Correctional Officers - Old School

Correctional Officers – Old School

 

There is an old expression that many of us have heard for years and quite likely misunderstand in many ways as it might be the wrong word for dealing with the problems today. Old school is defined as a group of people favoring customs and traditions of the past along with ideas and conservative or concrete practices. Old school is based on multiple and generational knowledge and has been lost or adapted or modified to meet today’s needs.

Some say that old school no longer exists. Some are saying we need to bring old school back but many know that it would be impossible to do that. One of the many things that has been lost in the trade of running correctional facilities is the ability and the knowledge how to run a prison without the use of high tech or modern devices. The fact is that today, manufacturers have  pretty much wiped out many of the old customs and practices and replaced them with high tech equipment and work related tools that have been enhanced and are either operated automatically or semi-automatically reducing the need for human intervention. Hence the focus is on learning technology and not people.

Prisons and large jails have come a long way from the old days of the Yuma Territorial prison that was made of clay, large stones and mud reinforced with steel and heavy lumber. No longer are cells built by the prisoners themselves and chained to the stone on the floor. Looking at the Old School ways we like think we can still grow things, make things, and fix things and then share them with you through an informal technique of on the job training and a show and tell process – all with a nod to what’s realistically doable in your everyday tour of duty inside the prisons. It was certainly a challenge in the prison world to do all those things and still be able to improve the way we run prisons as time goes by and

The posting of the prison guards carrying weapons around the perimeters has been replaced with infrared beams and night and day surveillance technology. All technology requires an officer to do is shake the fence and see if it trips the alarms and sensors as designed. No longer are we required to walk an endless tour around the sand pits and razor wire to make sure nobody escapes from the grounds.

Look at the way we have improved the restraint equipment and how shackles that were once solid steel and heavy as well as very cumbersome to carry have been replaced with electronic bracelets and stun belts that are hidden but very effective when the need to incapacitate is required.

No longer are keys required to afford a secure ingress and egress. All can be done with electronic locks that can be scanned with a card or opened or closed remotely from a secure control center that maintains vigilance through the use of a closed circuit television system that covers square miles and never goes to sleep.

The list is endless but one thing hasn’t changed – People – people haven’t changed as they are still configured the same way as they were a hundred years ago but what has changed is the mindset and the way they think and do things on the job. Time has brought us a lot of different generations that work inside these prisons and they are all capable of learning how to deal and manage their prisoners in a manner that resembles old school but in a manner that has been modified with new communication techniques and practices that makes them comply with existing rule of law and updated correctional practices that have been deemed safe and practical in such a setting.

Customs and practices have come a long way and some for the better and some for the worst. There appears to be a change in the mindset more now that before that creates hardships at the workplace as the old school way was to never get personal with the prisoner and just be fair, firm and consistent.

It appears today there are less restrictions in how you treat the prisoners and how you are allowed to interact that is much more relaxed that years of before. It threatens the way of life inside of prisons and although change can be good, changing things to give the advantage to the prisoners or take a direction to make prisoners more important that the staff endangers the entire prison structure and defeats sound thinking, decision making and morale.

The challenge of old school versus the new school is based on how your see and do things on the job. One has to be aware the difference between sympathy and empathy. There has to be complete awareness that interaction does not mean intercourse and personal conduct or information should be refrained from while professionalism should flourish and be the rule of thumb that includes a method or procedure based on experience and common sense.

Generations’ interpretations of such standards have been difficult to understand and while nobody is perfect, inside a prison it is most important that whatever is required to get the job done, it must be done in concert with the rule of law and sound correctional practices. There is no room for adaptation or modification in the role of being a correctional officer as the only technology required for the job is to just do it the way you are trained and nothing more.

A correctional officer cannot and should not be used as a psychologist or a health provider. Those are specialized occupations and require special training and education. A correctional officer can train to be reliable and efficient on the job but must be given the right tools to get the job done. Resources should be dedicated to ensure job stability and career building that allows an individual to grow and become better at what they do.

Experience, abilities and skills should be taken into considerations when promoting and although education and  politically correct communication building is very important there should be a balance of how someone that can do the job effectively and more than satisfactorily has an equal chance to be promoted with those that have less administrations today.

