been driven largely by the War on Drugs — a war that has targeted African Americans and Latinos for drug crimes that are largely ignored when committed by whites.  Studies have repeatedly shown that people of color are no more likely to use or sell illegal drugs than whites, yet they are targeted, arrested, and prosecuted at grossly disproportionate rates.

Several days ago, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit acknowledged the rampant racial bias in the criminal justice system, particularly in the prosecution of the drug war.  It struck down Washington state’s law prohibiting felons from voting as violative of the Voting Rights Act, on the grounds that uncontroverted evidence exists that racial bias permeates the criminal justice system.

Those who imagine that the bias documented in Washington does not exist in California should recall the wave of racial profiling studies that were conducted several years ago documenting biased stop and search practices in dozens of police departments, including the California Highway Patrol.

The uncomfortable reality we must face is that California, like the nation as a whole, has treated generations of African Americans and Latinos as largely disposable.  They have been rounded up by the thousands, locked in cages, and upon release ushered into a parallel social universe in which they can be denied the right to vote, automatically excluded from juries, and legally discriminated against in employment, housing, access to education and public benefits — reminiscent of an era we supposedly left behind.  Most of the people labeled felons and ushered behind bars today are not murderers or dangerous criminals.  They are black and brown, very poor, and paying the price of a get-tough movement driven not by crime rates, but by politics — a politics that has scapegoated the most vulnerable as a means of scoring political points.

Some might argue that the racial history doesn’t matter now, so long as the tide has begun to turn.  The problem, though, is that if we fail to reckon with our history, we will be doomed to repeat it.  If and when the economy improves, we’ll be able to afford once again to round up people of color en masse for imprisonment and social ex-communication.

The subtext of Schwarzenegger’s speech was that we need not worry about who’s in prison or why, so long as it doesn’t cost too much or interfere with the ability of middle-class university kids to get a good education.  But private prisons that warehouse impoverished black and brown folks, while the relatively privileged trot off to college, is not a step in the right direction.  What we need now is not a grand speech, but a day of reckoning.

Have you heard the term “Cap and Trade,” but not been quite sure what it means?

Or maybe you know what it is, but can’t make heads or tails of all the double-talk in Congress and the mainstream media?

Good news: there’s a helpful and fun new video called “The Story of Cap & Trade” and it’s just for YOU. This charming-yet-hard-hitting video explains what Congress is doing — and NOT doing — when it comes to tackling global warming.

Best of all, this whole project is led and narrated by Annie Leonard, an amazing activist with a talent for entertaining straight talk aimed at empowering people and repairing our fragile ecosystems. Annie Leonard was the driving force behind the now-famous “The Story of Stuff” video.

The Story of Cap & Trade comes in the nick of time! This month, as you may know, a major international climate summit is happening in Copenhagen, Denmark. The United States’ role in these talks is critical, and we need real solutions, not giveaways to big polluters.

Here’s a preview of the full 9 minute video. Watch the full length version on the Story of Stuff website.

About the video:
The Story of Cap & Trade is a fast-paced, fact-filled look at the leading climate solution being discussed at Copenhagen and on Capitol Hill. Host Annie Leonard introduces the energy traders and Wall Street financiers at the heart of this scheme and reveals the “devils in the details” in current cap and trade proposals: free permits to big polluters, fake offsets and distraction from what’s really required to tackle the climate crisis. If you’ve heard about Cap & Trade, but aren’t sure how it works (or who benefits), this is the film is for you.

In a surprise to no one, federal judges blasted California officials for the state’s half-hearted plan to relieve prison overcrowding. California’s prisons are so bloated that prisoners are dying from medical neglect.

These are the same prisons facing a $1.2 billion cut from an astronomic budget of nearly $10 billion. When federal judges ordered the state to relieve the cruel and unusual prison conditions caused by overcrowding, it seemed a perfect opportunity to whack the notorious “Golden Gulag.” The state, of course, immediately appealed to the Supreme Court. But even the conservative Supremes refused to let California get off without coming up with a plan.

By reducing the prison population by up to 55,000 over two years, per the judges’ order, California could save money, improve prison conditions, and make some long-overdue policy changes to reduce the state’s toxic addiction to prisons. However, Governor Schwarzenegger’s office, along with California prison officials, submitted a plan to do even less than the bare minimum. The state’s plan would cut the population by about 18,000 over two years. The judges? Not having it.

