Linda Dunn
Did you know that slavery is still legal in the United States?
The Thirteenth Amendment has an exemption.“…Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”
A joint resolution to amend the amendment, removing the “punishment” clause, was introduced to Congress 06/14/2023, that would clarify: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude may be imposed as a punishment for a crime.”
The odds are not in favor of its passage, largely because most of us see nothing wrong with the original wording.
In fact, we Americans seem to want those imprisoned to suffer — likely because we see this as a deterrent to future crimes but also possibly because we don’t think this is something that is ever going to apply to us law-abiding citizens.
What most of us don’t realize, however, is that the Thirteenth Amendment applies equally to the mass murderer and the clueless cousin whose “harmless prank” is tried as an act of vandalism before a no-nonsense judge.
Once convicted of a crime, it’s up to the criminal justice system to determine what follows. Thus, while it is unlikely that Cousin Clueless will be assigned to a chain gang, such an assignment is legal in some states and courts have ruled in the past that this does not violate the Eighth Amendment (cruel and unusual punishment). If he is paid anything at all while assigned to an involuntary work detail in prison, it will likely be far less than minimum wage and as much as 80% of those “wages” may be withheld to cover “room and board.” At the same time, some things we might consider essential, such as hygiene products, medical care and calls home to worried loved ones, can have outrageous fees.
We can look at it from the perspective of this reducing our tax bills by forcing those incarcerated to cover some of the expenses of their imprisonment; or we can take a long view and wonder how this type of labor versus other measures such as educational and vocational programs, might reduce recidivism rates. (Indiana’s rate is 38.2% for those facing a new conviction or violating parole.)
Inmates in private prisons fare no better than those in government-run facilities and worse in some ways since their recidivism rates are similar and those in private prisons typically spend 90 days more in prison than those in government-funded ones. (Thus, eliminating most “cost savings” for us taxpayers.)
Private prisons — which account for about $374 million annually — can also receive federal funds while still assigning prisoners to involuntary labor and charging them fees. Some of us would call this “double-dipping.”
The work that these prisoners are performing is more than we might expect. The non-profit “Prison Policy Initiative” estimates the annual value of incarcerated labor from US prisons and jails at about $2 billion. That’s a large number but a pithy sum compared to what imprisonment costs us taxpayers. USA Facts (https://usafacts.org/articles/how-much-do-states-spend-on-prisons/) estimated a combined $55 billion is spent annually for state prisons.
I don’t know about anyone else, but my hope is that prison sentences will accomplish two goals: (1) rehabilitate those prisoners who can be rehabilitated so they become productive, tax-paying citizens; and (2) protect us from those who would harm us if they were released back into society.
None of us who want this change to our constitution are in favor of “coddling criminals.” We just want an end to slavery in any form.
And it is slavery.
In 1871, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled that a convicted person was “a slave of the State.” Eight years later, a federal circuit judge noted: “We think it well settled that it is not the function of the courts to superintend the treatment and discipline of persons in penitentiaries, but only to deliver from imprisonment those who are illegally confined.”
Correctional administrators thus hold that prisoners lose all their constitutional rights after conviction. They have privileges, not rights, and privileges can be taken away arbitrarily.
This is not the first time a joint resolution to amend the 13th Amendment was introduced to Congress, and probably not the last, but it’s unlikely any of these efforts will succeed.
The reality is that we do not want to abolish slavery and involuntary servitude in the United States. At least, not when it applies to someone who has been convicted of a crime.
A lifelong resident of Hancock County, Linda Dunn is an author and retired Department of Defense employee.
