While I'm busy with other business today, check out these fine blogs which all have interesting recent posts on the topics Grits covers:
This is an open thread. Play nice.
Monday, March 09, 2009
Innocence Commission bill up this morning
I'll be testifying this morning at an 8 a.m. subcommittee meeting of the Texas House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee (live video here) to support legislation by Rep. Ruth McLendon on behalf of the Innocence Project of Texas to create an innocence commission in Texas to identify causes of false convictions and ways to prevent them.
An innocence commission would provide a way to systematically vet the errors that cause false convictions, similar to the way hospitals hold a "morbidity and mortality" conference after someone dies in their care to figure out what went wrong and how to prevent it in the future.
Texas' recent string of DNA exonerations have provided a unique window into the mechanics of false convictions. This bill would create a mechanism for formally identifying sources of error and suggesting ways to reduce their number in the future. Of course, we already know many of these causes - including faulty eyewitness ID procedures, mendacious informants, false confessions, and flawed forensics - but those are only the most prominent examples, hardly an exhaustive list.
I'll also be testifying in support of another bill by Rep. Harold Dutton to provide for expunction of records in cases where the defendant was pardoned, acquitted, or the case is dismissed. Dutton's bill would shift the burden to the state to clear the defendant's name when their accusations are overturned or never come to fruition.
There are several other notable items on the subcommittee agenda as well, including a good open records bill by Dutton that would make grand jury proceedings public records after the panel has disbanded. This would be a key accountability reform for District Attorneys, in particular, allowing the public post facto oversight of an aspect of justice that is at once one of the most critical parts of the process and also the most opaque.
Speaking of Harold Dutton, his bill (discussed here) to require drivers' consent to searches at traffic stops to be either written or recorded will be up in the House Public Safety Committee this afternoon.
UPDATE: See Rep. McLendon's press release about the innocence commission bill
An innocence commission would provide a way to systematically vet the errors that cause false convictions, similar to the way hospitals hold a "morbidity and mortality" conference after someone dies in their care to figure out what went wrong and how to prevent it in the future.
Texas' recent string of DNA exonerations have provided a unique window into the mechanics of false convictions. This bill would create a mechanism for formally identifying sources of error and suggesting ways to reduce their number in the future. Of course, we already know many of these causes - including faulty eyewitness ID procedures, mendacious informants, false confessions, and flawed forensics - but those are only the most prominent examples, hardly an exhaustive list.
I'll also be testifying in support of another bill by Rep. Harold Dutton to provide for expunction of records in cases where the defendant was pardoned, acquitted, or the case is dismissed. Dutton's bill would shift the burden to the state to clear the defendant's name when their accusations are overturned or never come to fruition.
There are several other notable items on the subcommittee agenda as well, including a good open records bill by Dutton that would make grand jury proceedings public records after the panel has disbanded. This would be a key accountability reform for District Attorneys, in particular, allowing the public post facto oversight of an aspect of justice that is at once one of the most critical parts of the process and also the most opaque.
Speaking of Harold Dutton, his bill (discussed here) to require drivers' consent to searches at traffic stops to be either written or recorded will be up in the House Public Safety Committee this afternoon.
UPDATE: See Rep. McLendon's press release about the innocence commission bill
Sunday, March 08, 2009
Drug cartel violence, possibly leadership migrates to US soil
Last month the Governor's homeland security chief told the Legislature that the "command and control" operations of so-called Mexican drug cartels are probably closer to Houston than the border, and a couple of recent Houston Chronicle stories seem to corroborate that claim:
Reported the Chron:
Reported the Chron:
Among the unsolved local killings is the death of Pedro Cardenas Guillen, 36, whose last name is considered trafficking royalty. He was shot in the head and left in a ditch off Madden Road, near Fort Bend County.
His uncle is Osiel Cardenas Guillen, reputed head of the powerful Gulf Cartel. He was extradited from Mexico and awaits trial in Houston on charges of drug trafficking, money laundering and threatening to kill federal agents.
While it's comforting to think of drug cartel murders as something that happen on the other side of the Rio Grande, these stories put the lie to that myth. As I wrote last month, "maybe we shouldn't think of transnational smuggling gangs as 'Mexican' cartels" when those exercising "command and control" and many of their hired gunmen live on the US side of the border.
Texas US Attorney rumors updated
A Democratic attorney friend anonymously forwards me more gossip about possible Texas US Attorney candidates.
I'd wondered why we'd heard no rumors about candidates in Texas' Eastern and Southern District, but apparently, in the Eastern District, at least, there's a reason: "there isn't a Congressional Delegation Committee for EDTX yet because there are no Dem Congressmen in that district."
This lawyer says that Tammy Reno (no relation to Janet), is the likely frontrunner. "She's the #2 in that office now. Formerly of the NDTX office where she prosecuted coyotes and was working on the public corruption cases when she left to go to the EDTX."
The other candidate mentioned in the Eastern District is Judge Bob Wortham of Beaumont, who ironically was US Attorney under Ronald Reagan but later switched parties to run for judge.
The source adds, "because the USA is staying for now (Becky Gregory) I bet the Obama admin doesn't pick this one for a while. As a side note, this may be the only USA dist in the country headed by 2 women -- in the EDTX of all places!"
In the Southern District, the names Susan Strawn (who ran last fall as a Democrat for the Court of Criminal Appeals) and Larry Veleska were mentioned as candidates, but I'm told there are also other possible nominees out there. My source wouldn't handicap the outcome.
In the Northern District, this source said rumors have floated about:
I'd wondered why we'd heard no rumors about candidates in Texas' Eastern and Southern District, but apparently, in the Eastern District, at least, there's a reason: "there isn't a Congressional Delegation Committee for EDTX yet because there are no Dem Congressmen in that district."
This lawyer says that Tammy Reno (no relation to Janet), is the likely frontrunner. "She's the #2 in that office now. Formerly of the NDTX office where she prosecuted coyotes and was working on the public corruption cases when she left to go to the EDTX."
The other candidate mentioned in the Eastern District is Judge Bob Wortham of Beaumont, who ironically was US Attorney under Ronald Reagan but later switched parties to run for judge.
The source adds, "because the USA is staying for now (Becky Gregory) I bet the Obama admin doesn't pick this one for a while. As a side note, this may be the only USA dist in the country headed by 2 women -- in the EDTX of all places!"
In the Southern District, the names Susan Strawn (who ran last fall as a Democrat for the Court of Criminal Appeals) and Larry Veleska were mentioned as candidates, but I'm told there are also other possible nominees out there. My source wouldn't handicap the outcome.
- Terri Moore, Dallas District Attorney Craig Watkins first assistant
- Sarah Saldana, who my source described as "smart and tough and progressive"
- Mike Snipes, an Iraqi war vet, West Point graduate, former AUSA in the Northern District
However, "the word is that Roger Williams has it locked up. No criminal experience at all. Never worked in a US Atty office. But was Ken Molberg's law partner, and is tied into some of the right (i.e. close to Doggett and Eddie Bernice Johnson) trial lawyers." This source has "heard that Roger is a capable administrator," but fears appointing someone with no criminal law experience might harm office morale.
