This RT Article Needs To Be Shared Everywhere

The Riverside Regional Jail, like our Middle River one, houses inmates from surrounding
jurisdictions. Meanwhile Middle River Regional Jail is considering expanding, while
Riverside now has room to spare.

The Riverside Regional Jail has relied on Chesterfield County for a significant part of its inmate population, but the Chesterfield Jail's numbers are projected to drop by 34% this year, leaving the RRJ hurting for operating funds. 

Chesterfield and now Rappahannock are two Virginia jails that are utilizing the McShin Foundation's heroin treatment program, as noted in the article below (used with the reporter's permission):

Drop in inmates at Riverside Regional Jail fuels a budget deficit of millions of dollars

By Mark Bowes

Richmond Times Dispatch

Tuesday, March 5, 2019

Riverside Regional Jail will operate with a $2.4 million budget deficit in the coming fiscal year, due largely to a substantial projected drop in the average number of inmates the facility will house and climbing pharmaceutical services.

Riverside receives nearly half its funding or about $20 million, from the revenue provided by the seven localities in Central Virginia that use the jail.

Chesterfield County supplies nearly half of the inmates, and because that number is projected to drop by 34 percent, the county's share of the budget will fall from $11.9 million in the current fiscal year to a projected $8.4 million in fiscal 2020.

Chesterfield's sheriff, Karl Leonard, attributed the county's drop in part to rehabilitation programs his department has created for offenders with substance abuse problems and more inmates being diverted by county judges into diversion programs rather than sending them to jail. In addition to inmates sent to Riverside, Chesterfield runs a separate county jail that houses roughly 300 inmates.

"Our rehabilitative measures are having an effect," Leonard said. "We're seeing less repeat offenders and our overall numbers are going down."

The jail's 14-member governing body last week passed a $42.6 million operating budget -- with two dissenting votes -- that includes a projected deficit of $2,463,450. The board voted to fill the gap with "rainy day" reserves.

(Email mbowes@timesdispatch.com for a complete copy of this article)

Our Local Granddaughter's Way Above Average Life Science Project

Six newborn chicks got a lot of attention at the science fair.

Madelyne, our 7th grade granddaughter, was one of over a hundred students from Harrisonburg City Schools who took part in the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) Science Fair held recently at our local mall.

Madelyne has long been interested in chickens, and has kept several laying hens in her back yard for some years, both as a hobby and as a way of providing some eggs for the family. So for her science project she and a friend bought some fertilized eggs and a small incubator and managed to have six baby chicks hatch just in time for their exhibit.

What made this unique was that, to the best of my knowledge, theirs was the only exhibit that had anything to do with the life sciences, the study of plant, animal and human biology.

That surprised, and in a way concerned, me. Shouldn't more of our offspring show an interest in the care of plants, trees, birds, animals and other organisms critical to our survival?

Of course, things like robot technology, applied physics and computer science also have their place, but who is going to grow our food?

Hopefully we'll always have enough people like Madelyne who can provide us with fresh vegetables and some good eggs from her back yard free range chickens.

Here's a great 2011 link to more on our grandchildren and nature. 
https://harvyoder.blogspot.com/2011/03/million-thousand-million-earthworms.html

Be A Solar Sponsor: And Help Gemeinschaft Save $5000 a Year!

Today, Give Solar is kicking off our campaign to help Gemeinschaft Home to go solar!  In May, Green Hill Solar, with the help of solar barn raising volunteers, will install a 26.2 kilowatt solar system on the roof of Gemeinschaft.  The solar array will help Gemeinschaft save $5000 per year for the next 25-30 years.

The mission of Gemeinschaft Home is to provide cutting edge therapeutic services to nonviolent offenders who have been released or diverted from incarceration in support of a transition to healthy community living. They have been playing a crucial role in this community since 1985.   

Will you help Gemeinschaft go solar?  We are looking for 300 people to donate $20 to $30 to help make this happen.  In addition, we are looking for sponsors such as businesses, churches, and community organizations.  Sponsors are asked to give a larger donation to help make this project possible.  The total fundraising goal is $28,000.  Through grant funding and early contributions, we have already raised $11,000.

Thank you for your support of Gemeinschaft Home. Donate here. Together, we can do this!

Five Reasons Jails Should Abolish 'Keep Fees’

Jails are to provide for both the care and custody of inmates.

In recent decades Virginia sheriffs have been permitted, but not mandated, to impose a daily fee of $1-3 per inmate as a way of recovering some of the costs of operating their jail. Here we charge $1, which raises about 7/10th of one percent of our jail’s annual budget of over $10 million. Detainees transferred from here to the Middle River Jail (due to local overcrowding) are charged $3 per day, which for a family earning $25,000 a year is 4% of their income.

