Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 199 posts

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#11

Post by toomuchtodo »

TimMeade wrote: post #10

Not to be the naysayer on this but it is a very serious incursion on states rights. The legal consensus i'm hearing is that it will be overturned by the judicial system. Does the FCC have the right to tell a state or town what to do with local calls? That is the root of this. It's a given that they can regulate interstate, but historically intrastate has been the rights of the states.

In the event this is overturned judicially, I intend to incorporate a 501c3 non-profit (or B Corp, depending on the legalities) to provide these services at-cost to deep six Securus Technologies' profiting off of this.

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#12

Post by Someone1234 »

jMyles wrote: post #4

I know this is controversial, but the humane thing to do is to allow inmates unfettered access to the internet. Contrary to the orthodoxy on the matter, I assert that this will reduce the strength and relevance of 'prison gangs.'

Extremely controversial.

Stopping prisoners from harassing their victims/witnesses against them/enemies or organising others to do their dirty work externally is already a massive problem. Prisons have the ability to listen to calls and read mail to try and curtail it.

Giving them access to the internet makes all of this far easier, and monitoring it far more expensive. Not to mention that now they can use the internet to commit new crimes, and they have nothing better to do for the years or tens of years that they're sitting in a cell.

I think giving them access to email is do-able, since that is no different in practice to physical letters. But giving them unrestricted access is a monitoring nightmare.

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#13

Post by revscat »

> The reform passed 3:2 along partisan lines, with the appointed Democrat commissioners voting in favor, and Republicans against.

While there has been far too much cross-party desire to be "tough on crime", this is yet another example where the GOP seems to be stuck in the past, unwilling to recognize the failure and brutality of that stance. And while this is absolutely a positive step, meaningful reforms will not transpire to any significant degree so long as state governments are dominated by conservatives. They may occasionally voice social justice concerns, but want to comes time to vote on those issues the result is what you see here, almost without exception.

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#14

Post by raymondh »

jMyles wrote: post #4

I know this is controversial, but the humane thing to do is to allow inmates unfettered access to the internet. Contrary to the orthodoxy on the matter, I assert that this will reduce the strength and relevance of 'prison gangs.'

More "naïve" than "controversial".

Unfettered access ==> ability to run criminal business, organize groups, stalk victims, perpetrate fraud, etc.

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#15

Post by eli »

jMyles wrote: post #5
zem wrote: post #3

> The reform passed 3:2 along partisan lines, with the appointed Democrat commissioners voting in favor, and Republicans against. it's kind of terrifying to think that a single republican in the wrong place could have blocked a measure affecting millions of people.

It's just odd on its face that so many of these decisions, which absolutely have an otherwise legislative character, are being made by the executive branch.

The FCC is an independent agency created by Congress, not part of the executive branch.

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#16

Post by cwyers »

Someone1234 wrote: post #6

I don't understand why the Republicans voted against. Look, I get it, you support private industry. But let's remember context, you support capitalism where COMPETITION exists, in this situation it is an artificially created monopoly of one company. Now if they had an alternative proposal that required prisons to have two or more vendors, I'd be totally onboard with not setting an artificial price restriction. Since…

> Look, I get it, you support private industry. But let's remember context, you support capitalism where COMPETITION exists, in this situation it is an artificially created monopoly of one company.

I mean, that's the definition of a classical liberal, I'm not sure it's described the Republican Party for a long time though.

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#17

Post by javiramos »

Someone1234 wrote: post #6

I don't understand why the Republicans voted against. Look, I get it, you support private industry. But let's remember context, you support capitalism where COMPETITION exists, in this situation it is an artificially created monopoly of one company. Now if they had an alternative proposal that required prisons to have two or more vendors, I'd be totally onboard with not setting an artificial price restriction. Since…

>The whole private prison thing makes me want to vomit.

Makes me vomit too. We've created a systematic punishment machine rather than a reformation and education system. And systematic profiteering machine that's corrupting the objective of the Justice system.

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#18

Post by jnardiello »

Someone1234 wrote: post #6

I don't understand why the Republicans voted against. Look, I get it, you support private industry. But let's remember context, you support capitalism where COMPETITION exists, in this situation it is an artificially created monopoly of one company. Now if they had an alternative proposal that required prisons to have two or more vendors, I'd be totally onboard with not setting an artificial price restriction. Since…

Agree. This is just plain abuse on people who have no other available options.

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#19

Post by spoiledtechie »

cwyers wrote: post #16
Someone1234 wrote: post #6

I don't understand why the Republicans voted against. Look, I get it, you support private industry. But let's remember context, you support capitalism where COMPETITION exists, in this situation it is an artificially created monopoly of one company. Now if they had an alternative proposal that required prisons to have two or more vendors, I'd be totally onboard with not setting an artificial price restriction. Since…

> Look, I get it, you support private industry. But let's remember context, you support capitalism where COMPETITION exists, in this situation it is an artificially created monopoly of one company. I mean, that's the definition of a classical liberal, I'm not sure it's described the Republican Party for a long time though.

Sounds more liberal to me. To have a monopoly within a government entity.

Re: The FCC has voted to end exorbitant phone fees for prison inmates

#20

Post by linksbro »

Someone1234 wrote: post #6

I don't understand why the Republicans voted against. Look, I get it, you support private industry. But let's remember context, you support capitalism where COMPETITION exists, in this situation it is an artificially created monopoly of one company. Now if they had an alternative proposal that required prisons to have two or more vendors, I'd be totally onboard with not setting an artificial price restriction. Since…

They voted against it because they believe it "exceed(s) the commission’s legal authority."[1] But they both said the idea had "well intentions." [2]

Makes you wonder what horrors a conservative majority FCC will cause.

[1] http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/22/regulators-sl... [2] Full commission meeting (item was first on agenda) https://www.fcc.gov/events/open-commission-meeting-october-2...

Post reply on HN