Finally, commenters had suggested several candidates in the running for the Western District slot:
Finally, commenters had suggested several candidates in the running for the Western District slot:
- David Escamilla: Current Travis County Attorney
- Mike McCrum: Former AUSA Chief of Major Crimes and Drug Unit for over 10 years
- Michael Bernard: Current San Antonio City Attorney
- Scott Hendler: Austin-based personal injury lawyer
The comment section, as always, is open for additional rumormongering and discusson of the candidates mentioned.
More guards, more prisons, or fewer prisoners: Bill expanding drug treatment makes third option possible
In the medium run, the Texas Legislature has two options for managing its prison population - build more prisons and increase pay so they can hire sufficient staff, or reduce the number of prisoners so the Department of Criminal Justice can safely guard the inmates it's got.
This week we received mixed signals on the pay front, with the Senate suggesting a 20% pay hike for guards while the House removed pay increases from the budget and put them on their "wish list." The issue won't be decided until the conference committee on the budget.
If pay hikes don't happen, that leaves reducing the inmate population.
The good news on that front is that the Legislative Budget Board projects (see p. 14 of the pdf) that Texas' prison population will decline in fiscal year 2009 for the first time in many, many years. LBB says Texas will incarcerate 2,000 fewer inmates by the beginning of FY 2010, but after that, the prison population will slowly begin to increase again, exceeding capacity by 2013. If that's accurate, the Whitmire/Madden reforms of 2005 and 2007 bought the state a little time, but have only put off the prison overcrowding problem, not eliminated it.
That's one reason why I was glad to see an excellent bipartisan bill filed in the Senate aimed at building on recent years' reforms. SB 1118 boasts five primary authors - Senators Ellis, Carona, Deuell, Hegar, and Whitmire - and would reduce the number of low-level drug offenders cycling in and out of prison. It proposes a substantial shift away from imprisonment for petty drug possession felonies and toward using probation and treatment for those offenses. It's a bit of a complex bill, but here are the highlights:
If approved, for third degree drug felonies (1-4 grams of a controlled substance) and lower, "the judge shall suspend the imposition of the sentence and place the defendant on community supervision," except that the judge "may" send them to prison if they determine by a preponderance of the evidence that:
The bill gives judges plenty of options, including incarceration, for dealing with offenders who won't comply with their probation terms. One goodie for judges whose overcrowded county jails may limit short-term incarceration for probation: The bill authorizes using TDCJ-run "intermediate sanction facilities" for up to 120 days for probation violators. Those state-run are presently only used for parole.
Another interesting twist: After the successful completion of their probation term and a drug treatment program, the defendant may petition the court for dismissal of their charges.
This legislation would affect significant chunk of Texas' drug cases; as noted recently, among Texas' state jail felons incarcerated for drug offenses, 87.3% are in for possession of less than a gram of a controlled substance according to TDCJ, while 58.6% of more serious drug cases were possession-only offenses, not for "distribution."
I'm optimistic about prospects for this legislation, which builds on prior, successful legislative initiatives which demonstrably averted what, not long ago, was a looming, California-style prison overcrowding crisis. Removing small-time drug possession defendants from prison and shifting them to less expensive, more effective treatment programs would help solidify the prison population reduction LBB projects for next year, avoiding billions in costs for more prisons and guards in the budget-strapped years ahead.
This week we received mixed signals on the pay front, with the Senate suggesting a 20% pay hike for guards while the House removed pay increases from the budget and put them on their "wish list." The issue won't be decided until the conference committee on the budget.
If pay hikes don't happen, that leaves reducing the inmate population.
The good news on that front is that the Legislative Budget Board projects (see p. 14 of the pdf) that Texas' prison population will decline in fiscal year 2009 for the first time in many, many years. LBB says Texas will incarcerate 2,000 fewer inmates by the beginning of FY 2010, but after that, the prison population will slowly begin to increase again, exceeding capacity by 2013. If that's accurate, the Whitmire/Madden reforms of 2005 and 2007 bought the state a little time, but have only put off the prison overcrowding problem, not eliminated it.
That's one reason why I was glad to see an excellent bipartisan bill filed in the Senate aimed at building on recent years' reforms. SB 1118 boasts five primary authors - Senators Ellis, Carona, Deuell, Hegar, and Whitmire - and would reduce the number of low-level drug offenders cycling in and out of prison. It proposes a substantial shift away from imprisonment for petty drug possession felonies and toward using probation and treatment for those offenses. It's a bit of a complex bill, but here are the highlights:
If approved, for third degree drug felonies (1-4 grams of a controlled substance) and lower, "the judge shall suspend the imposition of the sentence and place the defendant on community supervision," except that the judge "may" send them to prison if they determine by a preponderance of the evidence that:
- The defendant is a danger to the safety of others,
- The defendant has a prior conviction (excluding drug possession or a violation of the Transportation Code),
- The defendant is convicted in the same proceeding for an additional offense (excluding drug possession or a violation of the Transportation Code), or
- The judge determines after an "evidence-based assessment" that that the defendant is unlikely to benefit from participation in a drug treatment program, and then only if they have been convicted in two or more occasions of drug possession or discharged unsuccessfully from a drug court program.
- treatment in a faith-based program
- outpatient treatment
- halfway house treatment
- narcotic replacement therapy
- drug education or prevention courses, and
- inpatient or residential treatment
The bill gives judges plenty of options, including incarceration, for dealing with offenders who won't comply with their probation terms. One goodie for judges whose overcrowded county jails may limit short-term incarceration for probation: The bill authorizes using TDCJ-run "intermediate sanction facilities" for up to 120 days for probation violators. Those state-run are presently only used for parole.
Another interesting twist: After the successful completion of their probation term and a drug treatment program, the defendant may petition the court for dismissal of their charges.
This legislation would affect significant chunk of Texas' drug cases; as noted recently, among Texas' state jail felons incarcerated for drug offenses, 87.3% are in for possession of less than a gram of a controlled substance according to TDCJ, while 58.6% of more serious drug cases were possession-only offenses, not for "distribution."
I'm optimistic about prospects for this legislation, which builds on prior, successful legislative initiatives which demonstrably averted what, not long ago, was a looming, California-style prison overcrowding crisis. Removing small-time drug possession defendants from prison and shifting them to less expensive, more effective treatment programs would help solidify the prison population reduction LBB projects for next year, avoiding billions in costs for more prisons and guards in the budget-strapped years ahead.
Saturday, March 07, 2009
Covering for Keller: CCA Damage Control Tour 2009
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals sent one of its senior members around the state this week for an unusual PR blitz, according to the Dallas News editorial board:
If she survives the removal hearing and the Commission only reprimands her, she'll be damaged goods that Democrats will beat on like a piñata until 2012. She'll become the symbolic face of the whole court, to the extent that's not true already.
