The Texas Observer

The fastest-growing segment of the prison industry is for-profit detention centers housing immigrants. The Bush administration - with characteristic zeal - has given the job of holding this growing detention population — fed largely by the crackdown on illegal immigration — to prison peddlers who are dependent on taxpayer dollars. Texas has been ground zero for this growth industry.

“Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses… and we’ll lock ‘em up” seems to be the mantra of Corrections Corporation of America, Emerald, GEO Group, MTC, and other “corrections” companies. These outfits tend to operate with minimal oversight and little direction from government agencies. In truth, outside of a few attorneys, correctional officers, and the detainees themselves, few have first-hand knowledge of detention center operations.

However, documents recently obtained by the Observer paint a dismal picture of some Texas facilities. We wrote about the documents in a March issue of the magazine. Three of six Texas facilities inspected by the Office of Federal Detention Trustee flunked federal standards: the Brooks County Correctional Facility in Falfurrias, operated by LCS Corrections Services Inc. of Lafayette, Louisiana; the Willacy County Regional Detention Center in Raymondville, operated by Utah-based Management & Training Corp; and the East Hidalgo Detention Center in La Villa, also operated by LCS.

Brooks and Willacy both passed more limited inspections conducted by the Texas Commission on Jail Standards.

The facilities had numerous security, sanitation, management, record-keeping, and health care problems. In the case of East Hidalgo, the Federal Detention Trustee deemed the detention center “at risk” and ordered immediate federal intervention.

From the March issue of the Observer:

At East Hidalgo, the inspectors found dozens of violations of federal standards. Medical, dental, and mental health care is virtually nonexistent. Initial medical screenings are performed by unqualified nurses and do not include a physical examination, or an appraisal for chemical dependency, mental retardation, and suicide risk, according to the report. Moreover, the jail has no dentist or mental health professional on-site.

A hallway is used as an examination room. Staff are not trained to deal with suicidal detainees despite eight suicide attempts in the year prior to the report.Security is poor. At the time of the inspection, visitors didn’t even pass through a metal detector when entering the building. The jail has no “specific instructions” on when firearms may be used; no procedures for maintaining weapons or for controlling keys, kitchen tools, and medical equipment; no effective plan for a mass evacuation; and no training program on the use of force.

Sanitation is lacking. Employees are not tested for blood-borne pathogens, increasing the risk of disease to both guards and inmates. Detainees are issued “sporks,” but the utensils are not sanitized, nor are barbering tools.Two juveniles were discovered by the inspectors at the adult-only detention center and immediately removed.In addition, the report reveals that 19 inmate-on-inmate assaults had occurred in the previous year.

After six inmates escaped in 2006, the state jail commission cited the facility for employing too few guards, for the third time.

Richard Harbison, vice president of LCS, told the Observer last month that the company had corrected the problems and expected to pass an upcoming inspection. (We’ll update once we find out if the inspection has occurred and how the facility did.)

Because it’s so rare to get a glimpse of how bad some of these private lockups can be, we’ve taken the time to scan most of the pages from the East Hidalgo inspection report.

In addition to the deficiencies of the prisons, the documents also inadvertently reveal the pettiness of the secretive Bush administration. Whole pages of the inspection reports were redacted… sort of. The feds need to invest in some better Sharpies. Much of what they tried to hide could be read with the aid of a light table and a magnifying glass. While the redactions did obscure some sensitive security problems, other portions of the inspection reports hardly seemed worthy of a black marker.

For example, in the report on the East Hidalgo Detention Center, the Federal Detention Trustee redacted a section on spork protocol. “Sporks are not returned to food service for proper cleaning,” the redacted part reads. “All utensils should be properly washed.” A blacked-out section in the report on the LCS Brooks County Correctional Facility says, “Chicken was thawing in a sink for over two hours on Nov. [ ], 2007 and a turkey product was thawing at room temperature for over 7 1/2 hours on Nov. 7, 2007.”

The agency even redacted areas of the inspection where the prisons received passing marks.

As a legal basis for the secrecy, the agency cited a provision in the Freedom of Information Act that allows an agency to withhold information that “could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual.” But doesn’t the real danger to human safety come from the sorry state of the detention centers, not the disclosure thereof?

A five-hour hearing on the border wall conducted by members of Congress at UT Brownsville today illustrated why we have a logjam in Congress over any kind of meaningful immigration reform.

The 7-person congressional panel featured a number of chairmen including U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva a Democrat from Arizona, and U.S. Rep. Madeleine Bordallo, a Democrat from Guam. The majority of the members were Democrats with the exception of soon to be ex-U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter a Republican from California and the architect of the Secure Fence Act of 2006 legislation and soon to be ex-U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, a Republican from Colorado. Both Tancredo and Hunter are former presidential candidates who ran on an anti-immigration platform but failed to make a dent against Sen. John McCain, who holds a more moderate position on the subject.

