Since Christmas we've been talking about the story of Betsie Gallardo, a woman who is dying of cancer in a Florida prison.
When we last met, she was being starved to death, literally, at the direction of the Florida Department of Corrections (DOC), who had decided not only to withhold further treatment for her inoperable cancer, but to withdraw nutritional support as well.
Her adopted mother is fighting to have her discharged from prison so that she can die at home-and the DOC have recommended that she be released.
On December 9th, Florida's Board of Executive Clemency ("the Board") chose to ignore the DOC advice.
Since then, thanks to a whole bunch of outside pressure, things have changed, for the better, which we'll be talking about today.
On January 5th, the Board meets again-and if we do this right, we can bring some closure to this story.
If you were with us on Christmas Day you heard the story of Betsie Gallardo, who, unless something changes quickly, is going to be intentionally starved to death in a Florida prison after being convicted of spitting on a cop.
In fairness, the State did not decide simply to starve her; instead, the Department of Corrections (DOC) first chose to withhold any further treatment for her inoperable cancer...and then they decided to starve her to death.
Her adopted mother is trying to get her released on humanitarian grounds; the DOC recommended in October that she be allowed to go home and die, the Florida Parole Commission refused.
Governor Charlie Crist chairs the Executive Clemency Board, who could also agree to let her go...and so far, they've also refused to take action.
Funny thing is, the Governor and his Board have been more than willing to step in when other Floridians requested pardons and commutations, even in situations that seemed a lot less dire.
Today, we're going to look at that history-and to be honest, as with many things in the Sunshine State, from the outside...it all looks a bit bizarre.
A spate of recent news reports has called into question the objectivity of some forensic evidence and highlighted the need for effective oversight mechanisms for the nation’s crime labs. Fingerprint analysts told The Missouri Lawyer that when police officers have access to the labs, they often pressure the fingerprint examiners to secure arrests. In December, the New York State Inspector General released a report revealing that forensic analyst Gary Veeder falsified hundreds of results over a fifteen year period. The Phoenix, Arizona Police Department announced plans to investigate claims that lab technicians in the crime lab undermine the integrity of criminal investigations by leaving evidence behind at scenes and disposing of fingerprint evidence. In December, Donald Gates walked free from prison after his exoneration for a rape and murder he did not commit when it was revealed that FBI lab technician Michael Malone provided false testimony and inaccurate testing results.
It's the anniversary of Roe V. Wade today and Scott Roeder's trial for the murder of Dr. Tiller has begun. I'd write more, but this week in politics has left my hamster wheel a little damaged, so I'm going to go have a Friday night and leave you with what they said ...
Most city council members take oaths to defend the Constitution. The Constitution makes the rights and standards in its amendments and in international treaties the supreme law of the land. Our nation has a rich tradition of local governments lobbying state and national governments through the passage of resolutions. Under Clause 3, Rule XII, Section 819, of the Rules of the U.S. House of Representatives local governments may petition Congress. Under the First Amendment, we all can.
Eight years ago today, two planes flew into the World Trade Center, another crashed into the Pentagon, and a fourth landed in a Pennsylvania field. The raw power of that day came to be symbolized by a date composed of three numbers. Three numbers that evoked the shock of being attacked, the horror of the sounds and images on our television sets, and the heroism of so many men and women. Three numbers that framed the events of the last decade and seemed like they would define my generation.
But eight years ago, many in my generation couldn’t vote. We didn’t choose the President, his wars, or his policies. In fact, young Americans have largely rejected the politics of fear and division that dominated those formative years of our political consciousness—voting 2 to 1 in favor of Barack Obama. Today we remember the victims and honor our heroes, but we also have a new President, new crises, and three new numbers: 3-5-0. 350.
I am strongly in favor of an investigaton or prosecution of the Bush/Cheney administration. One resource that I would recommend is www.AfterDowningStreet.org.
The best start would be a bi-partisan truth commission, modelled on the 9/11 commission. As we push for that, let us make every effort to suspend judgment. That is, if we say "Bush is a criminal, but we can't convict until we prosecute, so let's prosecute as a formality", then we sound like this is a partisan witch hunt, such as what Kenneth Starr did to Clinton. If we proceed with that approach, and fail to convict, then there will be a big PR backlash in favor of Bush and against the prosecutors. And even if we do convict, the appearance of partisan bias may still make it look like an unjust conviction.
Instead, let us say: "There have been serious allegations against Bush, Cheney, and others. Let us conduct an independent, bi-partisan investigation. If Bush is innocent, his name will be cleared. If he is guilty, he will face the legal consequences." Of course, no matter how far we bend over backwards to be fair, objective, and bi-partisan, the far right (Rush, Hannity, Beck, and so on) will scream and yell about bias. But it should be possible to do an investigation in a way that about 90% of the American people will agree is fair.