For those reasons, I'd half-expected Judge Keller to submit her resignation and allow Governor Perry to appoint her replacement, but it's beginning to look like she'll stick it out. There's no accounting for hubris.
Speaking of the state Commission on Judicial Conduct, Chuck Lindell at the Austin Statesman has an interesting piece analyzing what actions were taken by the commission against wayward judges last year, when ten judges were reprimanded publicly and another 26 privately. (There are descriptions of the private reprimands, though, that give enough detail where it would be possible to tell if Judge Keller receives one.) Three judges resigned last year rather than face disciplinary procedures.
RELATED: From Capitol Annex, "Giving Cover to Keller."
UPDATE: See this Dallas News piece in which we learn that a) Judge Cheryl Johnson personally filed a complaint against Keller with the Commission on Judicial Conduct in the Michael Richard case, b) Judge Johnson later had to intervene to ensure the new rules Judge Meyers was bragging on to the press were actually followed when the new general counsel tried to reject another last-minute capital appeal, and c) that general counsel's "predecessor retired under pressure because of his role in the Richard case."
MORE: See NY Times coverage of the case (3/8).
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals wants to get a message out. And so senior Judge Lawrence E. Meyers embarked on a tour to convey it to major Texas newspapers. Here's the gist of his message: We're not as inept and indifferent as you think we are. Yes, Presiding Judge Sharon Keller decided 18 months ago to shut the court down with a death appeal and execution pending, but we have better procedures now. We even wrote them down. See, here's a printout. No more confusion. No, we don't know exactly happened that fateful night, but we're sure the upcoming hearing on Judge Keller will find out. Until then, don't judge us harshly. OK, then. But it's tougher and tougher to keep an open mind.Judge Meyers insisted to the media his colleague Sharon Keller will stay the course and fight the charges against her, but this seems like a no-win situation for her. It's pretty clear Keller actually did all the things alleged, so if the Judicial Conduct Commission does nothing it will look like favoritism for a GOP muckety muck. If she's removed, she lives out her career in disgrace.
If she survives the removal hearing and the Commission only reprimands her, she'll be damaged goods that Democrats will beat on like a piñata until 2012. She'll become the symbolic face of the whole court, to the extent that's not true already.
For those reasons, I'd half-expected Judge Keller to submit her resignation and allow Governor Perry to appoint her replacement, but it's beginning to look like she'll stick it out. There's no accounting for hubris.
Speaking of the state Commission on Judicial Conduct, Chuck Lindell at the Austin Statesman has an interesting piece analyzing what actions were taken by the commission against wayward judges last year, when ten judges were reprimanded publicly and another 26 privately. (There are descriptions of the private reprimands, though, that give enough detail where it would be possible to tell if Judge Keller receives one.) Three judges resigned last year rather than face disciplinary procedures.
RELATED: From Capitol Annex, "Giving Cover to Keller."
UPDATE: See this Dallas News piece in which we learn that a) Judge Cheryl Johnson personally filed a complaint against Keller with the Commission on Judicial Conduct in the Michael Richard case, b) Judge Johnson later had to intervene to ensure the new rules Judge Meyers was bragging on to the press were actually followed when the new general counsel tried to reject another last-minute capital appeal, and c) that general counsel's "predecessor retired under pressure because of his role in the Richard case."
MORE: See NY Times coverage of the case (3/8).
Friday, March 06, 2009
Details emerging on juvie reforms: Agency merger may be off the table
There's an email making the rounds on county commissioners listservs that includes this striking tidbit from the Texas Association of Urban Counties' Donald Lee:
In a previous item, I'd posted plans suggested by county juvenile probation departments which were passed along by Sen. Whitmire's office about how proposed, new diversion funding might work, but I was inadvertently sent the Travis County plan instead of the one from Dallas, as they'd intended. I apologize for the error.
In any event, little by little, it's becoming possible to piece together what Texas' juvenile justice system might look like, at least in broad outline, if TYC were radically downsized. Now that we've got a copy of the Dallas plan, let's look at a some of its key components. For starters, it includes several assumptions:
That's one of the reasons some juvie probation directors have told me they're hesitant to sign off on accepting these new responsibilities - at the higher rate, they say, they're pretty sure they can make the idea work. At a lower figure, quien sabe? Maybe not. Remember, they've already tried managing these same kids with the resources they've got.
At the per-diem rate suggested in the Dallas document, costs would still range higher than $81,000 per youth per year - a savings over the status quo, to be sure, but still much more than TYC's per-youth cost before the 2007 sex-scandal meltdown.
I like the idea of the county losing funds if they send more youth to TYC than their commitment target. That mechanism would give some teeth to the new reforms and is a particularly clever way to ensure compliance.
On the other hand, the voluntary component and negotiated commitment targets add an element of uncertainty to just how much TYC's population might really be reduced. If many counties choose not to participate or judges send more kids to TYC - decisions which lie entirely outside the Legislature's control - TYC could easily be back during the interim looking for emergency appropriations.
That said, a couple of juvie probation directors I spoke to were supportive of the idea. Les Brown, chief of the Lubbock juvenile probation department (speaking only for himself, he emphasized), said:
Interestingly, I'm told that smaller, rural jurisdictions are more amenable to the idea of managing placements themselves because they have little faith in TYC and feel like, if given enough money, they can deal with the small number of kids they'll be asked to handle. It's some of the larger and mid-sized agencies that are more concerned about the devil in the details.
I've got a few calls still out to other juvenile justice professionals and will write more on this topic when I get more feedback from folks in the know.
Today, Chairman John Whitmire called me to inform me that consolidation of TYC and TJPC will not happen this session. He is working hard to reform the juvenile system to provide counties the option of keeping more kids local instead of sending them to TYC and providing substantial additional funding to counties that do so.If accurate, it's pretty important concession from Sen. Whitmire - to take merging the Youth Commission and the Juvenile Probation Commission off the table. I called the Chairman's committee staff to confirm or refute the rumor, but they were unaware of the conversation.
In a previous item, I'd posted plans suggested by county juvenile probation departments which were passed along by Sen. Whitmire's office about how proposed, new diversion funding might work, but I was inadvertently sent the Travis County plan instead of the one from Dallas, as they'd intended. I apologize for the error.
In any event, little by little, it's becoming possible to piece together what Texas' juvenile justice system might look like, at least in broad outline, if TYC were radically downsized. Now that we've got a copy of the Dallas plan, let's look at a some of its key components. For starters, it includes several assumptions:
- Participation is voluntary
- TYC still exists for serious, persistent offenders
- TYC commitment targets are negotiated with the county
- County is reimbursed by the State at Intensive ($222) Level of Care per diem for difference between commitment target and average commitment total
- County pays State per diem for each youth committed over the target
That's one of the reasons some juvie probation directors have told me they're hesitant to sign off on accepting these new responsibilities - at the higher rate, they say, they're pretty sure they can make the idea work. At a lower figure, quien sabe? Maybe not. Remember, they've already tried managing these same kids with the resources they've got.
