FCC Can't Cap the Cost of Cross-State Prison Phone Calls, Court Rules (theverge.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: The Federal Communications Commission does not have the authority to cap the cost of prison and jail phone calls within states, an appeals court ruled in a decision today, dealing a massive blow to inmates and their advocates who have spent years litigating caps on the cost of such calls. Over several years, the FCC, under Democratic leadership, moved to cap the cost of calls for inmates. Activists argued that prisoners were effectively being extorted by private companies charging exorbitant rates -- a move that benefited private prisons and the states that got cuts of the revenue. Some of those states joined with companies in appealing the FCC's rules. The agency first moved to cap rates across state lines, and then, later, within states. Today, the court ruled that the FCC had overstepped when it attempted to regulate the price of calls within states. In the majority opinion, the court left little wiggle room for advocates of price-capping, with the possible exception of the cross-state caps, which are a minority of calls made by inmates. The opinion vacated not only the agency's proposed caps for in-state calls, but said the agency also lacked justification to require reports on video calling services. It also vacated a provision that would ban site commission payments.
Every article I come across seems to involve the FCC getting slapped down over pretty much everything, especially when it risks a corporations profits.
If no one wants them to regulate anything. why even bother having an FCC at all at this point?
It's not the lawyers, it's the families. Many of them struggle with technical issues, and almost all of them struggle with cost issues. Many inmates rely on their families to send them the money to make calls to maintain family ties. This makes that much harder.
This isn't about calling lawyers. This is about inmates keeping in touch with their families. Many states, including California, ship inmates to out of state prisons, where it hard for their families to visit. Putting even more barriers between these inmates and their families is idiotic, since there is plenty of evidence that family bonds reduce recidivism.
Flippant statements like "just get a virtual phone number" are not constructive. If these people had the wherewithal to do that, they wouldn't be in prison in the first place. These are dysfunctional people on the bottom rung of society. We shouldn't be trying to kick them even lower.
The people running the prisons know damn well what they are doing. They profit from squeezing money from desperate families, and they profit even more from the high recidivism rates that keep their facilities occupied.
So the correct answer to the problem would be to complain to the states' own legislatures, which are supposed to be more responsive to their constituents than federal organizations anyway.
Except that the States are also benefiting both by the creation of for-profit prison systems and the sharing of revenue from scams like this. In my opinion, a prison system should never be privatized. There is too much opportunity for the exploitation of prisoners.
Of course they can provide cheaper services. A local call in most areas is FREE. And long distance is a penny or less a minute (or even free) in plenty of areas.
Except in prison, where you can pay dollars per minute for a local call. Not even satellite phones cost that much! Hell, even cellphones at their most expensive 30 years ago were still cheaper than a prison phone call. Long distance could easily cost more than what NASA pays to call the ISS. Hell, I bet even a phone call to Mars would cost less than from prison. (And no, prisoners cannot pay for it - it's always collect).
So what's the argument in favor of letting them gouge prisoners and their families on phone calls? This seems counterproductive to the stated purpose of a prison, reform. Their punishment if supposed to be time behind bars, not high phone bills.
Exactly, we need strong local government and weak federal government so that the rich and connected can do what ever they want, and the poor can be stomped on. That's the very foundation of libertarianism.
That's obviously a completely irrelevant, and shockingly callous statement. Don't you find it a little strange that the more disadvantaged someone in your society is, the more difficult and expensive everything becomes? Live in a poor neighbourhood, pay more in insurance. Suffer poor health, pay more in health insurance, if you can even get it. Wind up in jail, be unable to afford a telephone call to your family, who may very well be the only people you have left.
The whole thing is tilted, so that once you start falling, you tend to keep going, and there may be no way back. Whatever good fortune you have experienced in your lifetime, I'd wager much of it came from luck. Perhaps I'm wrong, perhaps you pulled yourself out of the gutter, perhaps you were born into poverty, suffered ill-health, wound up in jail through no real fault of your own, and still managed to survive, and eventually to overcome.
But that's pretty vanishingly unlikely. I certainly didn't. I was born with good health, a reasonable brains, into a comfortable situation. Education was both provided for free, and I was expected to undertake it. When I completed it, a job was easy to come by. I bumped into a wonderful girl by accident, and how I have a beautiful family, and a good and happy life. All of that, all of it, was nothing better than luck. That luck could change any day. I am not so conceited and blind to imagine otherwise.