Inmate Labor: ‘Slavery’ or Work Experience?

CalMatters reports Wednesday morning that California voters will decide on a ballot measure in November that would change the state Constitution to ban the practice of forced labor in jails and prisons,” calling it “slavery,” just as the bill’s author did.

“If Californians vote to ban slavery this fall, will prisoners get a raise?” is the title.

Democrats in the California Legislature voted in June to “outlaw slavery” in California, the Globe reported. Most people think slavery was already illegal under the U.S. Constitution. But this is California. And in California, “slavery” has a different definition: Slavery in California is “forced labor in prison.”

Assembly Constitutional Amendment 8, the End Slavery in California Act by Assemblywoman Lori Wilson (D-Suisun City) says (amendments included):

I remember when prison was intended to provide justice to crime victims by incarcerating the convicted criminal so he could pay his debt to society.

But in California, “forcing” a convicted felon to work for meager pay is considered “slavery” by the left. They do not address the fact that most prison inmates who work want to work – they choose to work for the opportunity to learn skills and for the work experience.

By the ACA 8 definition, all work is “forced” if you have to support yourself and “slavery” if you work for someone else.

Actual slavery is bondage, captivity, enslavement, serfdom, servitude or subjugation. Convicted felons are serving time for committing a serious crime.

ACA 8 is one of 14 reparations bills the legislative Black Caucus is trying to get passed. In late June, Sen. Steven Bradford (D-Inglewood), the author of most of the Reparations bills said, “mass incarceration is a direct result of slavery and the emancipation proclamation,” which “forced individuals recently freed to go back and work on plantations.”

“It runs deep in California,” Bradford said.

So incarcerating convicted felons is slavery?

“If Proposition 6 passes, correctional officers could not order an inmate to work,” CalMatters reports. “No one can say with certainty, but it raises the possibility that inmates could be paid minimum wage for work they perform while incarcerated.”

Ah, maybe it should be called, “The Pay Convicted Felons Better Act.”

The economic reality behind this Constitutional Amendment is the state Finance Department which estimated that paying minimum wage to inmates would cost taxpayers $1.5 billion a year, which led to failure of a similar bill two years ago. “California’s entire corrections budget is expected to cost $18 billion this fiscal year.”

“California courts have consistently upheld pay below the minimum wage for prison inmates,” the article says. And the California Supreme Court recently ruled that the state’s minimum wage law does not apply to people working for private companies while they are held in pretrial detention in California’s jails, the ACLU acknowledged.

But behind much of this reporting is the California Endowment, which is a major contributor to CalMatters, in the $100,000 to $499,000 category to the journalism organization.

The Marshall Project also receives funding from the California Endowment and other organizations that favor efforts to “reform” California’s criminal justice system.

In a nutshell, CalMatters acknowledges that it is being paid to write articles like this one, with this “criminal justice reform” point of view. 92.1% of their total income comes from major donor gifts (41.9%) and foundation grants (50.2%).

Many of CalMatters’ contributors support efforts to “reform” California’s criminal justice system.

The CalMatters article was written by Shaanth Kodialam Nanguneri, who goes by “they.” His bio says “he comes to CalMatters as an intern on the health and justice beat.” (The health and justice beat? How are “health” issues and “justice” issues related?)

His bio continues: “They are a rising senior at UCLA, studying geography and communication, and they were born and raised in the Bay Area. As a student, they have written for their campus newspaper, The Daily Bruin, as well as The Sacramento Bee, the Orange County Register, and The Nation,” which is a very hard left newspaper.

“They” have literally become shills for the groups paying them to “report,” rather than open, honest and sourced “point-of-view” journalism.

On journalistic ethics, Journalism.com says:

“There is still a line, however, between point-of-view journalism on one hand and outright advocacy and propaganda on the other. Even a point-of-view journalist should honestly report facts and opinions at variance with her point of view.”

“Often the biggest distinction between an impartial and point-of-view journalist is in the subjects each writes about. Impartial journalists adhere to an idea of “newsworthiness” that covers a wide range of topics; point-of-view journalists often choose stories that serve to validate their own interests or perspectives.”

Notably, the votes in the Assembly and Senate were interesting. Assembly Republicans just didn’t vote at all for ACA 8; Only three Senate Republicans voted “no,” and the other just didn’t vote.

How difficult is it to vote “no” on an absurd bill made up of doublespeak?