Monday, February 7, 2011

Sentenced to Miss the Superbowl: My first week teaching in the hall

Friday I went into San Mateo Juvenile hall to deliver my first lesson in legal education to a group of incarcerated youth. Being a masochist, I decided to do sex crimes first figuring that if I can get through making them all as uncomfortable as possible in my first lesson that it can only get better from there on out. It actually went surprisingly well, and I found that real-life stories of sex-crime incidents resonate much more than abstract facts. Compared to this, though, I think that property crimes will be much easier.

My does not publicly support political campaigns or public issues, however that does not mean that the individuals within it don't. In fact, one of the most powerful lobbying machines in California is the CCPOA (California Correctional Peace Officers Association) which was founded back in '57, and is a giant union for correctional officers (of which the "counselors" in the hall are no doubt members).

The mission of the CCPOA (according to their website: http://www.ccpoa.org/) is to "promote and enhance the correctional profession, protect the safety of those engaged in corrections and advocate for the laws, funding and policies needed to improve prison operations and protect public safety." They have helped secure passage of numerous legislative bills favorable to union members, including bills that increase prison terms, member pay, and enforce current drug laws. In this way, my CP is very much active in politics.


In terms of my weekly chapter questions, here they go:

  1. How has the recent verdict of Citizens United v. FEC changed campaign contributions in the U.S?
  2. Are interest groups the bane of democracy or an example of it?
  3. In what ways is the tea party movement different or similar to traditional Republicans.

1 comment:

  1. If I understand correctly, corporate donations to independent political media is not limited by the First Amendment.
    Obama has stated that the ruling undermines the influence of average Americans in elections while throwing additional power in the hands of special interest groups and lobbyists.

    In effect, the ruling allows corporations (I do not believe it limits foreign corporations) virtually limitless input through media coverage into U.S. elections. This of course has the potential to sway voters in favor of big business.

    ReplyDelete