Should Clinton Reject DARK MONEY From The For-Profit Prison Industry?

[Segami]

~snip~

Back in April, Clinton delivered a speech on the topic of criminal justice reform, the entirety of which can be read here. On the topic of the disproportionate number of persons of color incarcerated in our for-profit prison system, she stated:

There is something profoundly wrong when African American men are still far more likely to be stopped and searched by police, charged with crimes, and sentenced to longer prison terms than are meted out to their white counterparts.
There is something wrong when a third of all black men face the prospect of prison during their lifetimes. And an estimated 1.5 million black men are "missing" from their families and communities because of incarceration and premature death.

http://www.vox.com/2015/4/29/8514831/hillary-clinton-criminal-justice-transcript

There's more, it's not a bad speech, and it should be read in its entirely. But the one glaring omission I found was any mention of how the privatized prison system, which encourages judicial corruption (we've seen judges who have taken kickbacks from the for-profit prison industry and doling out draconian sentences to juvenile offenders, and the like) and fosters the type of system where people are, once again, viewed as a product or commodity to meet bottom line corporate profits. How can such a system be even remotely fair and just?

Perhaps one of the reasons Clinton didn't mention the for-profit prison industry in her speech about criminal justice reform is because she is a recipient of campaign funds originating from the for-profit prison industry, and therefore, it could be a big conflict of interest to bring it up. But if she can't even bring up the for-profit prison industry, and the corruption it engenders, how will she be able to act on it? If people are to believe that Hillary Clinton is the best candidate to represent persons of color, then she should make persons of color a real priority, not just lip service. With Deep Ties to Politicians, Private Prisons Have Exploded As Profit Centers.

Prisoners can’t vote in the United States and as a result they don’t have much sway over public policy decisions. But private, for-profit prison companies do, their voices amplified by big campaign contributions and millions spent on lobbying. Ahead of the 2016 presidential election, some of the candidates’ ties to the prison-industrial complex raise a lot of questions.

For example, the GEO Group has contributed heavily to campaigns of Florida senator and Republican contender Marco Rubio. And Republican candidate Jeb Bush’s support of for-profit prisons goes back to the 1990s, when he oversaw prison privatization as Florida governor.

Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton is calling for criminal justice reform, which would reduce profits for private prisons and reduce mass incarceration. The election offers voters a choice between candidates who support the current system that allows corporations to profit from the misery of the inmates and those committed to fundamental reform, which includes changing inflexible sentencing laws and ending the for-profit prison system.

http://www.occupy.com/article/deep-ties-politicians-private-prisons-have-exploded-profit-centers

~snip~

I suggest that any campaign contributions Clinton receives from the for-profit prison industry and/or their lobbyists and lobbyist law firms should be publicly returned with a statement. I would like to see Hillary Clinton tell the for-profit prison bundlers "Thanks, but no thanks!" and show us that important issues that affect persons of color really are a priority for her, and not just campaign rhetoric. In order for us to take her seriously on the issue of criminal justice reform, we need assurances that she won't be beholden to the for-profit prison industry which profits by unjustly putting and keeping people of color in cages.



cont'


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/26/1405731/-Should-Clinton-Reject-Dark-Money-from-the-For-Profit-Prison-Industry

[bravenak]

1. Yes. She should make a big show of rejecting it.

[6chars]

9. she may yet do so

it's still early

[msongs]

2. better yet the democratic party USA inc should denounce and oppose all privatized jails/prisons and

require the government to house its own prisoners as it is the government that puts people in jail in the first place.
there should be noooooooooooo profit motive of any kind

[Ed Suspicious]

5. The primary measurement of success should be how many people are we able to keep out of prison

without too terribly affecting crime rates.

[6chars]

10. then there are really two measures of success

crime rates (more is worse)
prisoner count (more is worse)

or are you saying crime rates are a secondary measure not primary?

it is a problem if people in power think prisoner count is not one of the measures at all, or even (as the prison industry probably thinks) higher prisoner count is better.

[99th_Monkey]

3. Yes.

I'm supporting Bernie, but the answer is yes. Any and all Democratic candidates
should refuse money from the private for-profit prison moguls.

CCA & Geo are right up there with Monsanto & Blackwater .. about as evil
as it gets.

She doesn't even really need that money, which I know isn't all that much,
though it IS a bit more than CCA has given to their GOP darling, Marco Rubio.

[Cheese Sandwich]

4. If we know where it came from then how is it dark money?

But if it came from the prison industry or their shills she should reject it.

[Oldenuff]

6. If she didn't take dark money

she wouldn't have any money at all.Sang to he tune of "if it wasn't for bad luck,I wouldn't have no luck at all".

[davidpdx]

7. I agree

But Hillary Clinton gets a free pass on those sorts of things.

[The CCC]

8. Should Clinton Reject DARK MONEY From The For-Profit Prison Industry?

"If you can't take their money, drink their booze, screw their woman, and still vote against them anyway. You don't belong in politics".
Jesse Unruh

[Fumesucker]

11. When someone tells you who they are you should believe them

Actions speak far louder than mere words when it comes to people letting you know who they are.

[dsc]

12. I think she should reject it

but I do have a definitional point here. The money isn't dark money. Dark money is money whose origins you don't know. The fact you know where the money came from means it de facto isn't dark money.

[cherokeeprogressive]

13. Three words you're not likely to hear or read side-by-side anywhere in this Solar System...

Hillary Rejects Money

[restorefreedom]

16. lol. nt

[oasis]

14. No. Not getting on the slippery slope of allowing primary opponents pick and choose

her donors. Given her large lead, that would be foolish. Hill is criticized almost daily on DU by posters providing laundry lists of "inappropriate" donors.


She's going to need every penny in the GE. After she lands the nomination, it's not likely her GOP adversaries will squawk about where her money comes from.

[sabrina 1]

15. Yes, she should, ALL Democrats should refuse Corporate Money especially from

THAT kind of corporation. She refused a donation from Larry Flynt in 2008 who actually helped save Clinton's presidency when he exposed the sheer hypocrisy of the Far Right and promised to continue to do so unless they stopped their nonsense. They did, fearing more exposure, and we finally saw that awful saga come to an end.

Flynt donated to her campaign. But opponents pointed to her taking money from a pornographer and she immediately caved and returned the donation.

I was very disappointed in her for doing that. So easily pressured by the same morons who had tried to topple her husband's presidency.

But if she was willing to refuse that small donation, then she must refuse donations from reprehensible corporations like the Private Prison Industry.