At the per-diem rate suggested in the Dallas document, costs would still range higher than $81,000 per youth per year - a savings over the status quo, to be sure, but still much more than TYC's per-youth cost before the 2007 sex-scandal meltdown.
I like the idea of the county losing funds if they send more youth to TYC than their commitment target. That mechanism would give some teeth to the new reforms and is a particularly clever way to ensure compliance.
On the other hand, the voluntary component and negotiated commitment targets add an element of uncertainty to just how much TYC's population might really be reduced. If many counties choose not to participate or judges send more kids to TYC - decisions which lie entirely outside the Legislature's control - TYC could easily be back during the interim looking for emergency appropriations.
That said, a couple of juvie probation directors I spoke to were supportive of the idea. Les Brown, chief of the Lubbock juvenile probation department (speaking only for himself, he emphasized), said:
I do support moving more responsibility to the counties if funding from the Lege comes with it. No doubt counties can place kids in specialized programs (secure/nonsecure) at less cost than TYC. If they're spending $99K per year per student, we can do it much cheaper, hell, maybe 50-75% cheaper than TYC. Rural counties need a good chunk of the money, IMO, because they are the departments who use TYC as a "free placement" while the kid may not need specialized care and programs. As the good Senator says, TYC needs to exist for the worst of the worst and the kid who has been unsuccessful in local programs and several placements. The public needs to be protected from these type kids.Brown also seriously questioned, however, if "the private, for profit, county and non-profit infrastructure currently exist for 1000-1500 additional beds?" In other words, if you tell the counties to manage more youth with serious behavioral problems, as a practical matter are there currently enough beds to handle them? I agree with Les that piece of the puzzle remains a big question mark.
Another way for the Lege to deal with this is to further restrict types of kids (by offense) who may be committed to TYC much like the barring of misdemeanors. Not what I prefer but an alternative.
Interestingly, I'm told that smaller, rural jurisdictions are more amenable to the idea of managing placements themselves because they have little faith in TYC and feel like, if given enough money, they can deal with the small number of kids they'll be asked to handle. It's some of the larger and mid-sized agencies that are more concerned about the devil in the details.
I've got a few calls still out to other juvenile justice professionals and will write more on this topic when I get more feedback from folks in the know.
Tracking good criminal justice legislation
Via email, the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition highlights:
Thanks to TCJC for helping keep track of all the moving parts.
I'd add that there are some good bills up on the House Public Safety Committee agenda Monday afternoon as well, not the least of which is HB 917 by Dutton described here that would require written or recorded consent for searches by police at traffic stops.Seven bills ... scheduled for public hearings next week that, if enacted, will have a positive impact on Texas' criminal justice system. Here is a brief summary ...
House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence
Committee: House - Criminal Jurisprudence
Subcommittee: Criminal Procedure
Date: Monday, March 9, 2009
Time: 8:00 AM
Room: Reagan Building (JHR) 110 (105 W. 15th Street)
Chair: Rep. Joseph Moody● HB 292 by Dutton, Relating to restoration of certain rights to a criminal defendant.
● HB 293 by Dutton, Relating to automatic expunction of criminal records.
○ TCJC Testimony
● HB 498 by McClendon, Relating to the creation of a commission to investigate and prevent wrongful convictions.
○ TCJC Testimony
● HB 579 by Gutierrez, Relating to certain costs on conviction in certain intoxication and drug cases.
○ TCJC Testimony
● HB 666 by Gutierrez, Relating to certain court costs used to fund drug court programs.
○ TCJC TestimonyRead Full AgendaHouse Committee on Licensing & Administrative Procedures
Committee: Licensing & Administrative Procedures
Time: 8:00 AM
Date: Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Room: E2.016
Chair: Representative Edmund Kuempel
● HB 70 by Guillen, Relating to the issuance of an occupational license to certain applicants with criminal convictions.
○ TCJC Testimony
● HB 963 by Guillen, Relating to a criminal history evaluation letter determining occupational license eligibility.
Thanks to TCJC for helping keep track of all the moving parts.
Hoax video part of salvia testimony; Riddle on hate crimes and hair color
I missed the hearing myself, but Vince at Capitol Annex watched the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee meeting on Wednesday and offered a couple of provocative reports:
In the first item, Vince makes an excellent catch by identifying that one of the YouTube videos Anderson showed the committee on salvia, "was from a humor site and not actually something from real life." Whoops!
That's a serious blow to the credibility of Rep. Charles "Doc" Anderson's case against salvia, particularly since that the Houston Chronicle said (not knowing it was a hoax) that the humor video was the most "compelling" evidence shown to the committee. (See prior Grits coverage of the bill.)
I'm much less concerned than Vince, though, with Rep. Riddle's comments about hair color and the hate crimes act, finding little reason personally to take offense. But then, I disliked that legislation when it was passed in 2001 and more or less agree with Riddle that "Crime is crime, horrific," and that murders aren't more or less harmful because of motive.
If I am murdered, I am no less dead whatever your reasons for killing me. So even if Riddle's analogy was inartful, IMO she's expressing a valid point about the hate crimes law itself.
That said, Rep. Marc Veasey's bill only asks for a study of the effectiveness of the James Byrd Hate Crimes Act, which, given that it's been in place nearly a decade, is perhaps a good idea. Like it or not, the law already exists. Why not study it to see how its being implemented, what could be done to improve the law if there are problems, and how it's functioning out in the world?
In the first item, Vince makes an excellent catch by identifying that one of the YouTube videos Anderson showed the committee on salvia, "was from a humor site and not actually something from real life." Whoops!
That's a serious blow to the credibility of Rep. Charles "Doc" Anderson's case against salvia, particularly since that the Houston Chronicle said (not knowing it was a hoax) that the humor video was the most "compelling" evidence shown to the committee. (See prior Grits coverage of the bill.)
I'm much less concerned than Vince, though, with Rep. Riddle's comments about hair color and the hate crimes act, finding little reason personally to take offense. But then, I disliked that legislation when it was passed in 2001 and more or less agree with Riddle that "Crime is crime, horrific," and that murders aren't more or less harmful because of motive.
If I am murdered, I am no less dead whatever your reasons for killing me. So even if Riddle's analogy was inartful, IMO she's expressing a valid point about the hate crimes law itself.
That said, Rep. Marc Veasey's bill only asks for a study of the effectiveness of the James Byrd Hate Crimes Act, which, given that it's been in place nearly a decade, is perhaps a good idea. Like it or not, the law already exists. Why not study it to see how its being implemented, what could be done to improve the law if there are problems, and how it's functioning out in the world?
Power relations between police and accused can lead to sexual abuse
A former law enforcement officer from El Paso, now working as mall security in Olympia, WA, stands accused of coercing a pair of teenage girls allegedly caught shoplifting to expose themselves and let him take pictures, reports the Seattle Times ("Teens: Security took topless photos, March 5):
A loss-prevention officer at the J.C. Penney store at the Capital Mall was in jail Wednesday after two girls, ages 17 and 18, accused him of coercing them into exposing their breasts and soliciting them for sex after they were caught shoplifting.