Democrats on the panel seemed to agree the United States needed comprehensive immigration reform and that segments of a border wall would not solve U.S. immigration woes. Tancredo and Hunter repeatedly tried to argue that a border wall would significantly help stop illegal immigration. Hunter, especially seemed fixated on the double layered border fence in San Diego. He offered statistics that border arrests are down in San Diego but didn’t cite sources for them. Hunter’s district borders Tijuana in Baja California. Hunter painted a picture of apocalyptic lawlessness: hundreds of rapes, murders and “massive tons of cocaine being injected into the veins of American children” before the wall had been built.

But, people in Brownsville didn’t want to hear about San Diego. They wanted the congressional leaders to understand the uniqueness of the border culture in Texas.

The lecture hall was packed with border landowners, university students and business leaders from the border region. No supporters of the wall appeared to be present. “I would say that our community is united in opposition against the wall,” said Brownsville County Commissioner John Wood as he scanned the audience.

That opposition was evident in numerous testimonies from business people, landowners and academics including Dr. Juliet Garcia, President of the University of Texas at Brownsville. Dr. Garcia’s testimony illustrated the heavy handedness of Homeland Security and the short sightedness in trying to construct a wall through her campus by December 31, 2008. Garcia said that DHS’ plan was to leave an opening in the 18-foot fence that would funnel illegal activity to that point. That point however, would be right next to the library and campus classrooms. It would also be the same entrance that students would use to enter the university’s golf course.

The audience laughed in disbelief at DHS’ plan. “I could not sign the (DHS) waiver because it is my responsibility to protect the safety of our students,” she said.

Some of the more interesting testimony came from Ned Norris, chair of the Tohono O’odham tribe in Arizona. Norris said that much damage had already been done to ancestral burial grounds and the tribe’s sovereignty by Homeland Security’s heavy handed tactics. So far, DHS has already constructed vehicle barriers throughout the Tohono O’odham ancestral lands which range from the Arizona border near Tucson south into Mexico. Norris said subcontractors hired by Boeing, who is in charge of building the wall had ignored federal archaeological laws and destroyed burial grounds. “Imagine heavy machinery driving over your family graveyard,” he said. Norris said Homeland Security had never consulted with them on border security issues. “Their attitude is that we are federal land and they are the federal government and they can do whatever the hell they want.” Norris said that Secretary Michael Chertoff had avoided several invitations made by the tribe to visit. He also dodged them during several visits to Washington D.C.

‘We are tired of being tour guides for Congress,” said a frustrated Norris. “Probably the only visit we’d like to have right now is Chertoff, but he won’t come. He goes to the border to the East and the West of us but he never comes to out land.”

Every witness who testified before the panel said that Homeland Security had never consulted with them before suing them for access to their land to build the wall.These witnesses included local leaders, landowners, the Catholic Diocese, the UT Brownsville campus, the Texas Produce Association which represents hundreds of farmers and the Tohono O’odham tribe. Hunter and Tancredo did not seem to see a problem in Homeland Security’s tactics, however.

At the and of the day, Hunter said it was a successful hearing. “Well you thought you didn’t get your day in court, now you’ve gotten to talk about your issues,” he said.

But those testifying weren’t there just to go through the motions. They want action and they feel their day in court has yet to come.

Well, I wasn’t going to do it. But after chronicling the travails of Puddles/Panchito for several months, it seemed fitting to write an epilogue about the little Shih Tzu that brought down the mayor of a South Texas town.

After a 10-month tussle over custody of the lovable little yapper, the Gutierrez family finally emerged victorious yesterday. State District Judge Richard Terrell ruled in favor of the family after chastising both parties for behaving like idiots.

After all, Grace Saenz-Lopez—now the ex-mayor of Alice—gave up her political career for the pint-sized ball of fluff. She was also indicted along with her twin sister in an alleged plot to hide the dog from the Gutierrez family. The two still face criminal charges and will have their hearing next week. The whole affair became such a—ahem—doggone debacle that it made headlines in the New York Times and the nationally syndicated Mike and Juliet Show.

I’m glad it’s nearly over, because I’m running out of dog-related puns.

The question now is, can the ex-Mayor let sleeping dogs lie?

Creationism studies in Texas went back to square one Thursday. The nine-member Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board backed Commissioner Raymund Paredes’ recommendation to deny the Institute for Creation Research’s bid to teach creationism as science.

After Wednesday’s lengthy hearing and full day of testimony, board members voted that public testimony not be admitted today—proof, perhaps, that God is merciful.

The vote was quick and unanimous.  Joe Stafford, assistant commissioner for Academic Affairs and Research, read into the record a Texas Education Code statute about preventing public deception in the face of fraudulent or substandard college and university degrees. He also read from Texas Administrative Code rules 12a and 12d, which discuss the quality and content of curricula.

Dr. Henry Morris, CEO of the Institute for Creation Research, told the Observer that his school will appeal the decision within 45 days. Morris said the ICR may also take its case to the Texas Supreme Court.

A bid to teach creationism as science in Texas is facing extinction. Raymund Paredes, commissioner of the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, today recommended that the Institute for Creation Research not be allowed to offer a Masters of Science degree in Science Education.

The ICR teaches that the earth was created in a week and that it is 6,000 years old.