I believe that there are several serious charges to consider. The most serious charge is brought by former prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi, in his book "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder". Bugliosi alleges that Bush knowingly lied to get us in to war in Iraq, and should therefore be tried for the murder of over 3,000 American troops who died there. Bugliosi also goes to great lengths to distinguish the actions of Bush from the actions of other presidents who have sent American soldiers to die in foreign wars; the main difference is that the other Presidents believed their actions to be justified, and did not lie to the American people about the reasons for war.
Another of the charges against Bush is war crimes. If the acts of torture carried out in Abu Ghraib were not abberations carried out by "a few bad apples", but were ordered by the Bush administration, then the Bush administration has broken various American and international laws. Likewise, it is known that waterboarding and other "enhanced interrogation techniques" have been used in Gitmo, and that these were authorized by the Bush administration. If waterboarding is torture, and if torture is a serious violation of U.S. and international laws, then again the Bush administration deserves prosecution.
Another crime connected to Gitmo is the treatment of prisoners of war and terror suspects. Americans can be held by the government as crime suspects, but they must be charged with a crime, and given a lawyer and a trial. Jose Padilla was held without charge or trial for over three years.
Anyway, the above list should be a good starting place. I am not even a lawyer, and I created the list above from my memory of headlines and with the help of a few minutes of internet research. Each of the alleged crimes listed above deserves investigation, and if supported by the facts, several of them may deserve prosecution. And all of that should be supported by a majority of Americans. If done correctly, an investigaton of the Bush administration is both good policy and good politics.
1. Fighting for Economic Justice and Security in the U.S. and Global Economies
To uphold the right to universal access to affordable, high quality health care for all.
To preserve guaranteed Social Security benefits for all Americans, protect private pensions, and require corporate accountability.
To invest in America and create new jobs in the U.S. by building more affordable housing, re-building America's schools and physical infrastructure, cleaning up our environment, and improving homeland security.
To export more American products and not more American jobs and demand fair trade.
To reaffirm freedom of association and enforce the right to organize.
To ensure working families can live above the poverty line and with dignity by raising and indexing the minimum wage.
2. Protecting and Preserving Civil Rights and Civil Liberties
To sunset expiring provisions of the Patriot Act and bring remaining provisions into line with the U. S. Constitution.
To protect the personal privacy of all Americans from unbridled police powers and unchecked government intrusion.
To extend the Voting Rights Act and reform our electoral processes.
To fight corporate consolidation of the media and ensure opportunity for all voices to be heard.
To ensure enforcement of all legal rights in the workplace.
To eliminate all forms of discrimination based upon color, race, religion, gender, creed, disability, or sexual orientation.
3. Electoral Reform
Eliminate or reform the Electoral College so that a handful of states cannot game the system to override the will of the electorate;
Introduce Instant Runoff Voting so that a wider variety of political parties may compete in elections;
Eliminate private money in elections by creating a national, mandatory, publicly-funded election pot from which all federal candidates must draw; and
Pass laws, up to and including further amendment(s) to the Constitution, protecting the right of every citizen over the age of eighteen to vote.
4. Promoting Global Peace and Security
To honor and help our overburdened international public servants - both military and civilian.
To bring U. S. troops home from Iraq as soon as possible.
To re-build U.S. alliances around the world, restore international respect for American power and influence, and reaffirm our nation's constructive engagement in the United Nations and other multilateral organizations.
To enhance international cooperation to reduce the threats posed by nuclear proliferation and weapons of mass destruction.
To increase efforts to combat hunger and the scourge of HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and other infectious diseases.
To encourage debt relief for poor countries and support efforts to reach the UN's Millennium Goals for Developing Countries.
5. Environmental Protection & Energy Independence
To free ourselves and our economy from dependence upon imported oil and shift to growing reliance upon renewable energy supplies and technologies, thus creating at least three million new jobs, cleansing our environment, and enhancing our nation's security.
To free ourselves and our economy from dependence upon imported oil and shift to growing reliance upon renewable energy supplies and technologies, thus creating at least three million new jobs, cleansing our environment, and enhancing our nation's security.
To change incentives in federal tax, procurement, and appropriation policies to:
(A.) Speed commercialization of solar, biomass, and wind power generation, while encouraging state and local policy innovation to link clean energy and job creation;
(B.) Convert domestic assembly lines to manufacture highly efficient vehicles, enhance global competitiveness of U.S. auto industry, and expand consumer choice;
(C.) Increase investment in construction of "green buildings" and more energy-efficient homes and workplaces;
(D.) Link higher energy efficiency standards in appliances to consumer and manufacturing incentives that increase demand for new durable goods and increase investment in U.S. factories;
To eliminate environmental threat posed by global warming and ensuring that America does our part to advance an effective global problem-solving approach.