The girls said Michael Anthony Olivas, 35, told them that if they took off their clothes, he wouldn't call police about the shoplifting. They said he then took their photos with his cellphone camera while they were undressed. Olympia Police Lt. Jim Costa said Olivas' cellphone is being processed for evidence at the State Patrol Crime Lab.
Olivas was being held Wednesday at the Thurston County Jail with bail set at $10,000 after Superior Court Judge Gary Tabor found probable cause to order him held on suspicion of one count of unlawful imprisonment with sexual motivation. ...
According to court records:
The girls initially reported to Shelton police that Olivas took them into custody for shoplifting and "threatened and pretended to call the police."
"Olivas took their cellphones and looked through them for 'dirty pictures' and asked them questions about their boyfriends," court papers state. "Olivas coerced them into exposing their nude breasts and semi-clothed groin/buttocks areas to him so he could take pictures with his cellphone to avoid going to jail."
The girls said "they were held by Olivas from 4 p.m. to 7:20 p.m. when they were released."
This behavior reminds me of the Montague County Sheriff in North Texas who caught a young woman with meth and essentially turned her out, forcing her to perform oral sex and act as his snitch to avoid prosecution.
It's also hard not to be reminded of vice cops coercing sex from escort service employees to allow them to remain in business. One study out of Chicago found that 3% of tricks by street prostitutes without pimps were freebies given to police in exchange for protection.
The common theme: officers abusing authority given them to protect the public to instead victimize women for their own gratification. This guy in Washington was an ex-cop, not a current officer, but he was still allegedly using the coercive power of the police state for his own benefit instead of enforcing the law.
How effective are TDCJ shakedowns at finding contraband?
Reacting to this item from the Department of Criminal Justice's Connections newsletter, Duane Stuart at The Back Gate, a prison guards' blog, says that patdowns for guards and new restrictions on food and other items staff can bring onto TDCJ units are little more than security theater:
The Back Gate's View: Ok, good PR, but how are the shakedowns effective when you have that unit's correctional officers shaking down friends and co-workers? How good are the searches? Is it the fox guarding the henhouse? We think TDCJ is merely plugging the hole in the dam by using thier pinky finger. Just a few months after the the phones turned up on death row, guess how many more have been found statewide after the " stringent searches". Your answer.... hundreds. So what has been effective? So give us a break TDCJ. Come clean and correct the issues before it once again hits home.
Thursday, March 05, 2009
House budget writers move prison guard raises to "wish list," Senate cuts 40% from TYC budget
Corrections budgets hit the fan today in both chambers of the Texas Legislature. Reports Mike Ward on the Statesman's legislative blog:
A House budget subcommittee this morning tentatively agreed to drastically downsize a proposed pay-raise package for Texas’ prison guards, and move it from the sure-thing budget to the wish list.
State Rep. Debbie Riddle, R-Tomball, the chairman of the subcommittee, said the panel had little choice but to reduce the requested 20-percent raise package to just 5 percent.
That cut dropped the price tag from around $450 million to $124.8 million.
And because the state’s regular budget is so tight, Riddle’s subcommittee agreed to move the 5-percent raise to the state’s fast-growing “wish list” of items that should be funded, if extra money can be found. Subcommittee members said they will label it an “important, high priority.”
Not too promising, though in the current budget climate perhaps unsurprising. I'm not sure a 5% bump will be enough to overcome TDCJ's staffing shortages. No doubt, this decision to de-prioritize guard raises will be a major topic of discussion at next week's TDCJ employee lobby day, sponsored by AFSCME.
Meanwhile, TYC got an unexpected budget shock this morning in a Senate Finance subcommittee hearing, reports Ward: Citing a need to cut operations costs at the Texas Youth Commission, whose incarcerated population has dropped by almost half in two years, a Senate budget subcommittee moved Wednesday to possibly trim the agency's proposed budget by nearly 40 percent. A youth lockup in Corsicana and half of a juvenile correctional complex in Brownwood could be shuttered under one of four budget-cutting options proposed. An agency proposal to build three new lockups in urban areas would be scuttled.
- Senate backs prison pay hikes, Austin Statesman
Senators discuss closing Corsicana State Home, Corsicana Daily Sun
- Lawmakers want to cut costs at youth prisons, AP
New TYC budget plan unveiled, Austin Statesman
Dutton: Require written or recorded consent for traffic stop searches
On Monday, the Texas House Public Safety Committee will hear a particularly star-crossed piece of legislation by Houston state Rep. Harold Dutton, HB 917, which would require written or recorded consent for police to search personal vehicles at a traffic stops without probable cause.
This is an identical version of a bill that passed 29-2 in the Texas Senate and 96-41 in the House back in 2005 but was inexplicably vetoed by Governor Rick Perry. Since then we've seen numerous situations, most recently in East Texas, where police have abused their search authority.
I've written so much about this same legislation in the past, for now let me simply endorse the bill enthusiastically and link to past, related Grits coverage if you'd like more detail on the subject:
This is an identical version of a bill that passed 29-2 in the Texas Senate and 96-41 in the House back in 2005 but was inexplicably vetoed by Governor Rick Perry. Since then we've seen numerous situations, most recently in East Texas, where police have abused their search authority.
I've written so much about this same legislation in the past, for now let me simply endorse the bill enthusiastically and link to past, related Grits coverage if you'd like more detail on the subject:
- Written consent protects Texans' rights and prosecutors cases
- House vote count on written consent
- 'Strange coalition' backs SB 1195
- NYPD to require written consent for traffic and home searches
- Searching for consent at Texas traffic stops
- Don't mind if I take a look, do ya?
- Police oversearching not all about race
- Austin drivers refuse searches when they know they can
- How often do drivers refuse consent searches?
Heard any good rumors about US Attorney appointments?
I've been wondering lately when the Barack Obama Administration might select its new U.S. Attorney candidates and who they might be. Any readers who've heard rumors in that regard are strongly requested to reveal them in the comments.
Out of Texas' four federal judicial districts, only in the Northern District has the media published names of potential candidates. According to Gromer Jeffers at the Dallas News: "former U.S. assistant attorneys Larry Jarrett, Terri Moore and Mike Snipes, and federal prosecutor Sarah Saldana," along with a relative unknown, Dallas lawyer Roger Williams (not the former GOP Texas Secretary of State) are all presently in the running.
In the Western District, I've heard Travis County Attorney David Escamilla mentioned for the US Attorney slot, an appointment I would personally support. (I've known David since the late '80s when he was the assistant county attorney assigned to respond to a slew of open records requests related to tracking S&L-era related real estate scandals - he was always forthright, forthcoming, professional, and as far as I can tell, just a nice guy.)
On the other hand, I've not heard a peep about possible candidates in the Eastern or Southern Districts, nor of any possible competitors for Escamilla.
