The Not So Land of the
Free
By Kathy Kelly
March 16, 2015 "ICH"
- It was a little over two weeks ago that
Marlo entered Atwood Hall, here in Lexington
federal prison. Nearly all the women here
are nonviolent offenders. When I first saw
Marlo, her eyes seemed glued to the tiled
floors as she shuffled along hallways. I
guessed her age to be 25 or so.
A few days later, she came to a choir
rehearsal. She was still shy, but she looked
up and offered a quiet smile when she joined
the soprano section. The next time our choir
gathered, Marlo raised her hand before we
ended our rehearsal. “I got something to
say,” she said, as she stood.
“When I first came here, I
can tell all of you now, I was terrified.
Just plain terrified. I have 70 months, and
I felt so scared.” The intake process for
this, her introduction to the prison system,
had badly frightened her, but before sundown
that same day, a second intake process had
occurred, with several inmates finding her,
reassuring her, and getting her beyond that
first panic.
During my four stints in
U.S. federal prisons, I’ve witnessed
long-term inmates’ unconquerably humane
response when a newcomer arrives. An
unscripted choreography occurs and the new
prisoner finds that other women will help
her through the trauma of adjustment to
being locked up for many months or years.
Halfway through a three-month sentence
myself, I’m saddened to realize that I’ll
very likely adapt to an outside world for
which these women, and prisoners throughout
the U.S. prison system, are often completely
invisible.
U.S. state and federal
prison populations have risen, since 1988,
from 600,000 to an estimated 1,600,000
in 2012. This trend shows inhumane behavior
on the part of lawmakers and myriads of
employees who benefit from the so-called
“criminal justice” system. But our entire
society bears responsibility for what now
can aptly be labeled a “prison-industrial
complex.”
Constructing prisons and
filling prisons with people who posed little
or no threat to our security didn’t happen
secretively, without our consent. We
watched, mesmerized perhaps, and allowed
ourselves to become a country with the
world’s largest prison system.
A friend from home
recently sent me encouraging news of
Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner’s initiative to
address the problems in some of the United
States’ most brutally overcrowded prisons. A
Chicago Tribune article from
several weeks ago notes that Rauner plans to
reduce the state’s prison population by 25
percent over the next ten years,
establishing the reduction as a goal through
executive order.
The article, by columnist
Eric Zorn, cites a widely-cited recent
report by the Vera Institute of
Justice that “nearly 75% of the population
of both sentenced offenders and pretrial
detainees are in jail for nonviolent
offenses like traffic, property, drugs or
public order violations.”
Skyrocketing costs of
incarceration have finally convinced some
lawmakers to work toward “reducing prison
populations.” Recently, I read a long report
about how the California Department of
Corrections has responded to a court-ordered
demand that the state reduce the numbers of
people locked up in California state
prisons.
The order was first issued
in 2009 by a three-judge panel. The state
appealed the order, but in 2011, the U.S.
Supreme Court upheld it, ordering the state
of California to comply by 2013. The
California government sought and was granted
two extensions. As of now, the order insists
that California must reduce its prison
population, by 2016, to “no more than
137.5 percent of the design capacity”
of its state prisons.
Whatever plans Gov.
Rauner’s committee proposes for Illinois,
the notoriously incarceration-minded
Illinois state legislature is likely to put
up just as vigorous a fight. Meanwhile the
California report discusses “cost-effective
measures,” “recidivism reduction results,”
“rehabilitative programming” and
“programming slots” at “in-state contract
facilities.” The language, highly
impersonal, suggests warehousing. I wonder
if zookeepers might be more attentive to the
individuality of the beings they cage.
Trapped in a cruel and
uncaring system, women here in Atwood Hall
reliably find humane ways to cope. Among
many signs of daily generosity, one of my
favorites is the practice of “window
shopping.” Women place extra items they can
spare in the window sills nearest the
stairwells. A new prisoner can find new
fresh socks, a warm knit cap, books,
magazines, pitchers – items that quickly
disappear and are soon replenished.
Perhaps we’ll begin to see
a trend toward finding humane ways to cope
with seemingly intractable problems in
today’s criminal justice system. The U.S.
Supreme Court’s insistence that the State of
California must release many thousands of
prisoners signals a trend in which, as Gov.