To expand energy-efficient transportation choices by increasing investment in synthesized networks, including bicycle, local bus and rail transit, regional high-speed rail and magnetic levitation rail projects.
To preserve prudent public interest regulations that encourage sustainable growth and investment, ensure energy diversity and system reliability, protect workers and the environment, reward consumer conservation, and support an expanding marketplace that rewards the commercialization of energy-efficient technologies.
To protect, preserve, restore, and where reasonably possible expand wild lands and animal and plant populations endangered by human activity, reasonably compensating businesses and homeowners for damages or losses incurred by such.
Pass legislation and encourage community leadership to, among other acts: Increase funding to child placement services (foster care agencies); increase funding for comprehensive sex education programs that are proven to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies; increase awareness of the protective benefits of proper use of contraceptives, and increase access to them; increase funding for educational programs to spread awareness of sexually transmitted pathogens including viruses and bacteria, and their effects upon the human body; increase funding for prenatal care for unwed and low-income mothers; and expand daycare and nanny services to assist low-income families and single parents who choose to keep their children after birth.
7. Gun Control and State Militias
Adopt reasonable gun control laws that keep guns out of the hands of criminals, while preserving the 2nd Amendment right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.
Restore full control of the National Guard units to their respective states, maintaining both a federal standing military and the individual state-controlled and regulated Militias.
8. Legalizing Marijuana
Legalize marijuana, and regulate it like tobacco and alcohol.
Increase funds to existing education and rehabilitation programs; create new programs and expand existing ones where necessary, to reduce addiction; pass common sense drug laws that focus on rehabilitation for non-violent offenders; and engage parents and community leaders to educate their children on the dangers of drugs.
Those who support Progressive causes are in an odd position these days: we're often in the majority on issues that matter; and we're seriously talking about how to turn what, just a few years ago, was a wish list...into a "reality list".
Staying in the majority, however, requires the assistance of centrist voters--and that means, from time to time, finding philosophical compromise with voters we'd like to keep "in the fold".
In years past, the issue of the death penalty has created a considerable chasm between Progressives and centrists; with the one side concerned about the misapplication of capital punishment, and the other convinced that, for the most heinous of crimes, the only way to achieve a truly just outcome is for the guilty party to face the most severe of punishments.
What if we could bridge that gap?
In today's discussion we propose to do exactly that: to create a death penalty process that only executes those who are truly guilty and excludes those who might not deserve to be put to death...in fact, those who might not be guilty of any crime at all.
So a Supreme Court justice that hardly anyone noticed has announced his retirement and all of a sudden the lips of The Experts are all a-flutter with the word "Empathy".
President Obama reports he wants his nominee to have it; and Republicans are convinced that the word is a secret code for something that eventually ends in the death of free speech, massive roundups of guns by the Secret United Nations World Police, and the Internment Of All The White People In Reeducation Camps Run By Americorps And ACORN And Gay People Who Want To Marry And Are Funded By George Soros.
It is suggested that Evil Activist Judges will trample the Constitution as they create Law out of whole cloth; and that only those who interpret the Constitution just as it was written can bring the proper attitude to the Court.
It sounds like somebody needs to come along and provide a couple of cogent thoughts about this whole empathy thing...and lucky for you, Gentle Reader, we have before us today specific examples of how the quality of empathy can express itself in Court Doctrine.
Welcome to the new White House administration, in which we move forward with purpose. On President Obama's very first day in office, immigrants and allies marched on ICE headquarters to signify their for change. Racewire reports that yesterday, "hundreds gathered in DC, a day after inaugurating our new president, to demand A New Day for Immigration." George W. Bush waved goodbye by commuting the sentences of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean,two former border guards who shot a man trying to escape arrest and then tried to cover their deed up. Bush claimed Ramos and Compean had
"suffered enough" after serving a fifth of their sentence and set them free, though he did not pardon them. Air America reports on the controversial decision in Bush Commutes Border Agent Sentences (video).
Six California farm workers have died since May from what appears to be heat related causes. The latest one was Maria de Jesus Alvarez, 63, mother of nine, who died early this month. The first one to die was 17-year-old Maria Isabel Vasquez Jimenez, who died in May. Marie was about a month pregnant when she died, and likely did not ever know she was pregnant. The state fined the labor contractor $262,700 for failing to follow heat illness prevention regulations at the time Jimenez was stricken, but that won't bring her back. And the deaths have continued at an accelarated pace since then.
