The Phoenix Explains MA Criminal Justice

An edited version of this letter was published in the February 17, 2012 edition of the Boston Phoenix here:

http://thephoenix.com/Boston/news/134019-letters-to-the-boston-editors-february-17-2012/

[On Sunday February 19, 2012 Cambridge police kept me under surveillance and used obligatory young women as bait for one more attempt to arrest me. No evidence that was a result of the letter being published.]

This essay would be more believable if some experts in criminal justice were quoted. The essay is mere speculation by a political writer, typical hot air which passes for constructive criticism. More importantly the most egregious abuses currently in prisons are psychiatric abuses. There is no mention of psychiatry in this essay.

Bernstein says, "wherever the Massachusetts State Legislature gets its fingers into the criminal-justice system, the results are not pretty." He does not mention any reason why. Is part of the reason for this that most legislators are lawyers with a financial interest in criminal justice laws?

Bernstein adds, "the probation scandal, [exposed] how little the legislature cared about actual performance or results in criminal-justice agencies, as long as their own personal interests were met." That is a pervasive problem with all laws; not just at the state level, and not just about criminal justice. It is true about all laws written. MA General Court used to have a Post Audit Committee to study how laws were working. I never got any response from that committee when I revealed to it some of the counter productive abuses in other areas.

Bernstein exhibits the arrogance of Harvard scholars when he says, "Much like climate-change deniers, lawmakers refuse to accept the overwhelming body of research and best practices that show the benefits of a more thoughtful, evidence-based reform in criminal justice." It sounds nice, but what does it mean? Many climate change deniers are respected in their academic institutions. How does that equate with the reluctance of politicians to fix a system they created? Has science become politicized as badly as the criminal justice system?

He asks for "less reliance on punitive mass incarceration, and more focus on rehabilitation, treatment, and supervision." Each of these have serious arguments for and against. He states his conclusion without any argument no less evidence for it.

One curious statement without substantiation is that "There had been considerable optimism that Patrick would put Massachusetts on the road to reform." The reform train left the state house when Mitt Romney left. He stood up to the legislature vetoing 300 bills one year. The legislature over rode 299 of them. Romney actually stood up to William Bulger, former State Senate President, and President of the MA State University System. Gov. Romney threatened to appoint radio talk show host Howie Carr to the Board of Trustees of the University of Massachusetts system to get Bulger removed. Bulger said to Romney, "You wouldn't dare." Nonetheless Bulger did resign and now collects a state pension of over $200,000 per year. Not chicken feed.

Quoting a Patrick "insider," Bernstein reports he said,"When the legislators start talking about these issues, they automatically think about it as 'soft on crime,'" Isn't that a function of spinelessness of elected officials, what some journalists call the herd mentality? Is it like the fear of being called a racist, or a homophobe?

Andrea Cabral, appointed by Republican Governor Jane Swift then immediately changed her party affiliation to Democratic, says, "it's an absolute fact that the way it works now is simply unsustainable from a financial perspective." Yet no mention of the unusally high cost of psychiatric industry programs that are a waste of taxpayer funds.

Bernstein calls the legislature's mentality "Neanderthal." Neanderthal man is extinct. They did not have language nor a system of criminal justice. A more appropriate term to show ignorance or ancient opinions would be to call the legislature Medieval.

A remarkable statement is, "the state's citizenry is far more reform-minded than its elected officials." Bernstein provides no evidence for that sweeping conclusion. In Cambridge which prides itself on being progressive the citizens are very happy with the way things are. They do not care about reform, corruption, high taxes, waste of taxpayer funds. They are only interested in the value of their homes. If Cambridge residents lead the way, the belief that citizens are reform minded is extremely misguided.

The upbeat statement that "CORI reform was significant." is not explained. Is it the fact that any reform is significant? Or that the reform of CORI was a significant reform? No details are provided nor any link to what was done.

His conclusion of fearmongering is what the legislature does best explaining "the massive expense and threat to public safety that the current system represents." Eliminating psychiatric services from the prison system will reduce a large expense that has no place in the jails.

http://thephoenix.com/Boston/news/133445-massachusetts-legislature-is-the-principal-roa/?page=3#TOPCONTENT

The Massachusetts legislature is the principal roadblock to putting the state's criminal-justice system on the right track
House of Incorrections
By DAVID S. BERNSTEIN
February 1, 2012