At the same time, administrations should allocate sufficient resources whether human or logistic that enhances the job at a cost effective manner and take care of the correctional officers as they endure the war inside the trenches that many have endured and often been injured or killed doing while on duty. Focusing on the workplace and how stress impacts character, personalities and attitudes is also very important. Old School had a way of dealing with many of these issues before they became major concerns.

Dealing with people should be emphasized and the old school way is to learn and know the names and positions of those you work with and learn to trust them and defend them so that they have the confidence to get the job done. Avoiding the use of the email internet system and bringing back the face to face meetings can resolve so many different issues that are miscommunicated through the wireless world and technology. Being fair and giving someone the benefit of the doubt is more important than instilling harsh discipline and frequent sanctions. Old school means going back to the basics and build your foundation on common sense and courage.

Correctional Officers – Empathy in Psychopaths

Correctional Officers – Empathy in Psychopaths

 

Correctional employees need to take into consideration that working with psychopathic criminals takes some special management styles and security techniques in order to be an effective supervisor or manager. We must become aware how psychopaths process their minds to the environment and how they pose a significant threat to society as well as everyone inside a large jail or prison. Empathy is the capacity to recognize emotions that are being experienced by another being. One may need to have a certain amount of empathy before being able to experience accurate sympathy or compassion.

Whether we want to admit it or not they are capable and more likely to inflict more harm or pain to you or anyone else than any other type of inmate you are working with inside the penitentiary. I suggest this includes the mentally ill persons. Take in consideration that research has revealed a significant pattern of behavior that diagnosed psychopaths have “reduced empathy” while witnessing the pains of others or while committing crimes. Research showed that although they can activate their empathic side of the mind, they chose not do so so “automatically” like many others do. Feeling what other feel. Empathy is the ability to not only detect what others feel but also to experience that emotion yourself.

This is very disturbing for the correctional officers and others as it predicts a pattern of behavior that might endanger them immediately upon confrontation of a problem and explain how some of these type of criminals engage in the excessive violent acts with some type of spontaneous action such as gang beatdowns that are ruthless and senseless in nature as well as technique as it is designed to inflict as much pain and harm humanly possible within a very short period of time hoping not to be caught in the act.  This also explains “why psychopathic individuals can be callous and socially cunning at the same time.”

This research of the brain conducted on these types of incarcerated psychopaths indicated there are reasonable chances they are more likely to hurt others much unlike those individuals that experience the feeling of empathy automatically. They are capable of inflicting more pain and harm therefore justifying a higher custody level for closer supervision of their behaviors or conduct. Hence we are dealing with a reduced level of empathy and a more spontaneous action that makes them volatile and unpredictable at times.

The research “At first, this seems to suggest that psychopathic criminals might hurt others more easily than we do, because they do not feel pain, when they see the pain of their victims. The brain data suggests, that by default, psychopathic individuals feel less empathy than others. If they try to empathize, however, they can switch to 'empathy mode” and perhaps be able to consider the other person’s feelings better.

The research goes on to say “There might be two sides to these findings. The darker side is that reduced spontaneous empathy together with a preserved capacity for empathy might be the cocktail that makes these individuals so callous when harming their victims and at the same time so socially cunning when they try to seduce their victims. Whether individuals with psychopathy autonomously switch their empathy mode on and off depending on the requirements of a social situation however remains to be established.” The other side may indicate that therapy could impact their ability to engage empathy and do so reducing their violent behaviors and reducing recidivism rates by self-control of their own emotions and actions.

Source:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/07/130724200412.htm?goback=%2Egde_2391527_member_271923541#%21

Debra Milke- Free out on Bail awaiting retrial video

Death Row Inmate freed

Correctional Officers - Judgment & Decision-Making

Correctional Officers - Judgment & Decision-Making

 

Most correctional officers are adequately prepared for the job and in most cases resilient in nature and disposition and do remarkably well under the circumstances of working inside a large jail or prison. However, we must all admit that stress does take its toll and one of their main challenges is to deal and manage stress while making good sound decisions and appropriately based judgment calls that keeps everyone safe and sound twenty four hours a day seven days a week.  

To be a good decision maker, we must first stabilize our emotional conduct and resist the natural negative impacts of stress. This requires self-awareness and self-care. Once this is achieved the mindset is much clearer and better in most cases to offer better decision making efforts and safer environments to work in most of the time. Therefore it is important to mention that a clear mind makes better decisions especially under duress.