Here are five good reasons for abolishing such fees:

1. It’s an "excessive fine” (see Eighth Amendment), not because of its amount, but because it is “in excess of” what a court has already established as the just punishment for a sentenced person’s offense.

2. While the sheriff is acting within his rights, it sets an unusual precedent to have a law enforcement officer determining and imposing any kind of additional sanction, thereby taking on a role as a judge and lawmaker in addition to that of law enforcer.

3. We’re assured jailed individuals aren’t forced to pay this fee, but unless they do so they have only limited access to the commissary, phone service (except for collect calls) and other needs. But if the fee is a legitimate one, legally imposed by the sheriff, one would normally expect it to be enforced. Meanwhile, inmates find clandestine ways of getting canteen items through their cellmates’ accounts.

4. Since most inmates have no way of paying keep fees while incarcerated, it is unfair to have their loved ones feel pressed to do so, since they are not the ones who should be punished. Even $1 per day creates an unfair burden for families who have just lost a wage earner and who may be living on or below the poverty level, as opposed to families who can easily afford to pay it. In addition, there is a $4 transaction fee for every deposit, large or small, made in an inmate’s account. This means inmates who are well to do or who come from well off families can pay their fees and make as many phone calls—and purchase as many canteen items—as they wish, while  those who live on or near the poverty level (the majority) cannot.

5. Keep fees are especially unfair for the 40% or more inmates in jail awaiting trial and who haven’t yet been judged guilty of a crime. While they may be technically entitled to a refund if they are found to be innocent, the very fact that they are jailed and wearing orange jumpsuits represents an unjust presumption of guilt.

The Albemarle Regional Jail is slated to address this issue in their March meeting, and is expected to abolish their fee. We should do the same.

Relationships Need A Periodic Flush Of Stored Up Hurts And Grievances

Complete forgiveness is based on true repentance.

When couples "fall out of love" it's often due to an accumulation of grievances that have gotten in the way of celebrating the love they once had. Unforgiven and unresolved offenses can build up over time and become a part of a growing mound of misery they can no longer find a way around.

Such relationships may need some serious forgiveness sessions, in which each partner expresses sincere remorse for past wrongs, and without any rationalizations or defensiveness asks for reconciliation and forgiveness. The other partner, if willing and ready to do so, then expresses complete forgiveness, but only if and when he or she is willing to commit to never bringing up that grievance again. Any superficial confession of wrongs on the offender's part, and any unwillingness to truly declare the slate clean on the part of the person harmed, can become a kind of cheap grace that results in a superficial, pseudo-healing of the relationship.

Once having cleared the slate in a forgiveness ritual, couples need to commit to keeping short accounts going forward, dealing with any current offenses as soon as possible after they occur rather adding them to their grievance pile. In fact, if true repentance and forgiveness have occurred, that pile no longer exists.

True forgiveness goes far beyond a mere "Let's pretend this never happened." It is not a unilateral blank check declaring everything is all right when it isn't. On the offender's part, thorough-going repentance must be accompanied by a willingness to do whatever necessary to help make restitution and to commit to never repeating the same offense. On the part of the one granting forgiveness, it means a commitment to never bringing up that offense again.

When the slate is truly cleared, love can grow again.

For more on true forgiveness: 
https://harvyoder.blogspot.com/2011/01/should-we-ever-not-forgive.html

Guest Post: 67% Favor Rehabilitation Over Punishment

U.S. Polls Favor Rehabilitation over Incarceration

by Matt Clarke - Prison Legal News

Building more prisons and jails ranked dead last on the list of quality of life priorities, behind providing more jobs and job training, building and improving roads and infrastructure, strengthening community-based mental health treatment, increasing community-based drug and alcohol treatment, creating parks and green space, investing in violence-reduction programs, reducing racism and bias, and investing in arts and culture.

For the ACLU poll, the Benenson Strategy Group interviewed over 1,000 adults across the country, 41 percent of whom described themselves as conservatives, 31 percent as liberals and 23 percent as moderates. Their level of agreement was significant, with 71 percent overall supporting a reduction in the prison population - 87 percent of Democrats, 67 percent of Independents and 57 percent of Republicans, including 52 percent of those who reported voting for President Donald Trump.

Almost all - 91 percent - agreed that the U.S. criminal justice system needs reform, and more than two-thirds said they would be more likely to vote for political candidates who favor reducing the prison population and spending the savings on drug treatment and mental health programming. Nearly as many - 72 percent - would prefer a candidate opposed to mandatory minimum sentences.

The poll also found support for reforming the money bail system, with two-thirds of respondents opposing pre-trial detention simply due to lack of funds to make bail. Perhaps most glaring was the finding that just 13 percent were aware that non-violent offenders account for 75 percent of jail populations.

