While we understand that Kansas City must solve its budget problems, the poorest of the poor should not bear this burden disproportionately.
Last summer we started a vegetable garden with the female inmates at the Municipal Correctional Institution. The women incarcerated at MCI have problems such as substance abuse, homelessness, mental illness and poverty. As we worked in the garden side by side with the inmates, we could clearly see the importance of the programs provided by superintendent Nancy Leazer and her staff. These programs help them leave MCI better able to cope with their problems and more likely to live productive lives.
As a result of our firsthand experience, we are proud of MCI and believe strongly that it should remain open. It is one thing that Kansas City is doing right!
Kathy Hoggard
Kansas City
Joanne Katz
Merriam
We do have a gender based legal system.
A fair amount of "criminals" have done no more wrong than being unable to pay an invoice that was uncurred by someone else under false pretense. It's called debtors prison, forbidden by the BOR and USC but full on legal today. Poverty is no excuse for true criminal behavior, if you can afford drugs and alcohol then you can afford to pay your bills. Yes, people need resources and the help if they choose to take it. Much of the problem is that many people do not want the help, they want to make excuses. Choices, it all comes down to choices people make, there are consequences for poor choices. Of course, with the new administration, those that make bad choices will be rewarded and those that make good choices will be punished.
Posted by: NoMoreMrNiceGuy | February 20, 2009 at 08:50 AM
The women incarcurated there are also criminals. They broke the law. Just because they are women, does not obsolve them from complying with the law. We cannot have a gender-based legal system
Posted by: Stifled Freedom | February 19, 2009 at 11:32 AM
"...the poorest of the poor should not bear this burden disproportionately."
Seriously? We're not talking about closing shelters or discontinuing assistance programs. We're talking about closing a jail and relocating prisoners (who are all at least accused of doing something to end up there) to a facility whose operation is cheaper for the city.
Whether or not you're for closing the facility, combining operations into a regional facility, or pushing inmates to private facilities, trying to paint the issue as one of "poor struggling prisoners who shouldn't have to deal with this" is dishonest and naive.
"These programs help them leave MCI better able to cope with their problems and more likely to live productive lives."
And OF COURSE, MCI is the only facility that could ever run a rehabilitation program, right? Surely you must think so, since this seems to be the basis of your argument against any modifications to it.
Posted by: Marctnts | February 19, 2009 at 07:19 AM