You can help to end this tragedy. This Monday, August 18, more than 800 farm workers from throughout California want to go to Sacramento to lobby the Legislature on a key bill that will help them help themeselves. They want the chance to tell the Governor and their elected officials to support AB 2386, "Secret Ballot Elections for Farmworkers," which has moved out of the assembly and which will be voted on that afternoon in the state senate.
By Natasha Minsker, Death Penalty Policy Director, ACLU of Northern California
A panel of experts, including 10 law enforcement officers and prosecutors, unanimously agrees that California's death penalty is utterly broken. To fix it, we'll need to spend over $200 million per year. The current failed system already costs over $137 million more each year than our alternative of permanent imprisonment. Today's report forces all Californians to ask: how much we are willing to pay for our death penalty when we have an alternative that punishes criminals and protects our communities without making us bankrupt?
If you get an error message while attempting to view this clip, please reload the page or press F5.
Please note that by playing this clip You Tube will place a long-term cookie on your computer. Please see You Tube's privacy statement on their website to learn more. To view the ACLU's privacy statement, click here.
First, if we decide that we simply can't part with a system that we now know drains critical resources from public safety budgets, puts innocent lives at risk, harms murder victim family members, and is applied unfairly, then we need to commit to spending over $200 million in tax dollars every year to make the system operational on the most basic levels.
The Commission estimates that in order to make the system function, we would have to spend nearly $100 million more each year to pay for more prosecution and defense lawyers, and more court staff to handle the enormous volume of death penalty cases and appeals. When you add that to the money we already spend, it totals $217 million a year. On top of that, the State Auditor recently concluded that it will cost almost $400 million to build a new death row housing facility at San Quentin, on ground that is literally sinking into the sea.
Considering California's fiscal crisis, spending all of this money is not only unlikely, it's impossible.
And none of these proposed reforms would adequately address one of the most troubling flaws in California's death penalty, the racial and geographic disparities that call the very fairness and justice of the system into question. Despite evidence and testimony from several researchers indicating that race and place play a significant role in determining who lives and who dies, proposed reforms to address these issues are noticeably lacking from the Commission's report. Reforms that would begin to address those flaws would certainly cost more.
Our second option, according to the Commission, is to acknowledge that we have the most extreme death penalty statute in the country, resulting in an insupportably large death row population, and that we can't afford a system this big and bloated.
We all agree that we want a criminal justice system that delivers justice fairly. The overwhelming demands of our current death penalty system, however, overburden courts, lawyers and public safety officials at every level, jeopardizing the foundations of our justice system. The Commission suggests that we could limit the number of crimes eligible for the death penalty in order to ease some of the burden. This would still cost more than $100 million a year, depending on how much smaller we make the "smaller death penalty."
While both of these options provide a healthy dose of reality about how large and unmanageable our death penalty is, the Commission report also highlights the fact that we already pay many millions of dollars on the current failed death penalty, and that a cheaper, more effective system is not only feasible, it's already in place.
Few people realize that condemning someone to permanent imprisonment costs California taxpayers millions of dollars less than sentencing him or her to death. We have had the option of permanent imprisonment for as long as we have had the death penalty, and it's proven itself to be a more functional system that serves as a severe, but cost effective, punishment.
Which brings us to our third option, according to the Commission: replace the death penalty with permanent imprisonment until death, and save millions of dollars for public safety programs that actually work to punish criminals, protect the public and help victims. This would cost us less than $12 million, a savings of more than $200 million a year over option one.
The Commission does not come out and officially endorse this or any other option. In some sense, that's a cop out. On the other hand, the Commission puts the decision right where it should be: in the hand of the voters. It's time for those of us who are writing the checks to fund the system if to ask if it's really worth the price.
Immigration Orange Lessons are a series of essays aimed at combatting the talking points that derail every public conversation about immigration. They can all be found on Immigration Orange.
"I am in favor of legal immigration." "I am not anti-immigrant. I am anti-illegal immigrant." "I am for enforcing the law."
Every migrant advocate has heard these phrases or phrases like these. They're usually used to justify the atrocities that migrants suffer in the U.S.. People also use these statements with a smug tone, as if migrant advocates haven't heard them before. It's not worth my time to keep on addressing unimaginative talking points straight from the mouths of pundits and politicians. So I'll address them once and for all here. Following is a discussion of immigration law and it's history.
All manner of migrant hardship and suffering in the U.S. is justified and even encouraged under the pretenses of "the law". Anti-migrant advocates like to put "the law" on a sacred pedestal, while they completely divorce "the law" from justice. The law and it's application, need I remind everyone, is supposed to serve justice. Following is a discussion of justice.
STATE BLOGS