Paredes made his recommendation before the Coordinating Board’s Academic Excellence and Research Committee. On Thursday the 9-member Coordinating Board will meet to take a final vote on the Commissioner’s recommendation.

Three participants spoke in favor of ICR’s application: a radio announcer with a science background, a military officer, and a tax attorney. Seven folks spoke against authorizing ICR to grant degrees. Among them were several science teachers and two representatives of science education organizations: the Science Teacher’s Association of Texas and the Texas Academy of Science.

Commissioner Paredes said in a press release that he based his recommendation on two considerations: ICR failed to demonstrate that the proposed degree program meets acceptable standards of science and science education, and the proposed degree is inconsistent with Coordinating Board rules that require the accurate labeling or designation of programs.

Dr. Henry Morris, president of the ICR, told the Observer he was not surprised by Paredes’ recommendation. Morris said there has been an “intensity of resistance from the academic community toward creationism in the last year in Texas.” He cited the dismissal of Texas Education Agency employee Chris Comer, the upcoming review of TEKS and critical thinking standards for Texas schools, and the pro-creationism movie “Expelled” as topics that had generated media attention and public debate in the last year.

Morris said if the Board votes to uphold the Commissioner’s recommendation, the Institute will appeal the decision in the next 45 days. If the appeal is denied, Morris said, the Institute may take its case to the Texas Supreme Court. “We were denied the right to operate in California and we went through a lengthy and onerous court case before we won,” he said. “It’s an option that we will consider in Texas if we are denied.”

Morris said the real issue at hand is “whether science can tolerate a different presumption about the beginning point of creation.”

The ICR attorney said it was a question of freedom of speech and the Constitution that the Institute should be granted the authority to teach science in Texas.

Steven Schafersman, who testified against ICR at the hearing, said he thought Commissioner Paredes had made a “decisive and strong decision based on sound reasoning.”

“The ICR attorney said it was about fair play and free speech, but I disagree,” Schafersman said. “They have the right to teach whatever they want, but not the right to have the state grant them the authority to teach pseudoscience.”

There’s always home schooling…

It’s a banner week for Texas book lovers, Observer nerds, and acolytes of soon-to-be-75 icon Willie Nelson.

First up, tonight, Wednesday April 23, former Observer editor and current columnist Jim Hightower stops in at Austin’s BookPeople to sign copies of Swim Against the Current, the collection of progressive success stories the straw-hatted populist penned with partner Susan DeMarco. You can read an Observer excerpt of the book here, then drop by and pick up your own autographed copy tonight at 7 p.m.

Next up is veteran journalist and Observer contributor Joe Nick Patoski, signing copies of his forthcoming tome Willie Nelson: An Epic Life, at Waterloo Records in Austin on Friday, April 25, at 5 pm. Patoski has already written definitive biographies of Stevie Ray Vaughan (co-authored with Bill Crawford) and Selena, and his Willie book is set to become the jewel in his triple crown of Texas music biographies.

And finally, come Saturday, April 26, Texas literature legend Bud Shrake, author of the novel Strange Peaches, the mega-selling Harvey Penick’s Little Red Book, and some early (read: pre-archived) journalism for the Observer, celebrates the publication of Land of the Permanent Wave: An Edwin “Bud” Shrake Reader, published by Texas State University’s Southwestern Writers Collection Series, which just happens to include a decades-old piece on Austin’s perennially receeding hip factor originally published in the Observer’s very pages. There’ll be a reading from Shrake’s work at 7 p.m. and a book-signing with Shrake and collection editor Steven L. Davis afterward. The hoo-hah happens on the 7th floor of Texas State’s Alkek Library in San Marcos. Call 512-245-2313 for more info.

The price of oil continues to skyrocket today with a barrel of crude going for $120. Remember back in the day when the media kept warning that oil would bypass the $100 a barrel ceiling? Yeah, well those days are long gone.

Leave aside whether the U.S. can ever wean itself off its dependence on foreign oil, how about simply curbing subsidies and other corporate welfare perks for oil companies? An army of high-paid oil and gas lobbyists know the best way to forestall action is to win the hearts (these can usually be located next to their campaign accounts) of politicians. Oil producers are doling out some of their record-breaking profits to fund the presidential race. The Center for Responsive Politics, a non-profit, runs a database called Oil Change International that tracks oil and gas contributions to the presidential candidates.

Republican candidate Senator John McCain is in the lead with $291,685, while Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton is close behind with $289,950 in contributions.

Democratic nominee Senator Barack Obama trails the two with $163,840 in oil and gas contributions.

The biggest recipient of oil and gas largess is former Republican presidential nominee Rudy Guliani who collected $659,158 in political contributions. The campaign contributions are current as of March 3, 2008, according to the database.

Oil giant Exxon Mobil is not taking any chances in its lobbying and has given contributions to all three candidates. Long a target for environmentalists, Exxon has given the most, $23,550, to Senator Obama and the least to Senator McCain with just $7,950. Senator Clinton received $15,700.

Hmmmm. Is that about mitigating a worst-case scenario or do they know something we don’t?