Focusing on the fact that many officers and correctional employees are aware how to combat stress we should focus on better judgment and decision making processes and actions beyond the fair, firm and consistent concept taught in many law enforcement academies throughout the country. So it is favorable to start looking at quality of judgment and decision making in the corrections field. Whether or not the ability to measure judgment is reasonable or even possible we shall examine what constitutes good judgment and compare it with the job at hand as a correctional officer.

First off, correctional officers have an array of tools at his or her disposal besides their basic training. This includes post orders, institutional orders and agency directives or policies. It is a well-accepted practice that most decisions are based on such a foundations and requires little coaxing or motivation to stay on track with such guidance.

However, not every decision can be made out of a book or policy thus the individual must be capable of making independent judgment with independent criteria based on individual qualifications and standards to boost their basic foundation when trained or mentored by others. In addition there are firm emergency preparedness plans that need to be reviewed and learned to make critical decisions under stressful situations.

Using a basic skill such as a situational awareness assessment, one can expect a number of different decisions for different situations. This fact has long been established over time and through practical experience and time. Regardless, correctional officers need to realize that whatever decision they make it will have a significant impact on the situational outcome and lessons learned from taking such actions.

 In corrections there are blurred boundaries that are often misread or in some cases unrecognized at the time of the assessment. Thus theoretically, officers must learn how to approach each problem and evaluate and analyze things quickly in order to determine the correct approach to the problem and be put at risk that they do not have all the information needed to make a good decision.

This is quite complex in nature and often neglected in training line staff to prepare them for command decision positions. First we must recognize that judgment and decision making are intimately linked but are two separate concepts requiring separate processing. The process demands separate cognitive demand and pose distinct challenges in order to

Judgment is an assessment tool that allows alternatives between choices suggested in the problem solving process. It takes into consideration a continuum of different aspects that are based about a person, an object or a situation. Hence the final result based on judgment is an overall evaluation based on factors provided or given for each person, object or situation.

Decision making is determined to be a choice between alternatives and determines a specific response to a persons, object or situation. Herein because there are consequences for such a decision and accountability why such a decision was made in the first place it is important to distinguish the difference between these two concepts.

When it is all said and done, a correctional officer relies on the quality of judgment to do the job properly. This requires an analysis for accuracy and review the quality of facts gathered or provided and then encompass those established guidelines provided for such a condition. This leaves little wiggle room in the level of accuracy or for taking incorrect or deviating practices to make it come together as a valid evaluation that can be resolved satisfactorily.

So what makes a decision a good decision you have to ask? Working in such a complex environment that is influenced by many uncertainties the best decisions are those that yield the best results, conditions or consequences for achieving a safe and secure environment. However, one must take into account such results could in fact have come about by chance and not because of a thorough evaluation of the process involved. Some may call it luck but others call it a calculated guess for making the “best” decision at the time.

Regardless good decision-making involves using your training, your experience, the laws of logic and probability along with common sense. Keeping it rational and determining the probability of the outcome is a common approach and should keep in mind that the optimum decision may be ideal for one situation or person but not in other situations or persons. In other words, evaluating the outcome should include comparing options or decision how to resolve it taking into consideration of all the facts before finalizing a decision. 

However, what is reasonable for one person may not apply for another person. One decision maker can be of average experience while the other may be relatively better experienced and determine which strategy is better based on the examination of the problem and comparing possible outcomes with various strategies while in the end looking at tradeoffs or compromising factors.  

Regardless the process should include the goals, the consequences, and the relative value of outcomes of different approaches or options. This would logically be considered a good decision making process that takes much into consideration before the final decision is reached.

Therefore, here we have to caution the decision maker not to rely on ‘lessons learned” in the past as the factors may not be identical or duplicated creating a different outcome possibility and flawing the process. This is where the judgment comes into play and create a need to assess and decide the outcomes through comparisons and some level of consensus, peer acknowledgment and or evaluation and the appropriateness of the action proposed to be taken with the challenge to take the ultimate or best decisions for each problem or call to make.

Henceforward in a correctional setting one must be cautioned and be made aware that such evaluations if taken as a routine matter could reveal a degree of predictable or anticipated course of action of the proposed action and would be to the benefit of controversy as how well the inmates know the decision will be made ahead of time and how consistently these facts gathered are applied with the individual’s knowledge base creating a pre-determined response to a problem.

