This California ballot initiative seeks to end involuntary servitude for prisoners – Mother Jones

An inmate at Valley State Prison in Chowchilla, California, mops the floor of the prison’s kitchen.Andrew Burton/Getty

When J. Vasquez was incarcerated at Salinas Valley State Prison in California, he worked as a porter – sweeping, washing and taking out the trash. It paid less than 15 cents an hour, and as a “third shift” porter, he worked from 14 to 21. The timing of his shifts often coincided with prison programming, which was a source of constant frustration for Vasquez. He had gone to prison at 19 and sought to “take responsibility for (his) life.” But he was not allowed to take time off from work to attend classes. When a group of crime survivors came to the prison to talk to incarcerated people, Vasquez told me, “I thought about just putting that broom down and going anyway.” But he feared that refusing to work could result in a disciplinary violation, which would eventually appear in his parole application.

California Penal Code requires that most incarcerated people work while in prison, and if they refuse to do so, they can be disciplined – from losing access to phone calls to being placed in solitary confinement. This is because California’s state constitution has one caveat to its ban on involuntary servitude: It is permitted “to punish crime.” Proposal 6 will allow California voters to decide whether to remove this exemption from the Constitution.

For proponents of Prop 6, the exception in the state constitution is a clear and troubling remnant of slavery. “The practice of involuntary servitude is just another name for slavery in our California jails and prisons,” said Carmen-Nicole Cox, an attorney with ACLU California Action. Mother Jones.

But the movement to end involuntary servitude has not been as straightforward as one might imagine in California, and advocates face an uphill battle. A statewide vote conducted in early September showed that 50 percent of voters said they would vote against the proposal, while 46 percent would vote for it.

Of the 95,600 people incarcerated in California state prisons, about 65,000 work. This reflects the national trend: A 2022 ACLU report estimated that two out of three people incarcerated in state and federal prisons work. In California, the majority of jobs involve the day-to-day running of prisons: preparing food, doing laundry, or performing janitorial duties. Some jobs are unpaid, but most pay between 8 and 37 øre an hour.

About 7,000 incarcerated people work in manufacturing and service jobs — such as making license plates, processing eggs and making dentures — through the California Prison Industry Authority. These jobs are sought after because they pay more – their range is between 35 cents and $1 an hour. About 1,600 people work in conservation camps where they respond to fires and other natural disasters. They are paid between $1.45 to $3.90 per day and paid an additional $1 per hour for emergency firefighting.

Currently, at least 15 states have constitutions that allow involuntary servitude as punishment for crime. Lawmakers around the country have moved to ban forced labor in prisons by amending their state constitutions. In 2022 voters approved changes in Alabama, Oregon, Tennessee and Vermont – joining Colorado, Utah and Nebraska.

In 2020, Sydney Kamlager-Dove, then a member of the California Assembly, introduced an early version of a ban on forced labor in prisons. But that failed to pass the state Senate after the California Department of the Treasury opposed it, writing in a report that, given the amendment’s broad wording, its economic consequences were largely unknown. The report warned that it would cost taxpayers about $1.6 billion to pay incarcerated workers California’s minimum wage, which was $15.50 in 2023. Plus, the report said, the measure could leave the state vulnerable to potential lawsuits from incarcerated people. In Colorado, for example imprisoned people sued in 2022 because they were still forced to work despite a constitutional amendment banning involuntary servitude in prisons.

The report also pointed to the broad definition of involuntary servitude. Judges can sentence someone to community service instead of a fine or prison – because the work is unpaid, it can also be considered involuntary work.

Democratic state Sen. Steve Glazer joined five Republicans in voting against the measure. After that failed, Glazer said in a declaration that the issue of forced labor in prisons was better suited for the legislature to decide. He argued that a unilateral ban on the work requirement would “undermine our rehabilitation programs” and “make prisons more difficult to operate safely.”

This time, one accompanying bill— intended to address concerns about inmate pay — would allow the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to set pay for incarcerated workers if a constitutional amendment passes.

In January, Assemblywoman Lori Wilson brought back the measure, which was included in a package of bills is recommended by the California Legislative Black Caucus as part of reparations for descendants of enslaved Americans.

Although the current version of the ballot easily passed both the state Assembly and Senate — with support from Glazer — many of the same concerns remained. Glazer recently shared The capital’s public radio that he is still concerned about “unintended consequences” for the prisons. There has been speculation that if incarcerated people refuse to work in laundry and kitchen positions, the prisons will find it difficult to function. Glazer told the radio station that he had been assured that the state could still force people to perform “duties”.

Financial concerns in particular persist. Even if incarcerated people are not paid minimum wage, the change could still result in higher prison operating costs. A summary prepared by the Attorney General’s office warned that prisons may have to find “other ways to encourage work” if incarcerated people are not disciplined for refusing to do so. This could include raising wages or offering “time credits” from a prison sentence.

Advocates say these concerns reflect a misunderstanding of prison life. Vasquez, who is now director of policy and legal services at Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice, said incarcerated people often want to work, even if it’s just to get out of their cells. There are also some “fringe benefits” to working, he explained. As a porter, Vasquez was able to get some extra cleaning supplies and extra food could be available for those working in the kitchen. And since there are only about two-thirds of incarcerated positions available, there are sometimes waiting lists for jobs.

Moreover, advocates say it is misguided to calculate only the cost benefit of Prop 6 against the burden on taxpayers. Brandon Sturdivant, the campaign manager for Prop 6, says eliminating forced labor in prisons will allow incarcerated people to pursue rehabilitation and better prepare to return to their communities. Sturdivant said his father spent 12 years in prison, spending time making license plates instead of “getting the tools he needed to get out and be a father and a pillar of his community.”

Proponents of Prop 6 also point out that education and rehabilitation programs have been found to reduce recidivism. And this has its own economic benefit – now costs $132,860 a year to incarcerate someone in California. To Sturdivant, the biggest hurdle in passing Prop 6 is reaching and educating voters, which the coalition of organizations supporting the ballot initiative has tried to solve through phone banking. When they talk to voters, they try to dispel misunderstandings and frame the issue in personal, humanitarian terms. Esteban Núñez, a former incarcerated consultant and strategist, said that basically, Prop 6 presents voters with a “moral issue” and a chance to “restore dignity to those within.”