According to Jeffers, because Texas' two senators are Republican, Obama bypassed them in picking new US Attorneys and instead handed the task to Democrats in the Texas delegation to the US House of Representatives. Jeffers wrote on Sunday that:
Who is on the short list for these much-coveted US Attorney slots (or for that matter the open federal district judge's post)? If you've heard of other candidates in the running - particularly in the Eastern and Southern Districts - by all means, please let us know in the comments.
Out of Texas' four federal judicial districts, only in the Northern District has the media published names of potential candidates. According to Gromer Jeffers at the Dallas News: "former U.S. assistant attorneys Larry Jarrett, Terri Moore and Mike Snipes, and federal prosecutor Sarah Saldana," along with a relative unknown, Dallas lawyer Roger Williams (not the former GOP Texas Secretary of State) are all presently in the running.
In the Western District, I've heard Travis County Attorney David Escamilla mentioned for the US Attorney slot, an appointment I would personally support. (I've known David since the late '80s when he was the assistant county attorney assigned to respond to a slew of open records requests related to tracking S&L-era related real estate scandals - he was always forthright, forthcoming, professional, and as far as I can tell, just a nice guy.)
On the other hand, I've not heard a peep about possible candidates in the Eastern or Southern Districts, nor of any possible competitors for Escamilla.
According to Jeffers, because Texas' two senators are Republican, Obama bypassed them in picking new US Attorneys and instead handed the task to Democrats in the Texas delegation to the US House of Representatives. Jeffers wrote on Sunday that:
That's an interesting twist - probably the first time in years that group has been in a position to collectively flex any political muscle! I'd mentioned earlier that Obama's first Texas judicial pick will be an "emergency" slot in San Antonio - I wonder if Texas Congressional Democrats will also be picking judicial nominees?Democratic congressional leaders have begun the process of selecting the next U.S. attorney for Texas' Northern District and could notify the White House of their choice to replace Richard Roper in coming days.
"We'll have a meeting [this week], and we might make a decision on what name to send in then," said U.S. Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Dallas.
Johnson and U.S. Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Waco, are the only two Democratic representatives in the Northern District, which stretches from Dallas southwest to San Angelo and north to Amarillo.
Austin's Lloyd Doggett, chairman of the Democratic congressional delegation in Texas and Rep. Solomon Ortiz, D-Corpus Christi, are also part of the committee that will recommend a nominee to the president.
Who is on the short list for these much-coveted US Attorney slots (or for that matter the open federal district judge's post)? If you've heard of other candidates in the running - particularly in the Eastern and Southern Districts - by all means, please let us know in the comments.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Whitmire supplies more detail on proposed youth prison diversion money
I just spoke with Sen. John Whitmire, chair of the Senate Criminal Justice Commitee, who thought my post titled "The Yo-Yo Effect" was "off base," particularly my pessimism that there wouldn't be enough money for counties to manage the influx of delinquent kids, or that the Lege might reduce its commitment to such services somewhere down the line.Whitmire said the main cause of TYC's high costs are a bloated, central office bureaucracy, not just increased staffing ratios in the field. He also gave me names of several county officials who he said were supportive of changes he's proposing, and I promised to speak to each of them and follow up in future blog posts. None of those individuals were immediately available, but in the meantime, one of his staffers forwarded me a proposal
This is easily the most detailed analysis of a possible alternative system I've run across; the section on grants to counties in the Sunset report was decidedly scant. None of this is final, it was emphasized, but Griffith's suggestions are an example of the types of ideas being discussed behind the scenes.
Whitmire's office also forwarded me a proposal from 22 Southeast Texas probation departments estimating they could eliminate more than half their usual TYC commitments if the state gave them just 73% of the current TYC cost-per-inmate.
If these data are any indication, perhaps I've overestimated how much it would cost counties to manage these youth. Particularly readers in juvenile justice fields, take a look for yourself and see what you think.
There will always be a need for some version of youth prisons in Texas, said Whitmire, to house the "worst of the worst," but he thinks there may be "1,200 or so" at TYC right now who could more efficaciously be handled in local communities. Maybe he's right.
I've got other obligations this afternoon, but I'll post more on this topic after I've spoken with a few more people and had a chance to examine the documents sent over from Sen. Whitmire's office in more detail.
The Yo-Yo Effect: TYC blamed by Lege for costs it was ordered to assume
I don't quite know what to make of a report from Mike Ward at the Austin Statesman that legislators are worried TYC's cost per youth is too high and want them to make cuts. Reacting to a new report from LBB (pdf) on costs at criminal justice agencies, Ward writes ("Texas spends $99k per year to lock up each troubled youth," March 4) that:
The biggest reason TYC costs increased so much per student is precisely that, when the sex abuse scandal broke in 2007, the inmate-to-staff ratio systemwide was at 24-1. In response, the Lege mandated that TYC reduce that ratio to 12-1, but by definition that meant doubling the number of staff per student. So it only stands to reason cost per youth would increase - how could it not? That's what the Lege told TYC to do.
In addition, guarding is not TYC's only responsibility. To remedy existing shortcomings in special education services, for example, the state will have to spend more per youth, not less. Ditto for mental health services. Even if TYC's staffing costs for guards are too high (and I'm not sure that's true if they want to keep the staffing ratio at 12-1), they're still under-resourced in other areas.
Finally, it might be true that these service could be delivered more cheaply "in the communities," as Sen. Whitmire said, but it's also possible such services could be shortchanged or not delivered at all if the responsibility were left to the counties. That would certainly be cheaper, but to the extent the programming is necessary and improves safety (and otherwise, why does the Lege require it?), it wouldn't help rehabilitate youth. After all, most were sent to TYC precisely because county juvenile probation departments couldn't handle them with the resources available.
I don't inherently have a stake in maintaining the status quo at Texas' youth prison system; if they could eliminate TYC tomorrow and successfully replace it with higher quality community-based services run by the counties, I wouldn't shed a tear.
But neither do I harbor any illusion that radical change would be easy or that all counties are currently capable of managing youth that right now are headed to TYC. Plus it's likely counties would be subject to the same budgetary yo-yo effect seen with state youth prisons - ordered to add staff, e.g., then chastised for how much it costs.
Merging TYC with the Juvenile Probation Commission may or may not be a good idea, but it's likely not the case that it would be cheaper or easier to manage - in fact, arguably the opposite will be true.
Even though the Texas Youth Commission's incarcerated population has dropped by almost half in two years, the annual cost of locking up juvenile offenders in Texas has climbed to almost $99,000 per inmate — a 66 percent jump since 2006.
With a tight state budget and a tough economy, legislative leaders say that is too costly, and they are moving to cut spending at the commission. ...
The Youth Commission budget dropped from $314.9 million in 2008 to $237 million in 2009, according to Legislative Budget Board figures. Whitmire and others say it could be reduced further.
"I think we could better deliver a lot of the services, a lot of the programs for these youth, in the communities and not at TYC units," [Sen. John] Whitmire said.
The agency's initial budget request was $249.1 million for 2010 and $253.8 million for 2011. But at a recent meeting, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Steve Ogden, R-Bryan, told Townsend to return with a pared-down version. She said she is in the process of complying.
