THREAD 🧵 This game-changing legislation just introduced in NYC has been a long time in the works and has the potential to revolutionize correctional telecom by reversing its invasive reach into our privacy and uprooting the underlying justification for its egregious prices.
This effort dates back to 2018, when we passed another first-of-its-kind bill in NYC that made all jail calls free and spurred a nationwide movement for free correctional communication. During the hearing, councilmembers began asking about the surveillance of jail calls.
A key concern emerged around the universal monitoring of jail calls: Was it fair that only people detained pretrial, many of whom simply couldn’t afford bail, were being surveilled, thus hindering their ability to participate in their own defense, and not those who were released?
Note: NYC did not begin the universal monitoring and recording of all jail calls until just 2008. When it did, the rationale was simply that everyone else was doing it. And if the city didn’t have to bear the cost, because families were paying for calls, why not?
The City Council's concerns came to fruition quickly. A 2021 audit revealed that over 1,500 calls between 400 people awaiting trial and their attorneys were illegally recorded by the city’s jail telecom vendor, and many handed over to prosecutors. nydailynews.com/2021/03/20/ove…
It’s far from shocking as the city’s jail telecom vendor, Securus, which owns over 40% of the nation’s correctional telecom market, has been sued at least 10 times for similar violations in other jurisdictions, from California to Maine. vice.com/en/article/7kb…
Worse yet, in recent years, the city’s corrections department, like many across the country, has partnered with Securus to quietly expand the surveillance measures deployed over jail calls, including the collection of biometric data like voice prints.
Securus is developing databases from the data collected in its contracted facilities to sell to law enforcement agencies. Thus, the biometric data of incarcerated people is retained long after their release, so is the data of the loved ones they speak to. theintercept.com/2019/01/30/pri…
A recent lawsuit brought by a coalition of NYC public defenders details the expansive reach of this surveillance apparatus and its disproportionate impact on Black and brown communities, which make up more than 90% of the city’s jail population. nydailynews.com/2024/04/16/mil…
And this isn’t just about NYC, because while the city has free jail calls, correctional telecoms like Securus use their surveillance tools to justify the exorbitant rates they charge in other places. This bill can undermine a core tenet of the industry’s pricing model.
Readying to release new regs in response to the Martha Wright Reed Act, the FCC is contending with how much of the cost of these surveillance tools vendors can recoup through call rates. We argue none. Consumers should not pay for services that harm them. cbsnews.com/news/prison-ca…
Note: Correctional telecom began as a myriad of small surveillance firms no one would pay for. It wasn’t until they provided telecom services after the AT&T monopoly breakup in 1984 and shifted the cost of their surveillance tools onto families that they managed to make money.
Today’s introduction of the End Correctional Community Surveillance (ECCoS) Act undermines the industry’s argument that surveillance is necessary to the provision of correctional telecom. It is not. It is a prosecutorial tool that has nothing to do with facility security.
It’s time that we reprioritize and uphold our constitutional right to privacy. From privileged attorney-client calls to intimate conversations between spouses, all jail calls should be protected from warrantless surveillance. ECCoS will do just that. worthrises.org/blogpost/only-…
Thank you to City Councilmembers @GaleBrewerNYC and @dr_yusefsalaam for leading on this initiative and all of our partners: @BklynDefender @BronxDefenders @LegalAidNYC @MHPUJC and NY County Defender Services.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A mother is no less a mother because she’s incarcerated or her child is. Here’s the story of one mother eager to know her child is safe. 🧵
“This Mother’s Day, do right by us so that we can do right by our children, no matter where they are.” - Susan (NJ) nj.com/opinion/2024/0…
“My son Evan often came home from school in tears. From the age of 5, he was bullied by classmates. Like every mother, my impulse was to hold him close… Now I look back on those days with longing. They were almost easy compared to my day-to-day life today. Evan is in prison.”
“It’s been a few years, and I still wake up every morning wondering if he is alive. He struggles with depression and anxiety as well as addiction after years of self-medicating. I am on edge every day because too many times, I have had to step in to beg for him to receive care.”
First it was, if you make prison calls free, the vendors will pull all their phones out of the walls. Now it's, if you make calls free, we need millions more for increased monitoring costs. These are industry lobbying points to block efforts to make prison calls free. 🧵
Predatory prison telecoms charge high rates for calls and use the concept of security to justify them. Yet, their rates vary dramatically from one jurisdiction to another. Why? Not because their services wildly differ, but because some states are better at negotiating.
For example, in NY, Securus charges 3.6 cents per minute for calls. In IL, Securus charges 0.9 cents per minute for calls. IL is NOT accepting an inferior level of security services to pay 4x less. It just better negotiated rates for people in its custody.
THREAD. Predatory prison telecom Securus has just defaulted on over $1 BILLION in debt. After years of preying on incarcerated people and their families, driving many into debt, Securus can't pay its own. Here's the story about how advocacy made this happen.
Securus, owned by Platinum Equity, and its competitor ViaPath (fka GTL) hold 80% of the prison telecom market. Their duopoly allows them to charge egregious rates: $8.25 for a 15-min phone call, $15 for a 25-min video call, and $0.50 for an "email."
Given prison wages, it’s often families who pay for communication. They make impossible choices between paying for a call from a loved one inside and their bills. 1 in 3 falls into debt to stay connected, and some are forced to cut contact entirely. ellabakercenter.org/who-pays-the-t…
Once upon a time, there was a prison telecom named Global Tel Link. It got bad press for exploiting incarcerated people + their families, so it changed its name to @ViaPathTech. Unable to shake its image, private equity owner, American Securities, tried to sell it and failed. 🧵
Global Tel Link is one of the nation's two largest prison telcoms. It is consistently admonished by families, advocates, legislators, and others for charging egregious rates for its subpar communications services: phone calls, video calls, text messages.
The corporation has even charged incarcerated people BY THE MINUTE to read books, including books that are free to the public by thanks to Project Gutenberg. reason.com/2019/11/22/wes…
There are initiatives to abolish slavery on ballots around the country today. Yes, we're still working to abolish slavery because of an exception in the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. But some are voting no due to misinformation.
A civics lesson is in order. (THREAD)
This is specifically at issue in Louisiana, where efforts to end slavery are seriously in peril. Some, like the original sponsor who has now abandoned the bill, advocates, and thousands of incarcerated people in his state, have argued that the language on the ballot is confusing.
It's true, the ballot language could definitely be clearer, but the language of the actual measure is clear and definitely abolishes slavery. Confusing ballot language should not be the bases for voting no to abolish slavery. If you're not sure, check the actual bill language.
Recently, @nysfocus reported on NYC's history with predatory jail vendor @JPay_com. Now, let me tell you a disappointing story about NYC's investment relationship with JPay & its parent corps that even progressive Comptroller @BradLander hasn't dropped. 🧵 nysfocus.com/2022/10/21/new…
To start, JPay was founded by Ryan Shapiro (currently facing insider trading charges) as a costly prison & jail money transfer vendor. Over the yrs it grew to also sell tablets, tablet-based services, and debit release cards using predatory practices. nytimes.com/2021/10/19/bus…
In 2015, Shapiro sold JPay to predatory prison telecom @SecurusTech, known for its egregious prison & jail call rates as high as a dollar a minute, for $250M. buzzfeednews.com/article/daniel…