In other words, specifically in a critical or crisis situation, there should be room made for actions or decisions made by  the antagonistic group and that it is a strong possibility that they will make tactical or strategically implied assumptions that whatever decision is made, formulated and finalized within a hostile situation or environment the method [solution] chosen could fall into the hands of the inmates and thus the response is compromised even when following the process but failing to compare potential outcomes and consequences laid on the table beforehand.

Like it was mentioned and said in the beginning of this article, working inside a prison has many uncertainties and planning a situational assessment using judgment and decision-making tools should be done with caution and with some level of expertise and experience as well as taking the time to conduct peer assessments [for consensus] and share evaluation materials before finalizing the resolution.

 

 

 

McCluskey Murder Trial - Kingman Escape - Albuquerque

My friend Frank Smith left this feedback below at the Tri-Valley Central/Casa Grande Dispatch, and similar feedback at the Cody, Wyoming paper.

I drove to Albuquerque twice and listened to the testimony among many others, of the hijacked East Indian driver and McCluskey's ex-wife last week, and Charlie's fellow escapee Tracy Province this week.  Lots of law enforcement officers testified.

This case has already cost taxpayers over a million dollars and will cost millions more.

McCluskey and his fellow escapees should never have been sent to Kingman, one of many shoddy spec prisons built by hustlers from Oklahoma.

It was patently unsafe, poorly built, horribly maintained, and staffed by guards whom the warden admitted were "80% new, or newly promoted." A single fence, burned out yard lights, alarms that hadn't worked in years and guards who couldn't count stood between the convicts and the public.

The Arizona DOC provided only a fig leaf of oversight for the incompetent operators, Management and Training Corporation of Utah.

Jan Brewer and DOC director Chuck Ryan sent murderers, rapists, kidnappers and member of security threat groups to Kingman.

Her relationship with the for-profit prison industry got her elected governor.

Province, a lifer, and McCluskey who was doing 15 years and had a parole hold from Pennsylvania, were members of the Aryan Brotherhood gang.

A flood of campaign contributions kept the flow going to this crackerbox presenting to be a secure facility.

It took many hours for the escape to be discovered, still longer before outside law enforcement was notified but even then, the prison didn't know which prisoners had gotten out. The ensuing search would have embarrassed the Keystone Kops.

The bungling continued for three weeks as the escapees hijacked, robbed, shot it out, kidnapped and murdered their way across the west.

FBI Agent "Mac" McCaskill seemed to see an opportunity for career advancement as he had Province, the second escapee, retrace the steps of himself and his companions, and he partied with Tracy. There was audio played at the trial of the two laughing it up in state after state, with an abundance of promises for leniency made to Province even before McCluskey and his accomplice cousin were captured.

When the nationwide chase came to an end in an eastern Arizona campground, there was still more million dollar bungling. McCluskey admitted his guilt, but only after asking for an attorney and not being provided with one. All his admissions were consequently thrown out.

Now the District Court in Albuquerque is expected to be jammed for four months after McCaskill and another self-promoter, U.S. Attorney for New Mexico, Kenneth J. Gonzales went forward with the death penalty trial McCaskill had plotted for from the beginning.

Gonzales has already gotten his reward. Eric Holder, who refused plea mediation offered by a retired judge signed off on the capital trial, then got Gonzales appointed to a federal judgeship in New Mexico two weeks ago.

Taxpayers need to be told why no one seems to be both literally and figuratively minding the store

A Cup of Coffee in Corrections

A Cup of Coffee in Corrections

 

First of all not everybody drinks coffee so you must make a rule that if you don’t care for coffee, it is likely you have another favorite drink whether it is tea, bottled water or an energy drink but regardless what it only matters that you can apply this “coffee or drink” as a metaphor to what is about to be explained to you as a correctional supervisor or mid-level manager working in a high stress place like a large jail or prison. 

One has to wonder what a cup of coffee has in common with working in field of corrections and prison work. It has everything in common. One might say there is a direct relationship between a cup of coffee, its contents and its purpose. If you look at it from another point of view and be open minded enough to see the benefits within the drink. Prison work is not rocket science profession as everything you are taught lays out the foundation of the job and only requires you to take in a few simple things that will make your job easier and safer. Having said that let’s get down to having a cup of coffee and relax a little to understand how it helps you get the work done.