Oddly enough, the Gov. released a bigger plan earlier this year to cut prison spending and trim the population by as much as 37,000. Even the prison chiefs were on board. But they couldn’t get it through a cowardly, fear-mongering Legislature. Now, with a federal lawsuit addressing violations of prisoners’ constitutional rights, and an ongoing fiscal crisis, why are state leaders dragging their feet?

The state has until November 12 to come up with a satisfactory plan. If they fail, the judges will do it themselves. Californians have waited long enough through the legal maneuvering and political posturing. Our exploding, failing prisons need action now.

Last Saturday a young woman lost her ability to trust in her community.  At least 20 of her peers, all young men, watched as she was brutally raped and beat after her high school homecoming dance.  Some present even used their cameras phones to document their savage attempt to steal any semblance of innocence, trust and strength within her.

This attack is an indictment of all of us. I charge us all with our failure to educate and empower the young men in our community to be MEN.  Sexual assault and sexual violence must be addressed in all of our work.

As a community we must stand up for our young people, male and female, and say will not tolerate this type of behavior.  No longer can young men be allowed to standby while a young woman is being raped.

Many say that just shouting out from the rooftops will not make change, but teaching our young people and becoming role models for just behavior is one step in the right direction.

Young men are often the focus of violence prevention efforts, particularly boys of color are targeted as the most at-risk population. This is due to the fact that the majority of victims and those arrested for violent crimes in Oakland and Richmond are young men of color.

Unfortunately almost none of these interventions have any focus on the violence, disrespect and institutional sexism our young women face.  What work are we doing to stop men from harming their sisters, cousins, nieces and mothers?

Yesterday at a violence prevention conference, hosted by the California Wellness Foundation, Too Short (a.k.a. Todd Shaw) spoke on a panel regarding police and community relations. It was impressive to have a celebrity on the panel, especially one from East Oakland, talking about violence prevention and the need for better relations between the community and the cops.  But no one on the panel or in the other three that I attended discussed the violence experienced by young women because of sexism.

It seemed clear that Too Short, who raps about partying and street life, would take some note that young men who listen to his music can and are affected by his lyrics. I’m not going to get into a rap hating game, because that is not what this is. I love rap music, but I also know it’s a form of entertainment and education.

If we can acknowledge that our youth are mis-educated, then we must also step up and try to re-educate them in a way that will change their assumptions that their primary teacher, the media, provides them.

Sadly enough this isn’t only a local tragedy, but a national phenomenon.  We are watching young people rape and kill each other and no one does a thing to stop it.  In Chicago last month, a young man got caught in a gang fight on his way to school. While he was being beat to death in broad daylight, people just watched.  And, again, some even had the callousness to record it on their phones, but not the bravery to stand up and save a life.

Where have we gone wrong?

The Contra Costa Times reported today that the sixth young man was arrested in the attack.  The seventh is still at large. The article lists the names and ages of the men who participated in the attack. All are under 21 and most are juveniles (under 18).

We need violence prevention strategies that provide context to our young people about the sanctity of life. Obviously, in many cases, these lessons are getting through.  Our violence prevention strategies need to be expanded to ensure a culture shift before this next generation becomes adults.

Understandably, change takes time but we can’t wait until the next funding cycle or the next tragedy to re-evaluate how we are working to prevent violence for ALL of our young people; perpetrators, victims and at-risk young people. All are equally important regardless of who gets arrested.

We need to do more to educate young men and women, on how sexual violence and sexual assault harm us all and that in silence none of us is safe.

How can Heal the Streets take ACTION on this?

The fellows were outraged by this story. Only a handful of the fellows actually knew about the tragedy, the others were stunned. Thao Smith, a senior at Mandela High School in Oakland, suggested that young men and women are taught streets smarts. She is doing research on what organizations locally or nationally have programs to offer her peers. Smith said, “I can’t believe something like that would happen. I’m even more shocked that they just watched.”

Through our policy advocacy efforts and political and skills training, the Heal the Streets Fellowship program is offering a space for young people to learn how to prevent situations like this. All young people — not just young men — need to be invested in and protected by our efforts for violence prevention.

During this deep economic and ecological crisis, we must protect California’s most vulnerable communities.  Nidia Bautista from the Coalition for Clean Air discusses how we can do this through the creation of a Community Benefits Fund.  This fund will be created by AB 1405, one of our Green Jobs Package Bills.  Read the full article and become active in the fight to end poverty and fight pollution!

