O'Malley: 'For-Profit' Prisons Are 'Immoral'

[elleng]

http://on.aol.com/video/omalley--for-profit-prisons-are-immoral-519226790

[MADem]

1. The very worst offender of this practice is ... incorporated in Maryland. Ooops.

And O'Malley was the governor while they plied their trade AND converted their business model into a trust to avoid taxes. I guess he's coming to Jesus, and that's fine, but it's a bit late:

Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), incorporated in Maryland and headquartered in Nashville, Tennessee, is the largest owner of for-profit prisons and immigration detention facilities in the United States. The only larger operators of such facilities are “the federal government and three states,” according to CCA. [1] It is publicly traded in the United States (NYSE: CXW) and had approximately 15,400 employees in 2013.[2] In 2013, CCA was converted into a real estate investment trust (REIT), which will help the company avoid tens of millions of dollars in corporate taxes.[3][4] CCA's revenue in 2013 was nearly $1.7 billion, and it had profits of $300 million, 100 percent of which came from taxpayers via government contracts.[2]

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Corrections_Corporation_of_America

[FSogol]

2. They run prisons for the Federal Government, not for the State of Maryland.

Nice try though.

[Koinos]

4. CCA was incorporated in 1983. Headquarters in Tennessee. No CCA prisons in Maryland.

The post does not belong in this protected group.

[MADem]

5. I understand that, but the optics remain poor. nt

[FSogol]

6. LOL, the optics are poor? That's quite a stretch. O'Malley railed against the

Obama administration for how they were treating immigrant refugees and got some changes made. Maryland accepted more of those children than any other state.

Your factless attempt at a smear is laughable.

[MADem]

7. There are two facts at play, here:

I think it's good he has articulated this position. It is a valid campaign issue.

I think it's unfortunate that the largest practitioner of this business is incorporated in MD. Did he articulate these views while he was governor and that entity was paying taxes in the state? That could be exculpatory.

You've brought up another point about immigrant refugees that has nothing to do with the private prison discussion that had a little bit of "Obama bad" wrapped up in there. Not sure why you wanted to draw that distinction, though. Two points in that regard:

O'Malley made it a point to distinguish himself from Sanders by pointing out that he SUPPORTED Obama in 2012 while Sanders wanted him primaried. It's not a good move to think that the elevation of O'Malley by dumping on the sitting POTUS will pay any dividends. O'Malley seems to want to draw closer to Obama, not 'rail against' him.

Also, Obama was the POTUS who actually visited a prison recently, so they seem to be somewhat on the same page on at least some aspect of this issue.

It's not a smear, it's a reasonable question, phrased respectfully. One someone might just ask. Nothing wrong with being prepared with an answer. Or is there?

[FSogol]

8. In other States the immigrants were being held in for-profit prisons, that's

why the distinction with Obama was brought up. You seem to not understand the difference between the roles of Federal and State governments or are just ignoring them to rhetorically stretch something into a smear. Good luck in future civics/government classes.

[MADem]

9. Are you seriously trying to tell me that state governors ignore federal businesses

in their states that are unsavory "just because?"

Come on, you are not that naive--and to play the "You don't understand" excuse to try to avoid the question is just not on. Then to double down with the sorry little "civics/government" snark? Not working, either. Of course I understand the difference between state and federal government; I also understand the difference between public and private business entities.

When Chik-fil-A was at the height of their discrimination games, the little Mayor of Boston sent them a letter saying "We don't want your kind HERE in the City of Boston." A politician--even a city leader, never mind state-- CAN speak out. All I'm asking is "Did he?" Way back when, before Obama visited prisons, before #BLM started speaking about incarceration rates, before prison issues/non-violent offenders became a platform plank? It makes a difference.

And anytime there is an effort to resolve a candidate's stance on an issue, that does not make that effort a "smear." Calling it that is cheap and easy--it shuts up any discussion, sure, but it doesn't enhance understanding. If MO'M has been speaking of this matter for years, he's got a leg well up on the ladder. If he hasn't, though, or if he's spoken approvingly of the private entities in the past, he has some processing to work through to articulate his evolution. And it's not denigrating to mention this. There's nothing wrong with evolving. Except, of course, at DU.

O'Malley has a lot of positives, but he's got issues reaching out to certain segments of society. If he can demonstrate that this is a long-held view it is helpful to him. If it's an evolution, he can spin that in 'fervor of the convert' fashion. I am less familiar with his career than some politicians, which is why I ask the questions. If he wants to grow his base of support, he needs to be prepared to answer them--because if I am wondering, you can rest assured that many people are as well.