First of all a cup of coffee represents the respect you and your employees deserve while doing this most danger job within the criminal justice system.  You may want to discuss your business matters in your proper setting using mutual respect issues and common sense so you can learn something from someone else. Listen and really listen to the other person. Keep your mouth shut and your ears open as you look for useful information from your employee. As you become aware of crucial concerns, you are able to motivate your employees to participate in problem solving and manage the issues effectively. In return for such deliberate attention towards your staff you will be rewarded with a mutual level of respect that is earned by the manner you do your job.

Along with respect comes a cup of motivation as the two come together and makes it work out like a little bit of magic in the air. When you treat your employees like adults there are benefits and gives them the confidence they can handle the truths of the job. Trying to shelter them with lies only backfires and serves no other person but hurting them in the long run as they are never really protected from the workplace where issues are harsh realities of the job itself and the potential dangers that lurk around every corner. 

Yes, you can use the coffee cup metaphor as a management and motivation tool. Having a “cup of coffee” with your staff gives you the opportunity to sit down, listen and learn with them. Your conversation with your personnel over coffee can be a powerful employee motivational tool. You can gain valuable information about yourself, your staff, the company and your workplace culture as you share coffee or the time to get to know each other better.

That leads you to the cup of time and wisdom for managing our resources and employees effectively. Meetings are great for those that have the time to do them but working alongside while on the job gives employees a feeling of worth and value that is more important when it is shared with respect and motivation. Showing you are never too busy to work side by side can do more to maximize your effectiveness than anything else in the leadership manual. It gives you a rare opportunity to walk the walk and talk the talk that is so important for credibility.

You can never make up for lost time but you can schedule quality time with your staff just by taking a few minutes out of your busy schedule and taking your employee out for a cup of coffee. Simply said, buy a soft drink or a cup of coffee for the person you are meeting and sit at a table and talk. Set aside the phones or cellphones at the moment and enjoy the moment of opportunity to get to know your staff.

Frank Smith speaks out on McCluskey Murder Trial in Albuquerque

This case is a poster child for why inmates shouldn't be sent to for-profit prisons.
Management and Training Corporation (MTC) understaffed this Kingman prison with employees being, according to the warden, "80% new or newly promoted."

It was built on the cheap by Dominion of Edmund, OK, and like most or all of their speculative prisons, was grossly substandard. The state claimed it would only send minimum security offenders there, mostly those doing short terms for drunk driving offenses.

The alarms hadn't worked properly in years, some seven yard lights were burnt out, staff had no control over inmate identification and basic security procedures.

It happened because state regulators were uninterested in professional operation.

It grossly failed to oversee its operations and sent hordes of inappropriate prisoners to a place that could never expect to hold them securely. This included many lifers incarcerated for homicides, escape risks, members of security threat groups (STGs) such as neo-Nazis, and those with parole holds from other states.

As long as the campaign contributions kept rolling in, supposedly conservative legislators, executives and bureaucrats championed the nonexistent "savings" they provided. As long as the revolving door spun at a dizzying pace, no department of corrections official was likely to insist on delivery of anything remotely near the level and quality of contract performance that the state required.

Not that long afterward, Arizona did a research study that estimated that contract prisons cost the state 16% more, per prisoner, than did professionally managed state prisons handling matched populations.

On the evening of July 30th, 2010, the chickens came home to roost.

Three long-term inmates broke out with the assistance of the ringleader's girl friend, who reconnoitered the prison, then drove to its rear after sundown and threw small bolt cutters and other tools to breach the fence, as well as bags of pistols.

She had been arrested not two months earlier, for bringing drugs and other contraband into the prison. However, the Mohave County sheriffs offered her a deal: She could give up her suppliers, whom they said she claimed were neo-Nazis, and they would let her go free.

Of course, had she followed through, her fiancée would have been targeted after he got out of solitary for being on the receiving end of the smuggling.

On the fateful night, she had forgotten where she had parked the ringleader's Chevy Blazer, out there in the desert, so the four split up to search for it. One, Daniel Renwick, who was doing 44 years for a particularly cruel robbery-murder, quickly found the SUV and absconded with it, abandoning his confederates in the desert.

The accomplice and other two, John "Charlie" McCluskey, who was doing two 15-year sentences for attempted murders and who was a white supremacist, and Tracy Province, who was doing life for two murders, began walking through the desert like Moses, looking for a vehicle to steal or hijack.

