Is there a win-win-no loss-win opportunity for the Governor, the MA GOP, House and Senate Dems, and we the people, respectively?
Maybe.
CORI reform.
A bunch of good ideas from Boston Foundation here (pdf).
The issue? Guys (mostly) who have stopped looking for blue collar jobs and entry level service jobs. Whenever they looked, their criminal record came up, and the employer figured — why risk someone who committed assault?
If the Gov tries to lead on this, for a lot of obvious reasons, it will fail.
The reform playbook so far has been backwards. Lefty advocates of reform emphasize the “innocents who are hurt by a flawed system.” These innocents DO exist. Some reports have mistakes. All reports are hard to read. But it’s a surefire frame to lose the argument.
Instead, I say the Gov goes to China: the GOP.
He asks them to come up with a CORI reform plan they like.
Most R’s agree on some basics, I’d bet: that we want ex-cons to get jobs and not live off the dole, and that employers should have access to records, even old crimes, and make the judgment for themselves about “what is old enough to be relevant.”
My guess is that the R’s would suggest a system of enhanced tax credits to businesses who do choose to hire people with a record. (there’s actually a little-known tax credit now, but it’s just $1500; I’m thinking $5,000). They’d also support some reasonable modifications, particularly to help the innocents clean up their reports (just like you can fix errors on your credit report), while maximizing information and protection for employers.
Meanwhile, R’s are probably not going to “require training for people who read CORI reports” since they’re not big fans of required trainings. They’re not going to seal juvie records. They’re not going to hide criminal records that are > than 3 years old from employers. You get the idea. This is all stuff that the State Senate wants and it just ain’t gonna happen.
R’s get a chance at relevance, doesn’t take anything away from Sal and Trav, bipartisan bill gets signed, low $.
What say you? Another silly notion gone wild?
Nixon only went to China because he could rely on the USA. Otherwise, it would have been see nas a stunt. You’re proposing, it seems to me, a stunt.
<
p>
If Deval Patrick runs to the Republicans on this, it merely confirms the impression that he has forsaken understanding and allies within the Democratic Party. It also sends quite the message that Deval turns to the GOP to get things accomplished in Massachusetts.
I’m working with the D’s in the Lege on health care, education, budget, and public safety.
<
p>
But I want to try to reach across the aisle, too. Here’s one area where we may have some common ground.
I think a political stunt is perhaps if you do something for gain that really only benefits yourself.
<
p>
However, we really do need CORI reform, and I’d be very surprised if it goes anywhere as is.
<
p>
My proposal is to enact some good public policy, and the only way is with some clever politics.
<
p>
Yours truly, Lee Majors
…if we had any proof that he were. I’m just saying I’d sooner see some tangible accomplishments (not good intentions) working with Democrats in those fields before he aims for tangible accomplishments working with Republicans.
even remember that there are any Republicans in the State House. Or care.
<
p>
Sure, the GOP would love the spotlight. But the GOP is irrelevant on Beacon Hill. Patrick needs to work with the powers that be, not the powers that wannabe.
Why change te CORI laws. People that have turned their lives around show it by the fact that they have gotten out of the can, and put their nose to the grindstone and worked their way back. I know more than one man and woman who has done this. Changing CORI to let domestic batterers, child abusers, sociopaths, thieves, rapists, to prey on the unsuspecting in our society is criminal in and of itself. What’s this, back to the Norman Mailer school of penalogy? We want the Ben LaGuer’s back out amongst us to batter and rape women? Right!
97% of people in prison will be out at some point and they need to find jobs after jail. If not, their only choice will be to go back to crime. You don’t need a CORI check to break into a house or deal coke.
How about the criminals who have taken positions in nursing homes, day care centers, hospitals and in places where the most vulnerable amongst us reside? Get a clue.
<
p>
CORI laws ensure that these people get jobs working as laberers on construction sites etc. You think that someone who has done two or three indecent A&B’s should be working in a nursing home? A rapist should be working in an office building, a pedophile in a day care center? CORI laws protect those who are unsuspecting. Predators do just that.
Sure, I agree that someone with a record of pedophilia shouldn’t be working in a daycare center. That is quite a bit short of how far the CORI system goes as I understand it now.
<
p>
Let’s say you ran a Taco Bell, you could hire:
A) Guy with a felony record (let’s say breaking and entering)
B) Guy with no record at all
<
p>
Who’re you gonna hire? Repeat that 12 times and the guy with the felony record is right back to committing felonies, or on the dole or in jail. None of those outcomes are acceptable.
<
p>
Scare-mongering doesn’t make good policy.
…I actually feel sorry for Nixon. He was probably not a bad man. He just got himself caught up over his head, beginning with his lies of having a “secret plan” of getting the US out of the Vietnam War. But nobody could have done any differently. Humphry wouldn’t have.