While most Americans would now agree that climate change is real, a new report by the USC Program for Environmental and Regional Equity and UC Berkeley’s College of Natural Resources uncovers what researchers call a “climate gap” or hidden pattern revealing that poor people and people of color in the United States suffer more from environmental changes than other whiter and wealthier Americans.

Some key findings from the report:

• Extreme heat leads to increased illnesses and deaths—particularly among the elderly, infants and African Americans. in a study on nine California counties from may
  through September of 1999–2003, researchers found that for every 10°F (5.6°c) increase in temperature, there is a 2.6%  increase in cardiovascular deaths.
• Risk factors for heat-related illness and death are higher for low-income neighborhoods and people of color.
• African Americans in Los Angeles are nearly twice as likely to die from a heat wave
• There is nearly a three-fold difference in the proportion of income that goes towards water between households in the lowest income bracket versus households in the highest income bracket.

Those are the problems. The report also offers some solutions:

• Close the climate gap by auctioning permits or establishing a fee and invest revenue in communities that will be hardest hit.
• Coordinate reductions in greenhouse gas emissions with opportunities to reduce toxic pollutants in neighborhoods with the dirtiest air.
• Anticipate and address inevitable job shifts and retraining needs to maximize opportunities for low-income communities of color to successfully transition to and benefit from a new, clean energy economy
• Ensure that revenue generated from climate policy will help high-poverty neighborhoods absorb the higher prices for energy and other basic necessities

Read the full report or the executive summary.

Newsweek.com recently interviewed Ella Baker Center co-founder Van Jones, who is now President Obama’s “green jobs advisor” in the White House. Van gives some of the best answers anyone could give to some of today’s toughest questions on green jobs and the economic stimulus.

Check it out!

The New York Times published an editorial today (”12 and In Prison”) challenging the practice of sentencing children as young as twelve in adult court.

Referring to Justice Kennedy’s 2005 majority opinion that children are ineligible for sentences of death, the editorial praises the Supreme Court judge for drawing on “compassion, common sense and the science of the youthful brain when he wrote that it was morally wrong to equate the offenses of emotionally undeveloped adolescents with the offenses of fully formed adults.” Nevertheless, today’s editorial laments, states across the nation continue “to mete out barbaric treatment — including life sentences — to children whose cases should rightly be handled through the juvenile courts.”

In today’s editorial, the New York Times urges Congress to amend the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (up for reauthorization this year) to require states to end abusive practices like juvenile life sentences and housing youth in adult prisons.

Eighty children ages 13 and under are waived to the adult courts each year. In California, children as young as 14 receive adult sentences. According to a new report by the Sentencing Project (PDF), of the 6,807 individuals serving life sentences for crimes committed as juveniles, over a third are incarcerated in California, 239 of whom received sentences of life without parole. Black youth, the study referenced in the Times editorial notes (PDF), are more than twenty times as likely to receive a sentence of life without parole than white youth.

State Senator Yee introduced legislation this year to review the cases of juveniles sentenced to spend the rest of their lives in prison and provide opportunities to earn a reduced sentence. In late June, SB 399 failed to pass the Assembly Public Safety committee, but the bill is due to go up for reconsideration. Learn how you can support SB 399 here.

Unlike some states, California generally bars the housing of youth in adult prisons. Instead, youth sentenced as adults are sent to the Division of Juvenile Justice until they turn 18, at which point they are transferred to adult prisons. But Division of Juvenile Justice facilities—far from home, weak on programming, and prison-like by design—pose little contrast to adult prisons. As of last December, three children ages 13 and under and 11 children of just 14 years of age were confined to California’s decades-old youth prison system.

Indeed, the problem is not only that too many young people are sentenced to a failed adult prison system, but that the punitive logic of the adult system threatens to overtake the rehabilitative principles guiding the juvenile justice system.  Early this month, the California Supreme Court disregarded the fact that young people have no right to a jury trial and that adolescent brains are far from fully developed when it ruled that certain offenses adjudicated in juvenile court can qualify as “strikes” under California’s Three Strikes Law.

We agree with the New York Times that young people’s cases should be “handled through the juvenile courts.” We also urge Congress to use its legislative powers to push state juvenile justice systems to not only act separately from the adult courts, but also attend to the distinct needs of young people.