Let's Take a Look

I found this worth-reading article about Texas and its inmates on AAS' site.  This was published not too long ago, on February 14th.  It talks about how we are so proud of ourselves cutting down criminals and putting them in the right place.  However, what leaves everyone standing in awe is the cost of keeping these guys in and alive.  The price of incarnation costs rises along with health care.  Even, our universities (University of Texas & Texas Tech) are giving out a hand to provide these inmates healthcare.  Also, the Texas prison board made a $46 million deal with the Huntsville Memorial Hospital to help inmates incarcerated in area units.  This article will definitely have a variety of people in the audience.  Each mindset will have its own thinking and its own logic to where money should be going.

Texas statistics show : "older inmates are 7 percent of the 160,000 inmate population, but they account for nearly a third of hospitalization costs, according to a recent report in The Texas Tribune..."  1/3 of hospitalization costs?!  That's crazy and only to think that is just 7% of the inmate population.

"No rational person would argue that poor lifestyle choices, illness or age should be a ticket out of prison for dangerous offenders, but neither would a rational person ignore the responsibilities the state assumes when it incarcerates someone. Prisoners have to be fed, clothed and treated when they become ill."


I agree with what this article says.  However, I do know that some people will in fact disagree with this.  They may believe that their money shouldn't be going towards care for inmates...instead,  them suffering and dying is just enough for their punishment. We have people locked up, it is our responsibility to to have them serve time.  In order for them to serve time, they need to be up and about, not dying from starvation or illnesses.  It's only how we manage our money to keep these guys in.  Justice will have to be served sooner or later.
.

Good/Bad Law for TX?

This is a very interesting article that I found online about Texas.  There are so many issues to this day about abortions and also many debates about it that seem to never have an end.  In this article, it says that a federal judge won’t attempt to block a law that requires women to have a sonogram before having an abortion.  However, a district judge (Sam Sparks) finds it wrong and wanted to sway the law towards a different direction because he found it unconstitutional.  I believe Sparks is right because it invades people’s privacy.  Though there are so many ways to think how it being wrong, I could also see there being ways that it could be right.  Like I said before, this topic is so controversial.  It’s definitely worth a read.  Even though Mr. Sparks tried to change it up, federal appeals court had overturned his decision and has been said that the law needs to be put in place.   However, this article doesn’t have an end to it yet because it is still said that the Center for Reproductive Rights will continue to “pursue appeals” towards sonograms prior to abortion.