Rauner’s order recognizes, “States across
the country have enacted bi-partisan, data
driven and evidence based reforms that have
reduced the use of incarceration and its
costs while protecting and improving public
safety.”
Zorn notes that the
MacArthur Foundation recently granted $75
million for a five-year “Safety
and Justice Challenge” meant “to
reduce over-incarceration by changing the
way America thinks about its prisons and
jails.” I can’t imagine a figure too high to
pay, in dollars or in human work hours, to
effectively challenge the way U.S. people
think about safety and justice. In
describing a class that he taught in a New
Jersey maximum-security prison, Chris Hedges
wrote:
“The mass incarceration of
primarily poor people of color, people who
seldom have access to adequate legal defense
and who are often kept behind bars for years
for nonviolent crimes or for crimes they did
not commit, is one of the most shameful mass
injustices committed in the United States.
“The 28 men in my class
have cumulatively spent 515 years in prison.
Some of their sentences are utterly
disproportionate to the crimes of which they
are accused. Most are not even close to
finishing their sentences or coming before a
parole board, which rarely grants first-time
applicants their liberty. Many of them are
in for life.
“One of my students was
arrested at the age of 14 for a crime that
strong evidence suggests he did not commit.
He will not be eligible for parole until he
is 70. He never had a chance in court and
because he cannot afford a private attorney
he has no chance now of challenging the
grotesque sentence handed to him as a
child.”
Here in Atwood Hall,
guards and administrators know that they
imprison humane, caring, generous and
talented women, people not very different
from their own relatives, friends and
co-workers. Where are the “bad sisters” that
could ever justify the punishment of
isolating women like Marlo from their
children and other loved ones for long and
wearying years?
I imagine that many BOP
guards admire, as I do, the courage and
fortitude of the women facing long sentences
here. Do they wonder, sometimes, what
courage would be required, in their own
lives, to stop working as enforcers of the
prison system? Or do they perhaps wish,
sometimes, that the general public could
muster up the will to stop voting for the
prison system?
There is a
cynical quote which a cynical
friend of mine likes to quote to me, from
the philosopher David Hume: “A prisoner who
has neither money nor interest, discovers
the impossibility of his escape, as well
when he considers the obstinacy of the
gaoler, as the walls and bars with which he
is surrounded; and, in all attempts for his
freedom, chooses rather to work upon the
stone and iron of the one, than upon the
inflexible nature of the other.”
It’s the cliché of the
prisoner attempting escape: the prisoner
sees more hope tunneling out through bricks
than appealing to the stone-faced jailer.
But who are the jailers?
These prisons were built, and filled, in our
name – in the name of making us “safer.”
More guards, more lawyers, judges, wardens,
marshals, probation officers and court
personnel would be hired even if the present
ones resigned.
Meanwhile the creative
work to create real security, real community
in the face of social dislocation and crime,
would still need to be done. We, the broader
public, must be the jailers.
Sometimes we seem to be a
stone rolling down the path of least
resistance. But we’re not stone. We can
choose not to be jailers, and choose,
instead, to be ever more inflexible in our
resistance to injustice and to hatred born
of fear.
I’m here among women, some
of whom, I’ve been told, are supposed to be
“hardened criminals.” Fellow activists
incarcerated in men’s prisons likewise
concur that the system is futile, merciless
and wrongheaded. Our jailers, I’m convinced,
can see this. Men like Gov. Rauner, it
seems, can see it, or his advisers can.
Where are the inflexible
ones keeping women like Marlo isolated from
and lost to the world, trembling for their
future for the next five years? I would like
to make an appeal to you, and to myself two
months from now when I’ve left here and once
more rejoined the polite society of these
women’s “inflexible jailers.”
I choose to believe that
we can be moved and these women can escape.
I am writing this, as many have written and
will write, to see if we’re easier to move
than iron and stone.
Kathy Kelly, co-coordinator
of Voices for Creative Nonviolence (info@vcnv.org),
is in federal prison for participation in an
anti-drone protest. She can
receive mail at: KATHY
KELLY 04971-045; FMC LEXINGTON; FEDERAL
MEDICAL CENTER; SATELLITE CAMP; P.O. BOX
14525; LEXINGTON, KY 40512.