According to Jasmine Heiss, director of outreach and public affairs strategist at the Vera Institute of Justice, local incarceration rates are strongly influenced by local actors such as judges and prosecutors. A judge who always gives out the maximum sentence or a prosecutor who always seeks the maximum penalties will increase a county's incarceration rate. Such over-incarceration is not linked to less crime; instead, the economic distress resulting from higher incarceration rates may drive up the community's crime rate.

In August 2016, the Alliance for Safety and Justice released the results of the first-ever survey of crime victims' perspectives on the U.S. criminal justice system. A majority wanted prosecutors to look for alternatives to incarceration to hold criminal defendants accountable.

Sixty-one percent preferred shorter sentences to spending on incarceration, while 38 percent believed incarceration actually increased recidivism. Eighty-nine percent of crime victims favored additional spending on schools and education over building more prisons and jails, 83 percent supported more spending on mental health treatment and 73 percent wanted increased drug treatment instead of incarceration.

The survey found that young and poor people were more likely to be victims of crime. The victimization rate for those between 18 and 24 was twice that of all other age groups, and the rate for those earning less than $15,000 a year was thrice that of those making at least $75,000. Over a third of violent crime victims had previously been a victim of violent crime. Two-thirds of the victims surveyed received no help after the crime; most who received help got it from family and friends.

"The data is clear - when it comes to criminal justice, Americans want reform and rehabilitation," concluded Udi Ofer, who serves as deputy national political director and director of the Campaign for Smart Justice at the ACLU.

Now we just need elected officials to listen to the people who support criminal justice reforms.

Sources: www.citylab.com, www.gqrr.com, www.shadowproof.com, www.crimereport.org, www.aclu.org, www.vera.org

Yes, I am Pro-Life, And Oppose Abortion Except Under The Most Extreme Circumstances

These are some of the tools used in later, and legal, abortions. 

In spite of my having written numerous pro-life posts, I'm sometimes accused of not speaking out strongly enough against abortion, or not denouncing it in the same way I do killing in warfare, for example, or protecting the already born from starvation or from lack of clean water or medical care. 

So let me repeat: I believe all life is precious, and that we should do all we can to preserve and enhance it at every stage from conception to natural death. Period. 

But as a male I want to be appropriately humble about how I weigh in on the issue, knowing I will never be the victim of incest or a rape that might result in my carrying an unwanted pregnancy. Nor will I ever have to carry a baby that is so seriously deformed that it  may have no chance of living more than a few painful hours after its birth. So I fully realize that it's easy for men like me to pontificate on what all women should do in every case, acknowledging that few of us would eagerly step up and offer to carry another's difficult pregnancy if that were even possible, which it isn't. So it can be all too easy for us to claim a cheap form of "higher-than-thou" moral ground on this issue.

Besides, it is men who directly cause pregnancies (except for cases of artificial insemination), and who should therefore accept a full share of blame for every abortion.

Having said that, in principle I remain very conservative about preserving life, and am not even comfortable with the use of a morning after pill (except in cases of rape or incest), much less supporting abortion generally as a convenient means of birth control. And as a father, grandfather and fellow member of the human family, I strongly oppose abortions based on a fear that a child may simply be physically or mentally impaired. All human life is precious and sacred.

In a recent Facebook conversation I followed, one that generated over 40 comments, I noted an interesting ratio of 8 men to 2 women expressing strongly held convictions. The men and the two women were equally divided in their positions, with one side equating even the use of an IUD with capital murder. Others, while not favoring terminating any form of human life, even at conception or when an embryo is still less than the size of a raison, nevertheless don't see that as equivalent to terminating the life of a more fully developed human fetus.

Certainly in principle we would all agree that each human person who dies should be given a name, be duly registered as a deceased member of some human family, and be provided a proper casket, funeral, burial and grave marker. Should we actually do all of those things whenever there is a miscarriage, either a natural one or an induced one, and whether during a very early stage of development or a later one? So far in human and Christian history we have not.

My point is that many who decry terminating a human life at any stage, nevertheless do some make distinctions regarding the nature and extent of personhood associated with prenatal human life.

Side note: Human life, far from simply beginning at conception, is actually a part of every male's sperm and each female's ovum, and so it continues at conception--continues in a sequence of forms and through various stages of human development.

I know some will severely criticize me for attempting to nuance the issue in this way, rather than insisting that any termination of a pregnancy is not only wrong (with which I agree except in the most serious of medical circumstances) but is exactly the same as murdering an already born member of the human family.    

Bottom line: I fully support the Mennonite Church's position on abortion, as follows: 

https://harvyoder.blogspot.com/2016/10/until-recently-evangelicals-condoned.html