It took over 100 minutes for the staff to discover the inmates missing from their dorm, but they weren't sure who was gone. Instead of reporting the escape to outside law enforcement and the Department of Corrections, they fiddled around, looking for them for another hour. Their motorized guard who had been making regular rounds, somehow repeatedly missed the huge hole in the outside perimeter's single fence.

The fugitives had by then walked miles before a helicopter showed to try to locate them in the sparsely vegetated desert. Unfortunately, it was operated as incompetently as the prison, and just circled the prison in tight circles, far from the escapees' location.

At last they arrived at an eastbound 18-wheeler that had stopped for a brake check miles south of Kingman at an I-40 exit. They took its East Indian drivers with them and drove to Flagstaff, stopping to call for assistance from friends and relatives along the way. Eventually, the ringleader's ex-wife agreed to pick them up and drove to meet them in Flagstaff.

At that location, they waited for their ride and the drivers agreed to wait 15 minutes after it arrived before sounding an alarm. They had taken $60 from one and $40 from the other, but rejected more, leaving each with more than half their cash.

McCluskey even turned down an offer by the owner/operator to go to an ATM to furnish them with more money.

The ex-wife dropped them off after stopping in Payson, then went on to Mesa. There they got another car and took off for a hideout in Southeast Arizona, only to find it occupied. They continued on toward their destination, Gentry, Arkansas, stealing a license plate from a car in Moriarity, New Mexico, on their way east.
Unbeknownst to them, their fellow escapee who stole the getaway car, had gotten into a shootout with a Garfield County sheriff's deputy and City of Rifle police, and spilled the beans on his erstwhile companions.
He is now doing 60 years for that shootout, at Colorado taxpayers' expense.
The three remaining fugitives heard news of his capture and squealing on them on the radio as they were going through Texas. Knowing their plans had been revealed, they quickly reversed direction. When they arrived at the New Mexico I-40 welcome station, they picked up maps and then noticed a couple who were pulling an RV with a crew cab pickup. They approached them and warned the driver not to go for one of his many handguns that was within reach.
That, unfortunately, sealed the fate of the hapless couple who were kidnapped.

Now a two-car convoy, they continued, going west toward Santa Rosa, when they were ordered to pull off on a frontage road. They were forced back into their trailer, allegedly by the ringleader, while the lifer drove the pickup and his girl friend followed in the beat up grey sedan they had bought in Arizona.

According to his indictment, the ringleader shot the couple, then when the truck stopped for gas, they noticed that the victims' blood was pouring out of the trailer onto the ground. They sped off, then exited to an unpaved country road, where the trailer was unhitched, splashed with liquor and set afire.

Eventually, the lifer, intent on suicide, changed his mind, going to a church in Meetetse, Wyoming and singing with the congregation. The minister gave him a jacket and $40 for mowing the church lawn, and he cadged a motel room floor to spend the night. The next morning, after a church member saw his picture on TV news and called police, he was captured while hitchhiking to Casper.
The fleeing couple had already gone on to Billings, Montana, then to Gentry, Arkansas, a week later. There they held up a beauty salon, but thanks to law enforcement dithering, the pair continued on their nationwide flight.

A week after that, they were spotted by an alert forest service employee at a campground and a swat team descended upon them to capture the pair.

Now the federal government is prosecuting the ringleader, hoping to get a death penalty conviction from a jury that will have to endure a four month trial. Federal, Arizona and New Mexican taxpayers will be footing the bill for millions for this search, apprehension, Arizona and New Mexico trials, and continued imprisonment.

McCluskey, being 48 years old, suicidal and in poor health, is not likely to ever be executed. There have only been three federal executions in the last 50 years and three Virginians have been on death row for over 20 years. Appeals of death sentences cost the public fortunes.

If McCluskey makes it that far, he will join Sherman Lamont Fields, who promised a bribe to a Texas for-profit prison guard in exchange for a key to his prison, escaped and promptly kidnapped and murdered his ex-girl friend.

The U.S. Attorney who decided to seek the death penalty, Kenneth J. Gonzales, was perhaps awarded a federal judgeship for this sort of grandstanding, and was sworn in last week.

Unfortunately, no one seems to be really talking about the whole picture.

Somewhere, just as they did in Kansas five to ten years ago, corrupt officials are no doubt meeting with industry executives and cooking up more plans to expand their leaky, for-profit American gulag.

Who will tell the people?