[askew]

10. This is a group for O'Malley supporters.

Your comment violates the rules and is a jackass thing to do. Delete it and apologize.

[MADem]

11. A few points:

My comments do not violate the rules--here are the rules of this group in their entirety:

Statement of Purpose
A group for supporters of Martin O'Malley.

Here's the pinned thread on the subject:

The Martin O'Malley group serves as a safe haven to discuss and learn about Governor Martin O'Malley. As fellow Democrats, bashing other Democratic candidates is not acceptable. This is paramount to participation in this group.

That's it. I'm "discussing and learning." Except when I'm having to defend myself against accusations such as those you are making, here.

I support O'Malley in that he has become my second choice for the nomination. There's no requirement articulated in those rules that I support him as my primary choice. I think he is a good guy, he has decent political instincts, he comes across as very genuine, he has a nice looking family, and I do believe he has a real, national future in the Democratic party. That said, he does have weaknesses he must overcome, and questions he will need to ask in order to "break out" of 3rd place. He's not going to do that without conversation. I am providing a polite entree to that process here in this little corner of the internet.

Further, you are not a host here. If they want to ban me for polite, respectful discourse that in no way violates the rules of this group (again, I see no admonition that "only positive, happy-glad comments are acceptable" here) then that's up to them. I don't think avoiding a topic that very well might come up is terribly helpful to the candidate, particularly if the topic isn't discussed rudely. If you want to argue "No one will care," fine--but I bring it up because it does create an appearance of recent conversion unless there are additional comments that go back a few years on this matter.

Third, trying to net nanny, IMO, is a (let me quote you) "jackass thing to do." Maybe you should take your own advice and stop telling other people what to do. Attend to that beam in your own eye, eh?

[askew]

13. So you aren't going to apologize for posting baseless attacks against O'Malley in the

O'Malley group? Why am I not surprised? Some people pride themselves on being jerks.

[MADem]

14. Your characterizations are "baseless."

I did not attack the man--I pointed out a plain fact that someone just might ask him about. It's a fair question, and why are you

a) afraid of the answer and

b) calling me a jerk?

Do you pride yourself on engaging in personal insult as a debate tool? How very trumpesque!

[FSogol]

15. Your comments aren't polite or respectful, they are pure bashing and

not welcome here. At no point in any debate or appearance is anyone going to try and connect a Tennessee-based business with the former Governor of Maryland. Your whole premise is ridiculous.

[MADem]

16. If you can't take my remarks in the polite, open and honest way that I have offered them,

go on ahead and hit the button.

The business is INCORPORATED in MD. That is a matter of record. And they do this for a SPECIFIC reason-so they can HIDE their shareholder list from YOU and ME:

Further, although headquartered in Tennessee, CCA is incorporated in Maryland. Under Maryland state law, MD Corp. & Assn. Code § 2-513 (2013), only shareholders who own “at least 5 percent of the outstanding stock” of a company may inspect and copy its stock ledger – i.e., its list of shareholders. Since CCA has around 117 million shares of outstanding stock, an investor would have to own about 5.85 million shares (currently valued at over $200 million) before they could obtain a copy of the company’s shareholder list.

...Thus, the individual shareholders who own stock in both CCA and GEO remain shrouded in secrecy – much like private prison companies themselves, which have a long history of being non-transparent and lacking public accountability even though almost all of their revenue is obtained from government contracts paid with taxpayer funds.

https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2015/jul/31/who-owns-private-prison-stock/

Still think this is "Nothing to see here, move along?"


I don't think that avoiding issues, even difficult ones, is helpful. This is a fair question.

If you want a circular cheering squad, though, that is your right.

[FSogol]

17. You think this was a polite comment?

The very worst offender of this practice is ... incorporated in Maryland. Ooops.

And O'Malley was the governor while they plied their trade AND converted their business model into a trust to avoid taxes. I guess he's coming to Jesus, and that's fine, but it's a bit late:

I suppose in your mind, a governor controls every corporation in his State?


Go bother some other group with your total nonsense.

[MADem]

18. Which is why I asked--has he brought up this issue before? Or is he coming to Jesus?

Look, you can get all shirty and blame-y with me, but here's a real truth--if Marco Rubio becomes the GOP nominee, or even the VP nom, expect this issue to LEAP to the fore of discussion. Why? Because Rubio is Up To His ASS in Private Prison monies. His Chief of Staff is a former lobbyist for the industry. Those guys will probably serve as an ATM for him, if needs must.