Although legislative leaders have yet to see the new figures, Senate budget writers are expected to begin discussing their own reductions, perhaps as soon as today — including discussions about possibly closing two additional lockups.
The biggest reason TYC costs increased so much per student is precisely that, when the sex abuse scandal broke in 2007, the inmate-to-staff ratio systemwide was at 24-1. In response, the Lege mandated that TYC reduce that ratio to 12-1, but by definition that meant doubling the number of staff per student. So it only stands to reason cost per youth would increase - how could it not? That's what the Lege told TYC to do.
In addition, guarding is not TYC's only responsibility. To remedy existing shortcomings in special education services, for example, the state will have to spend more per youth, not less. Ditto for mental health services. Even if TYC's staffing costs for guards are too high (and I'm not sure that's true if they want to keep the staffing ratio at 12-1), they're still under-resourced in other areas.
Finally, it might be true that these service could be delivered more cheaply "in the communities," as Sen. Whitmire said, but it's also possible such services could be shortchanged or not delivered at all if the responsibility were left to the counties. That would certainly be cheaper, but to the extent the programming is necessary and improves safety (and otherwise, why does the Lege require it?), it wouldn't help rehabilitate youth. After all, most were sent to TYC precisely because county juvenile probation departments couldn't handle them with the resources available.
I don't inherently have a stake in maintaining the status quo at Texas' youth prison system; if they could eliminate TYC tomorrow and successfully replace it with higher quality community-based services run by the counties, I wouldn't shed a tear.
But neither do I harbor any illusion that radical change would be easy or that all counties are currently capable of managing youth that right now are headed to TYC. Plus it's likely counties would be subject to the same budgetary yo-yo effect seen with state youth prisons - ordered to add staff, e.g., then chastised for how much it costs.
Merging TYC with the Juvenile Probation Commission may or may not be a good idea, but it's likely not the case that it would be cheaper or easier to manage - in fact, arguably the opposite will be true.
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
Reduce number of mentally ill languishing in jail
For an informative discussion of the transportation and disposition of mentally ill people who're detained by police but not charged with any crime, see the discussion of SB 32 at the tail end of the first part of this morning's hearing of the Senate Health and Human Services Committee (video here, runs for about 12 minutes starting at the 1:24:12 mark).
I thought Sen. Zaffirini offered compelling arguments when laying out her bill, which focuses on cases where a mentally ill person is taken into custody by police without being charged with a crime.
Such folks would be taken to jail only if a suitable mental health or medical facility is not available and the nearest facility approved by the local mental health authority is more than 75 miles away. Once taken to jail, they could be detained only up to 12 hours and must kept separate from other prisoners. Finally, the bill would eliminate hogtying and other abusive restraints.
Zaffirini emphasized that most jail suicides happen in the first 24 hours, so getting mentally ill folks who don't need to be there out of jail as quickly as possible helps prevent "decompensation." She also handed out flyers demonstrating some of the hogtying techniques currently in use that she's hoping to ban. Advocacy Inc.'s Beth Mitchell further clarified how the legislation would work for a big, high-volume jail like in Harris County.
An identical bill passed the Senate unanimously in both 2005 and 2007, but died the first time in the House Calendars Committee, then again last session sitting on the General State calendar on the final day for the House to hear Senate bills. (See a House Research Organization bill analysis from 2007.)
So this bill has consistently made it through the Senate and also the committee process in the House; maybe since it's starting out this time on the early side, the 81st Legislature can push it on through to the finish line. Kudos to Sen. Zaffirini for sticking with the idea all these years, and I hope the third time is the charm.
MORE: See written testimony submitted by the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition.
I thought Sen. Zaffirini offered compelling arguments when laying out her bill, which focuses on cases where a mentally ill person is taken into custody by police without being charged with a crime.
Such folks would be taken to jail only if a suitable mental health or medical facility is not available and the nearest facility approved by the local mental health authority is more than 75 miles away. Once taken to jail, they could be detained only up to 12 hours and must kept separate from other prisoners. Finally, the bill would eliminate hogtying and other abusive restraints.
Zaffirini emphasized that most jail suicides happen in the first 24 hours, so getting mentally ill folks who don't need to be there out of jail as quickly as possible helps prevent "decompensation." She also handed out flyers demonstrating some of the hogtying techniques currently in use that she's hoping to ban. Advocacy Inc.'s Beth Mitchell further clarified how the legislation would work for a big, high-volume jail like in Harris County.An identical bill passed the Senate unanimously in both 2005 and 2007, but died the first time in the House Calendars Committee, then again last session sitting on the General State calendar on the final day for the House to hear Senate bills. (See a House Research Organization bill analysis from 2007.)
So this bill has consistently made it through the Senate and also the committee process in the House; maybe since it's starting out this time on the early side, the 81st Legislature can push it on through to the finish line. Kudos to Sen. Zaffirini for sticking with the idea all these years, and I hope the third time is the charm.
MORE: See written testimony submitted by the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition.
Who's watching what criminal justice bills at the Texas Lege?
I'd pointed yesterday to a list of reform bills supported by the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition, and was reminded in the comments that I should be sure to point out the online bill lists of items supported and opposed by other criminal-justice related organizations:
- Texas District and County Attorneys Association (TDCAA): See their legislative page and their list of key bills to watch.
- Texas Municipal Police Association(TMPA): See their Feb. 19 bill tracking report.
- Combined Law Enforcement Associations of Texas(CLEAT): See their supported bills, bills they oppose, and their "watch list."
- At the Texas Association of Counties (TAC), scroll down on their legislative page to see a list of bills they're watching on various topics of interest to counties, including "Sheriffs," "Constables," "District Clerks," and "Attorneys" (Incidentally, my grandfather, long-time Dallam County Judge W.D. Henson, was one of the founders and the first president of TAC, way back when I was a young pup.)
- The Texas Police Chiefs Association restricts viewership of its legislative agenda to a members only section of their website.
- The Sheriff's Association of Texas has no reference to legislation at all on the public portion of its website; neither does the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association.
- Here's the legislative agenda for the Texas Association Against Sexual Assault (TAASA).
- ACLU of Texas: Scroll down on their Legislative page to see ACLUTX's "bill book" of items they're focused on this session.
Will 2009 be the year Texas approves needle exchange? Senate committee to hear syringe access bill today
Maybe this will be the year when Texas legislators finally get the point.
This morning, the Senate Health and Human Services Committee will hear SB 188 by Senators Robert Deuell and Leticia Van de Putte authorizing local governments in Texas to operate needle exchange programs if they choose to do so to prevent the spread of disease, particularly HIV and Hepatitis.
We can be pretty sure the legislation has the votes to pass the Senate: Eight of the nine Health and Human Services committee members voted for the bill on the Senate floor in 2007, when twelve Republicans joined 11 Democrats on a final vote of 23-8 to approve the same legislation. What's more, Sen. Kim Brimer, an opponent of the bill, was replaced by Democrat Wendy Davis, whittling the number of known Senate opponents down to seven: Not enough under the 2/3 rule to block the bill.
