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

81–90 of 199 posts

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

#81

Post by jbooth »

ars wrote: post #31
revscat wrote: post #13

> 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 t…

It's not that. They felt they did not have the legal authority to do this, and that it would be struck down by the courts.

Oh, come on. Anytime a politician of any party uses that line it's a load of crap. If they supported the policy they'd find the legal authority perfectly acceptable.

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

#83

Post by irl_zebra »

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.

Under that logic, didn't a single Democrat in the right place pass a measure that affects millions of people?

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

#84

Post by smt88 »

harryh wrote: post #71
smt88 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying states shouldn't be able to determine certain things. But the federal government should be able to overrule asinine state policies after public debate (still subject to testing in court). When that testing happens, as it does now, the determining factor shouldn't be "states vs federal rights". It should be, "Does this state have a good reason to differ from the rest of the country?" In this case, where…

Maybe in a poorer state like Mississippi the revenue state raised by more expensive phone calls is needed to properly pay for the prisons in question? I'm not saying I believe that argument, but I don't live in Mississippi, I don't pay taxes in Mississippi, and I'm extremely unlikely to ever end up in a Mississippi prison. Maybe it should be the job of Mississippians to weigh the pros and cons of these things?

I understand that you're proposing something hypothetical. So let's assume that it's true: Mississippi needs the revenue to run the prisons.

The federal government should be able to say, "No, sorry Mississippi, you aren't going to run your prisons on the backs of the families of inmates."

Why should someone have to pay extortionist prices to speak to a loved one? They likely had nothing to do with the crime (or the criminality of the inmate), and it's not fair to punish them just for being unlucky enough to love someone who becomes a convict.

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

#85

Post by nickff »

anon432 wrote: post #77
nickff wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why must you accuse your intellectual opponents of being mean and evil? Why would they be so cruel and irrational? Do you have any real reason to believe you are any better than them?

Look into the research of Jonathan Haidt.

Yes, I am aware of the psychological reasons why people hold themselves in high esteem while accusing their opponents of moral corruption; my rhetorical questions were meant to highlight the absurdity of the accusations.

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

#86

Post by liveoneggs »

harryh wrote: post #56
smt88 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably time to give up on the ridiculous sanctity of states' rights. It made sense in a time when people lived in same state their whole lives, rarely traveled outside the state, and rarely communicated outside the state. Their whole lives unfolded within a few hundred square miles. That's not the case anymore. You can't subdivide the interests of American citizens by state anymore. What does it mean to be fro…

What does it mean to be from Hawaii vs. Mississippi? Kind of a lot?

other than racial demographics, what does it mean?

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

#87

Post by liveoneggs »

harryh wrote: post #56
smt88 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably time to give up on the ridiculous sanctity of states' rights. It made sense in a time when people lived in same state their whole lives, rarely traveled outside the state, and rarely communicated outside the state. Their whole lives unfolded within a few hundred square miles. That's not the case anymore. You can't subdivide the interests of American citizens by state anymore. What does it mean to be fro…

What does it mean to be from Hawaii vs. Mississippi? Kind of a lot?

other than racial demographics, what does it mean?

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

#88

Post by intopieces »

smt88 wrote: post #48
intopieces wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could employ internet filtering software used by China, Syria and Iran. Shouldn't be too difficult to get their hands on, considering it's made by an American company, Blue Coat Systems [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Coat_Systems

That software (whatever is used by China and Iran) is designed to tell the difference between parts of the web that are political and parts that aren't. It isn't designed to tell whether Inmate X is flooding Victim Y's Instagram with veiled threats. You'd have to create an incredibly complex system of rules for each individual inmate in order to do anything close to being effective, and even then, you'd require a lev…

I'm not sure I follow why the system has to be so complex. Why not just block access to Instagram entirely? China does, and they seem to be satisfied with the results. I don't forsee prison inmates getting access to VPNs. As other users have proposed, a locked-down version (not 'unfettered') of the web seems like a reasonable compromise.

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

#89

Post by comrh »

devit wrote: post #68

Why not $0? The marginal cost of the bandwidth required to make the phone calls is negligible, so there is no reason it should cost anything to the inmates. A simple solution to achieve such a result is to buy a cell phone plan with unlimited minutes and route calls through it.

> Prisons like the Maryland facility featured in the hit podcast “Serial” sign exclusive contracts with companies like Global Tel-Link, and receive a cut of the proceeds from each call, creating an incentive to raise rates as much as possible.

Cause the prison makes $$$.

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

#90

Post by thaumasiotes »

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.

What are you trying to say? Pretty much every measure affects millions of people. Are you terrified to think that some things --no matter what!-- might get blocked?
Post reply on HN