It's kinda important, in light of this information, that any potential nominee of ours, for either slot, be fully vetted and "clarified" when it comes to this issue, doncha think?

Or is it more important to just put happy faces on everything and wave pompoms?

You might want to adjust and clarify your SOP if you don't want real discussions here. As I've said, that's ENTIRELY your right to do that, and if you want to put your foot up my ass and show me the door, FINE-- but to this point, your SOP does not prohibit "critique" like some others do.

[FSogol]

19. You keep whining and making claims, but have not shown how it connects to O'malley.

We do want real discussion here, but you haven't started a real discussion. You are just making a nebulous accusation, which you have failed to back up, and expect us to scurry around responding.

O'Malley closed Maryland's worst prison, Maryland House of Correction in 2007. The State does not use private prisons. No matter how you try and stretch it, O'Malley doesn't have a prison problem.

[MADem]

20. I have provided you a link that shows you where the largest offender is incorporated.

I have provided you another link that shows WHY they incorporated in MD -- to hide their individual shareholders.

I have also informed you that Rubio is up in that private prison business to his elbows.

You keep coming back at me with with whines that I'm whining, when all I am asking for is clarity.

Has MO'M protested this issue before, when he was in office and had authority to influence change? Has he tried to get the incorporation laws changed while he was governor to force more transparency WRT the shareholders of the largest practitioner of this ugly industry?

Those are not "whines." They're fair questions. People who congregate here, who purport to be experts on this candidate's background should be able to answer them--and if they can't, then don't you think NOW is the time to fix that little knowledge gap, rather than later? Or, you can shoot the messenger.


And O'Malley HAS had a "prison problem" in his past--don't you think it would be a good idea for him to try to inoculate himself against this kind of stuff being revisited, again?

If you don't believe me, look at this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/for-gov-omalley-md-jail-scandal-caps-years-of-trouble-with-baltimore-facility/2013/06/05/c8985da4-cde5-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html

[FSogol]

21. What does Marco Rubio have to do with O'Malley?

edited to add: You don't make any sense with your accusations. O'Malley is not connected to private prisons and his State doesn't use them. You keep pretending this issue will bite him. Why? How?

[MADem]

22. If O'Malley gets the nomination (a long shot, but who knows?), Rubio could well be his opponent.

If O'Malley gets the VP nod (also a long shot, but who knows?), Rubio could ALSO be his opponent.

He's polling better than Jeb! these days.

Again, since you keep ignoring what I am asking:

The worst private prison company in USA is incorporated in MD and was when MOM was governor.

The purpose of incorporating in MD was to take advantage of MD law in order to HIDE individual shareholders from scrutiny.

Did O'Malley ever try to change this law? Did he ever address the private prison issue as governor? And didn't his state have a private juvenile facility operating while he was a governor?

These ARE fair questions. They're not going to disappear just because you don't like them. If he gains traction, you should expect them to be asked.

[FSogol]

23. Laughably naive.

1. Rubio will never bring up private prisons, it would kill his Latino support. Immigration is an issue he has to dance around and he won't look good as the private-prison guy.

2. You seem to not understand the difference between the Federal govt and State govt.
Private prisons are not used by Maryland. There is no law for him to try and change. There is no Federal policy he could have changed as governor of Md.

3. No, Maryland has no private prisons. Here's a letter from the aclu:

https://www.aclu.org/letter/department-public-safety-and-correctional-services-private-prisons-maryland

4. You might think it is a fair question, but it will get answered by "We have no private prisons in Maryland" type of response.

5. A Rubio/O'Malley debate would be one of the funniest events ever. The candidate most clued in on policy with comprehensive/specific plans to improve the country versus a lip-smacking, empty suit who looks desperate to run whenever a tough question is asked? Note to self, stock up on

[MADem]

24. Annnnnd.....straight to the personal insult! I could say the same about you.

You see, the "prison" business is an ITEM OF NEXUS between both M'OM and Rubio. Only someone who is either NAIVE or LINEAR in their thinking would not notice this. MO'M says he objects to these prisons, but IIRC he had one in his state, for juveniles, under his watch. He also has had prison issues under his leadership, that have continued past his time in office. Rubio, OTOH, takes money hand over fist from the privatized version of this industry, and has a former prison lobbyist as his closest staff member. It's ripe for plucking.

It is the PERFECT topic upon which to formulate a series of DEBATE questions directed at BOTH candidates, with follow-ups, with "what did you do back then?" and "compare and contrast" scenarios, etc.