<
p>
Regarding DP going to China, I don’t know the official reason that he’s going it’s probable that it is something of a trade mission. The governor of a state is usually the chief trade advertiser of the state, and trade advertising is one of his–or her–duties.
… he is going to find inner peace.
<
p>
Patrick isn’t going to China, raj (as far as we know).
<
p>
The poster was making what we sometimes call an analogy. He was suggesting that Patrick working with the MA GOP would be like Nixon going to China.
<
p>
I’m pretty sure.
Just want to lock em up longer. Many (most?) republicans don’t get that after prison (and preparing a prisoner for after prison) is kinda important and, if we did it better, would help reduce the costs of the prison system in this country.
That’s why we have parole boards. They keep the bad guys in and the good guys (potentially) out. Recividism is not because these people can’t get jobs, it’s because they are sociopaths. They’ll spend their entire lives going through the revolving door. The problem lays in our societal structure. The fabric of society has been torn and nearly destroyed. Children are throw away and an inconvenience.
<
p>
Why are people being murdered in Roxbury/Dorchester/Mattapan/Springfield as if it is Baghdad? Jurors in fear of their lives. Witnesses terrified of coming forward. It all goes back to the family.
America has so many sociopaths, then? After all, we have way more prisoners per capita than other westernized countries out there.
<
p>
We may have parole boards, but we don’t go anywhere near enough to addressing the problems about why these prisoners keep ending up coming back. Heck, even if they were all really just sociopaths (which is a HUGE assumption – and a rather rude comment – on your part), there are treatments out there, treatments prisoners aren’t getting.
Why is it rude. What is the definition of insanity (not really but) enagaging in repeated acts of inappropriate behavior expecting different results.
<
p>
We live in a free society. You can do anything you want and the there may be a consequence and on the other hand there may not. Quite a few people just roll the dice. How else would you explain the fact that many of our solons go from the state legislature to prison? The last two house speakers are convicted felons. Was Tom Finneran acting in the best interest of the minority communities with his gerrymandering and then lied to three federal judges in open court, god, and everybody. What is the propensity that leads so many of our federal legislators to be common thieves. Why do we have a Massachusetts Congressman playing footsie with a country that is the largest exporter of cocaine in the world, a president who is obviously an anti-semite, a communist, despises America, and is a budding dictator? Why are most of our politicians bold face liars and cheats. You tell me. Congress enacts reams of restrictive legislation applicable to everyone but themselves.Congressmen and women are ENTITLED to federal pensions and SS but they do not contribute a dime to SS. Marty Meehan is leaving Congress to fatten his pension not to pursue another civic duty. Why is being a “politician” now a lifetime career as opposed to a civic responsibility?
<
p>
As citizens we should expect and demand more, but we keep on re electing the same same old faces. I won’t even mention an infamous Massachusetts politician who has engaged in one unethical and immoral after another and persists in being re elected because Massachusetts voters and sycophants fawn over him because he has “clout” on Capitol Hill or he is a good soldier. Whatever happened to common deceny, integrity, honesty, and being a genuinely
“good” person rather than what’s in it for me. I would suggest that 95% of the folks who post here are a far better person than any one of our current elected officials. What ever happened to the Paul Tsongas’s of this world?
don’t have the inclination, time (hopefully they’re busy with stuff they truly care about) or juice to move anything. Even if they embraced some of the ideas in the CORI Report, especially the ones related to workforce development anyone would be suspicious of the strings attached to their legislation.
As with everything in DP’s quiver, the Democratic legislature will be his primary opposition to CORI reform. Geno (friend of Kerry Healey) won’t let it out of the Judiciary Committee. The Senate leadership doesn’t much care about CORI reform or public safety right now. The Senate included the CORI language in the budget last year for two reasons. To get key D support on other budget matters and they knew the House would take it out – it was in an outside section. The vote on it was unanimous, all Rs voted for the language, which meant that they got assurance their stuff was included.
<
p>
CORI legislation should not be about giving ex-cons a break. This is a public safety issue – 20,000 offenders return to the community from prison and jail annually, almost 50% recidivate (lots of new victims), a financial issue – it costs $47,000 to incarcerate an inmate in the DOC and the corrections budget exceeds $800,000,000 annually (almost twice as much as early care and education), and a workforce and economic development issue – MA is losing workers and growing the number of people in need of services (retiring boomers). Who is going to do the work?
<
p>
The illuminating statements of MCRD and his ilk show us just how dim the public can be about this issue. When CORI reform was floated last month by the administration the letters and emails to the Globe showed the same level of understanding – child molesters, murderers, etc. are going to be able to hide their criminal past. While that obviously won’t happen with any type of CORI reform, those most impacted by CORI are somewhat different. Of the nearly 60,000 convictions in 2004 in MA, 70% were for misdemeanors (MCRD, murder is not (N-O-T) a misdemeanor), 63% resulted in a criminal sanction of something other than incarceration, usually probation and/or a fine. Yet all of these people have CORI which is obtainable to many employers through the Commonwealth. For those out in the cold on this issue, it means that most people with CORI are not violent and have never been to prison.