Though it's still early in the process, it looks like 2009 may finally be the year for needle exchange to pass in Texas - the only state in the union that doesn't allow their operation. Its chief opponent in the House, Rep. Diane Delisi, retired last year and the Public Health Committee she chaired is now run by Rep. Lois Kolkhorst, who was absent for a vote onwho voted for a pilot needle exchange program in 2007. Delisi simply refused to allow a vote on the bill in her committee, though by all accounts a majority supported it, just as most members voted for a floor amendment to other legislation authorizing an ill-fated pilot program in San Antonio.
As somebody who's supported this legislation since Rep. Glen Maxey first carried a version of it in the early '90s, I'm enthused to see the idea finally has real momentum. The costs of HIV are too high to do nothing, and needle exchange programs do a good job of reducing both disease and overall cost. Cross your fingers.
UPDATE (1:40 p.m.): Good news! This legislation was heard this afternoon with no opposition soon after the Senate adjourned, then passed out of committee on a prompt, 5-1 vote.
Sen. Deuell cited a study by the Department of State Health Services estimating that needle exchange would prevent 100 new HIV infections per year at an average savings to the state in indigent health care costs of $385,000 per case. Sen. Robert Nichols, whose Republican district neighbors Sen. Deuell's in East Texas, noted that despite a "neutral" fiscal note from the Legislative Budget Board, SB 188 would likely save the state "millions" because of averted indigent health care costs. I was glad to hear that argument made.
A good and positive start, but only the first step of a hard slog. Congrats to the bill sponsors and supporters on a successful hearing.
Related: From Sifting the Haystack, see Harris County officials discuss syringe access legislation. MORE: See STH's coverage of the 3/3 hearing. See also AP's coverage.
See also prior, related Grits posts:
This morning, the Senate Health and Human Services Committee will hear SB 188 by Senators Robert Deuell and Leticia Van de Putte authorizing local governments in Texas to operate needle exchange programs if they choose to do so to prevent the spread of disease, particularly HIV and Hepatitis.
We can be pretty sure the legislation has the votes to pass the Senate: Eight of the nine Health and Human Services committee members voted for the bill on the Senate floor in 2007, when twelve Republicans joined 11 Democrats on a final vote of 23-8 to approve the same legislation. What's more, Sen. Kim Brimer, an opponent of the bill, was replaced by Democrat Wendy Davis, whittling the number of known Senate opponents down to seven: Not enough under the 2/3 rule to block the bill.
Though it's still early in the process, it looks like 2009 may finally be the year for needle exchange to pass in Texas - the only state in the union that doesn't allow their operation. Its chief opponent in the House, Rep. Diane Delisi, retired last year and the Public Health Committee she chaired is now run by Rep. Lois Kolkhorst, who was absent for a vote on
As somebody who's supported this legislation since Rep. Glen Maxey first carried a version of it in the early '90s, I'm enthused to see the idea finally has real momentum. The costs of HIV are too high to do nothing, and needle exchange programs do a good job of reducing both disease and overall cost. Cross your fingers.
UPDATE (1:40 p.m.): Good news! This legislation was heard this afternoon with no opposition soon after the Senate adjourned, then passed out of committee on a prompt, 5-1 vote.
Sen. Deuell cited a study by the Department of State Health Services estimating that needle exchange would prevent 100 new HIV infections per year at an average savings to the state in indigent health care costs of $385,000 per case. Sen. Robert Nichols, whose Republican district neighbors Sen. Deuell's in East Texas, noted that despite a "neutral" fiscal note from the Legislative Budget Board, SB 188 would likely save the state "millions" because of averted indigent health care costs. I was glad to hear that argument made.
A good and positive start, but only the first step of a hard slog. Congrats to the bill sponsors and supporters on a successful hearing.
Related: From Sifting the Haystack, see Harris County officials discuss syringe access legislation. MORE: See STH's coverage of the 3/3 hearing. See also AP's coverage.
See also prior, related Grits posts:
- Good chances for Texas' needle exchange bill next year, but assume nothing
- Needle exchange gets unexpected 2009 boost
- Bully Bexar DA says she didn't pick needle exchange fight (but she did)
- Needle exchange bill pits small government Republicans vs. authoritarian wing
- Texas Senate prescribes voluntary needle exchange
- Wow! Texas House approves pilot needle exchange
- Lone Star Times: Delisi needle exchange stance shows why GOP may lose majority
- Delisi: Research, Smesearch, I don't wanna
- Dr. Deuell prescribes needle exchange legislation
Monday, March 02, 2009
The war on wild sage (salvia): Banning native plants
The reconstituted House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee will hear its first bills of the session on Wednesday (see their agenda), starting off with a short, diverse list of bills headlined by HB 126 (Doc Anderson), which adds to the Controlled Substances list (Penalty Group 3):
Because the drug is so obscure and unlikely to be abused, this arguably is another instance where messages promoting sentence enhancements do more to promote than deter the negative conduct they're targeting. Seeing the drug's effects described, it seems unlikely that salvia would become a popular recreational drug - unless they ban it.
UPDATE: See coverage of the hearing from the Houston Chronicle's Texas Politics Blog, where David Rauf wrote:
Salvia divinorum, unless unharvested and growing in its natural state, meaning all parts of that plant, whether growing or not, the seeds of that plant, an extract from a part of that plant, and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of that plant, its seeds, or extracts, including Salvinorin A.What is salvia divinorum? A breed of wild sage. My wife says salvia is a staple for Texas gardeners - in fact, we've got some growing in the backyard. It blooms all summer, handles heat and drought, and draws butterflies and hummingbirds, she informs me. But apparently when smoked it will get you (somewhat unpleasantly) high. I wrote in 2007:
I'd not heard of this drug before, but it appears to be a psychoactive plant originally used by Indians in Mexico as part of shamanic religious rituals. But the plant grows naturally in Texas, and after studies in the 1990s identified its hallucinogenic qualities, its use for recreational purposes, said the Senator, has expanded among youth. ...The Houston Press in 2003 did a feature where several staffers tried salvia with friends and reported their experiences. (See more on the salvia debate from the Texas Observer.)
Sen. [Craig] Estes said to Google it, so I did. This source says that Salvia "is not habit-forming, not addictive, and does not present a significant risk to public health or safety," but I'd never heard of it.
Because the drug is so obscure and unlikely to be abused, this arguably is another instance where messages promoting sentence enhancements do more to promote than deter the negative conduct they're targeting. Seeing the drug's effects described, it seems unlikely that salvia would become a popular recreational drug - unless they ban it.
UPDATE: See coverage of the hearing from the Houston Chronicle's Texas Politics Blog, where David Rauf wrote:
HB 126 was left pending because its current language, which would criminalize the entire plant and its seeds, was too broad. Gallego requested that Anderson amend his bill to criminalize only the Salvia extract that can cause hallucinations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