But hey, whatever. It's obvious that you're so busy playing defense that you don't really care how your candidate might handle this particular matter. I thought people here in this group would already KNOW. He can't get away with high flying rhetoric -- particularly rhetoric that excoriates--without expecting a little digging into his own backstory and stances.


Look--he's a nice guy, he's not stupid, he can deliver a line with conviction, he's got a certain amount of charisma--he is gradually raising his profile, but with an increased profile comes increased SCRUTINY. He's got some clarifying to do if he wants to make this plank a signature portion of his campaign, and that's true even if you are angry at me for bringing it up.

[FSogol]

25. And for the 4th time: Maryland doesn't use private prisons.

[MADem]

29. They used to.

And there's a DC "Youth Detention Facility" in Anne Arundel, MD. Belongs to DC, but if anything happens there, it's their MD police on the hook. So they've got one in their yard.

And they use privatized health care providers in their public prisons--that are accused of not meeting minimum standards for care and are being cited as "cruel and unusual" -- so there's that, too.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/privatized-prison-health-care-scrutinized/2012/07/21/gJQAgsp70W_story.html

If MD doesn't want to host private prison corporations, they really should change their incorporation laws, at least as regards entities that do business with the government. Those entities should NEVER have a "secret" list of shareholders, but if they incorporate in MD, that's the end result. There should be full transparency on that score if they want to do business with any government, be it federal, state or local.

[FSogol]

30. Stretchhhhhhhhh

[MADem]

31. MO'M has a legacy problem WRT prison management. He does.

You can deny it, call it a stretch, put kiddie pictures up, and get mad at me. That's not going to change a perception he needs to MANAGE.

I think you'd do better to help him neutralize it instead of shooting the messenger. I am not the only person who has NOTICED this--and if I noticed it, knowing less than the MD experts on this guy, then surely others in media who have had their ear to the ground know about this, too.

Here's the local paper discussing this (MONTHS ago, too): http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/bs-md-rodricks-0728-20150727-column.html

If he had not been planning to run for president for several years — with many of his decisions and positions as Maryland governor poured into that calculus — I would be tempted to say that Martin O'Malley's views on criminal justice had "evolved," that his current beliefs resulted from a thoughtful process free of political calculation.

And if we were not in the middle of one of those "national conversations" about cops, racial bias, mass incarceration and the long war on drugs, I might even believe O'Malley had had a genuine epiphany about the state of American justice.

But, alas, the man is running for president (has been for a long time) and several aspects of criminal justice — from the deaths of citizens in police custody to our world-leading rate of imprisonment — are issues in the presidential campaign, at least on the Democratic side.

So that explains the new, progressive Martin O'Malley who, while campaigning in Iowa, told The Des Moines Register that he sees criminal justice reform as a defining issue of the 2016 campaign.....What?

What happened to the zero-tolerance Baltimore mayor who became the no-parole-for-lifers governor of Maryland? Where's the guy who was once bullish on mandatory minimums?

[FSogol]

32. So, you try and prove your point by posting an article by a Hogan promoter?

I think you'd do better to help him neutralize it instead of shooting the messenger.

I guess the only thing left to say is: Your concern is noted.

:p

By the way, your article hit piece didn't say anything about private prisons. Also "privatized health care providers" are insurance companies, not private prisons. Does any state run their own insurance company?

Have fun playing with stretchhhhhh

[MADem]

33. Some prison systems hire their own, state-employed, doctors and nurses.

They are responsible for the day-to-day care of inmates, not "contract employees" that are "sent by the agency."

It doesn't matter who is "promoting" these discussions--they are OUT THERE. Do you seriously think that "Oh well, that's an opponent" will fly? That opponent has friends amongst the competition!

And I didn't SAY the article said anything about private prisons--but MD used to have them, and MD continues to harbor them as incorporated entities within their borders--which means that their SHAREHOLDERS are concealed because of a dumbass MD law, even though they do business with state/federal governments. And that's not a "stretch." That's hard fact.

MD could have thrown daylight on that, but didn't.

[FSogol]

36. Go make your unfounded allegations in some other group. n/t

[Koinos]

3. I assume that you did not realize you are posting in a protected group.

Your response and its groundless insinuations do not belong in a protected group. Please delete.

[MADem]

12. I don't think you meant to talk to the person who started this thread, but that is what you are

doing.

[Koinos]

34. You're right. It was directed at your first response.

My mistake in misplacing it. That happens sometimes.

[tblue]

26. I don't understand

[Koinos]

35. I misplaced my response. It was meant for Response #1.

[think]

27. Good on O'Malley! K&R

[elleng]

28. Yes!

Thanks.