<
p>
There are a lot of issues with CORI, not the least should be, what’s the objective of reform. And there needs to be a strategy that demystifies what CORI is and what are the issues related to employing and housing ex-offenders. While the Rs will someday have to vote on CORI legislation, it’s doubtful that they’d embrace it as a co-sponsor. But to truly make headway in moving such legislation skip China, go to North Korea – the District Attorneys.
…pardon my lack of understanding, but what is CORI? I’ve done an Internet search, and found a number of references, but have not been able to disambiguate them.
CORI is the criminal information system managed by the commonwealth and every other state. . It is a lifelong record of arrests, arraignments and criminal convictions.
<
p>
209A’s are alo included although they are civil
Juvenile criminal cases are sealed after the affected person reaches the chronological age of eighteen, but may be opened in the event of a serious criminal matter as an adult.
…I can do Internet searches. Just tells me what it stands for.
you have to request for them to be closed, if you had a record before 18.
Are sealed as a matter of law.
BUT, how about the man/woman with four or five OUI’s. How about the myriads of felonies that are plea bargained down to misdemeanors? You may or may not have worked in the court sytem in MA. Folks at this forum would be in disbelief. To make the machine work in spite of itself, just about every criminal case is dealt with by a plea, to wit: the charges are reduced, the penalty is reduced and the defendant gets a walk, until the courts get tired of seeing him/her, ergo most felonies become misdemeanors. Only the most horrific or poltically correct crimes get center stage. The people doing time in the state DOC are by and large (95%) very bad and very dangerous people.
<
p>
Granted, there are all kinds of crappy misdemeanors, but I do not want to put a thief in a bank, nor a drunk in a school bus. CORI allows an employer to run his/her business, and hire whomever he/she deems worthy of employment. It is not the states providence to conceal this from anyone.
<
p>
FYI–After five years from the date of conviction, the date of release from incarceration or probation of a misdemeanor offense the convicted person does not have to respond to a query re criminal convictions. Aforementioned does not apply to felonies.
<
p>
Giving a woman(or a man) a severe beating (repeatedly)is a misdemeanor. Intentionally burning someone with a lit cigarette is a felony (Comm V Kelly)
We live in a representative democracy. If our congres votes for Deval’s CORI reform proposals and Deval signs it – indeed, the state would have providence.
The legislators may be thieves and knaves—their not crazy!
Preconcieved notions are a terrible thing – stunt you brain.
<
p>
About CORI reform.
<
p>
There are some classes of offense – rape, child abuse, etc., that should not be hidden. Likewise, misdemeanor pleadings for these crimes should not be hidden.
<
p>
Correcting and purging CORI is an excellent ides. The Parole Board might be able to hold hearings to determine if CORI should reflect a conviction that is not a clerical error or like-sounding name. Also, people need to be made aware that they can expunge their records after a period of time with no recidivism.
<
p>
The most likely candidates to benefit from CORI reform are white collar criminals, such as embezzlers and larceny, and drunk driving (minus a vehicular homicide). However – employers need some kind of indemnification for the hit their liability insurance will take if they give these people a second chance, above and beyind the tax credit mentioned. Maybe a pool to reimburse carriers for claims made because of a relapse of behavior.
<
p>
And Deval needs to investigate what he can do with executive orders. I don’t think he even NEEDS legislation for the CORI cleanup.
<
p>
1. Technically, maybe. Politically, can’t be done. Needs cover. R’s would be unassailable.
<
p>
2. I agree on a gov’t sponsored “risk pool” — that’s the whole market failure that R’s can fix. Let employers know things — but INCENT them to give a chance to a guy with an A&B from 5 years ago, both the tax credit (which employer gets if things go right with that employee) and the “insurance” (if things go wrong).
<
p>
3. Don’t agree that main target is white collar. It’s blue and pink.
They don’t need to know if some 28 year old went streaking, drunk at the beach, when he was 19.
<
p>
So, sure, let them know things… but what your proposing I think could even do more harm than good.
in Massachusetts. If expungement means erasing a record so that it no longer exists, the SJC prohibited such measures based on a public access argument. There are a few exceptions but they are limited to certain juvenile records and a first time possession of pot (I think it’s that limiting) conviction. Records can be sealed if the subject has gone 15 years from a felony conviction or 10 years from a misdemeanor conviction so long as there has been no intervening conviction for any offense greater than a speeding ticket in excess of $50 (what’s that, about 2 mph over the speed limit?).
