Carroll Fife weighed in on Twitter yesterday when she tweeted “Shameful, but not surprising,” in response to another tweet, this one by a Democratic State Senator from Los Angeles, Sydney Kamlager, who wrote, “The CA State Senate just reaffirmed its commitment to keeping slavery and involuntary servitude in the state's constitution. Way to go, Confederates.”
THE BACKGROUND
Kamlager was the author of a bill in the State Senate, ACA 3, that proposed to change the wording of the California Constitution. The Constitution as written, in Article 1 Section 6, states that “Slavery is prohibited. Involuntary servitude is prohibited except to punish crime.” ACA 3, if enacted into law, “removes language in the state Constitution that allows involuntary servitude as punishment to a crime.”
But yesterday, the California State Senate rejected Kamlager’s measure that would have put ACA 3 on the state ballot this November for voters to approve. (As of this writing, the final tally has not been recorded on the Legislature’s website.) The State Senate is, of course, controlled by Democrats. They did so after Gov. Gavin Newsom warned that, if ACA 3 became law, it “could require the state to pay prison inmates the minimum wage, which in California is $15 per hour for companies with 26 or more employees. That could cost taxpayers $1.5 billion per year.” He was supported by State Senator Steve Glazer, who noted, “The question this measure raises is whether or not Californians should require felons in state prison to work. Banning the work requirement in our prisons would undermine our rehabilitation programs (and) make prison more difficult to manage safely.”
Kamlager framed the issue as a moral one. “Slavery is still alive and well and nicely packaged in the form of involuntary servitude,” she said, adding, “California is a plantation state.”
Under current law, reports the Washington Post, “California prison inmates are required to either work or participate in education or rehabilitative programs. Inmate jobs--which include things like clerks, painters and carpenters--pay salaries that range from a low of 8 cents per hour to 37 cents per hour.” The minimum wage in California is $15 an hour.
Kamlager herself noted, when ACA 3 was heard by the Senate Committee on Public Safety, that, while the U.S. Constitution prohibits both slavery and involuntary servitude, “The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently recognized that the Thirteenth Amendment does not prevent enforced labor as punishment for crime.” She added, “Federal courts have held that the U.S. Constitution does not prohibit incarcerated individuals from being required to work and does not provide incarcerated individuals a right to wages for work done in custody.” The California Penal Code specifically says (Section 2700) that “The Department of Corrections shall require of every able-bodied prisoner imprisoned in any state prison as many hours of faithful labor in each day and every day during his or her term of imprisonment as shall be prescribed by the rules and regulations of the Director of Corrections.” Thus, there appears to be no legal injunction, under either Federal or State law, against compelling prisoners in California to work, or paying them very little.
The California Assembly, by the way, voted to approve ACA 3 in March. Was the State Senate wrong in their decision? Granted that it would cost California $1.5 billion. But with the state’s budget surplus standing at $97.5 billion, that $1.5 billion is a pittance; it’s not like we can’t afford it. Gov. Newsom himself pointed out that, if ACA 3 became law, labor might be upset, and that employed prisoners might attempt to form unions, leading to unknown consequences.
I myself have mixed feelings. We can all agree, I should think, that prisoners ought to be required to work. And they ought to be paid. But should they be paid $15 an hour? On the other hand, 8 cents an hour is ridiculous. I wouldn’t go so far as to call the current system “slavery” or accuse California of being “a plantation state.” That’s hyperbole. But we can do better. ACA 3 actually may be heard again next week, under a so-called “third reading.” But if it doesn’t pass by June 30, it won’t be on the ballot this year.
What do you think?
* * *
Our meeting
Reminder: We’re meeting this Sunday, June 26 at noon!
We’ll gather on the lawn alongside the parking lot of Lakeside Park (Lake Merritt) this Sunday at noon.
For those unfamiliar with the parking lot, you enter it from Grand Avenue, where Park View Terrace meets Grand, in the Adams Point neighborhood. The spot is instantly recognizable by the big Children’s Fairyland sign. In the event the parking lot is all filled up, street parking is easy, both on Grand Avenue and on the side streets (Park View, Lenox, Perkins). It being Sunday, parking meters will not be in effect.
We’ll find a spot on the grass to the left of the parking kiosk. Look for us.
You might want to bring a snack and/or drink, and a blanket to sit on or some kind of chair.
Regarding the agenda, we’ll keep it simple. I envision going around in a circle where everyone can briefly state his/her name, neighborhood and chief concerns. We can open the discussion up to general ideas afterwards. It’s also been suggested we allow time for everyone to casually mingle in smaller groups. I should think our gathering will last for perhaps 1-1/2 hours, 2 max.
Please keep your remarks friendly, respectful and positive, and don’t make speeches. This is an opportunity for everyone to be heard. I especially would like to apply our collective brain power to the question of how we can grow the Coalition for a Better Oakland by attracting more members. We have influence now, but if we can hit 1,000 active members, we’ll be an irresistible force.
See you on Sunday!
Steve Heimoff