Sealed CORI reports, though don’t necessarily apply to all records that might be available to employers or landlords. A looming and massive problem with access to criminal records is the availability of “criminal records” from private vendors of such information. Those running background checks, employment checks, credit checks, etc. can ignore any regulations that the state might place on the CORI (Criminal Offender Record Information) it distributes. Among the many issues with CORI reform is what is the impact of limiting access to official CORI if an employer believes it’s necessary that he or she see someone’s criminal history? Will we be forcing employers and landlords to the contract with ChoicePoint (largest background check corp in the country) to get a criminal record (that is often inaccurate, incomplete and largely irrelevant for the needs of the user)? To give you an idea of the volume of such business google criminal background and see how many ads for private vendors come up.
<
p>
Regarding the need for legislation (vs. an EO), among the challenges of the current CORI system is the fact that the Great and General Court keeps adding to the list of required users of CORI on an almost annual basis. Likewise the Criminal History Systems Board (that made headlines during the campaign because LG Healey sat on the Board and voted to limit access to CORI on a number of occasions) has expanded the number of users. This will require legislation, the whole system was created legislatively and the members of the CHSB are named in the legislation, to a certain degree, but much can be done through regulation and much more can be done through an effort to alter the public perception of people with criminal records.
<
p>
And lastly, regarding indemnification or limiting the liability of employers accused of negligent hiring, the American Bar Association has recently adopted recommendations that map out ways in which states can limit such liability when employers exercise due diligence in hiring decisions and rely on certain evidence in the subject’s history certifying to his or her appropriateness for a particular workplace.
…What does the acronym CORI stand for here?
Criminal Offender Record Information
One has available to them the opportunity to have a criminal record sealed by authority of the court ie a judge after five years without the existence of a re-offense. Any offense committed after aforementioned seal will re open the entire record.(To the best of my memory but I am certain this remains accurate)
<
p>
Approximately ten years ago judges were completely expunging the existence of 209A’s with BOP, however SJC ruled that these records were to be reinstated
A convicted person may petition the court to have a record SEALED not expunged. The record is NEVER expunged.
The record of a 209A will never be sealed or purged (as it now stands). 209A’s are lethal for employment. Many are paybacks or a weapon that divorce lawyers use, and they cut both ways.
<
p>
IF DP wants to do something by executive fiat he should purge all 209A’s after five years .
<
p>
Consult with MADD re OUI offenses—good luck
Here’s a little statistic for you (sorry, reference not handy, take my word for now). Ex-con out of jail or prison for seven years without re-offending is no more likely to commit a crime than someone who has never been in the criminal justice system.
<
p>
Putting aside the sex offenders, what exactly is the interest in impeding ex-offenders, seven years out and living clean, in their efforts to get good housing and good jobs?
<
p>
The Crime and Justice Institute — with a lot of input from many state officials — has compiled some excellent studies on criminal justice issues in Massacusetts. Check them out at Crime & Justice Institute web site.
<
p>
A criminal justice system that deters reintegration into society, that fails to reduce recidivism, and which costs a fortune while at the same time failing should be, by an objective standard, judged as broken.
<
p>
Watch for a CORI commission of some sort, which hopefully will lead to meaningful reforms in the next year.
There should be a time limit where anyone and everyone can look into your past (excluding certain offenses)
<
p>
After five years for misdemeanors and perhaps ten years for non violent felonies.
<
p>
There are obviously other crimes that should always be available for scrutiny. People who commit sex crimes of any nature generally fail to resolve their issues.
Nixon going to China was the establishment of formal relations with the Communist regime with which we had fought a nasty war in Korea, and this during the height of the Cold War.
<
p>
Only Nixon could go to China because Nixon’s anti-Communist credentials were absolutely rock-solid, after decades of in national politics. Thus, Nixon could be trusted not to be rolled by Mao.
<
p>
The point of the metaphor is that had McGovern or Humphrey attempted to normalize relations with Red China, it would have played like the later images of Carter getting smoochy with Brezhnev.
<
p>
The same principle generally applies to the curious fact that peace initiatives in Israel tend to come from the right.
<
p>
Deval Patrick has not established any credibility yet as anything, and can’t play this game yet. I’m not sure if the metaphor applies to bipartisanship anyway.
I mixed my metaphor — there are two Chinas here.
<
p>
One is CORI. Only R’s can go there.
<
p>
One is R’s. Can DP go there?
Nixon’s supposed “credibility” in regards national security was a product of Republicon lies in regards the Yalta conference, which dated from 1948–JFK’s stance in regards the Cuban Missile Crisis notwithstanding. And the Republicons’ Dolchstosslegende-like assault against the Democratic congress in regards funding for the Vietnam War in 1974-75.
<
p>
I’m sorry, but you don’t have the slightest idea what you are writing about. Do a little research.
White is black and black is white.
<
p>
The atomic bombing of Japan is now a “bad” thing.
So what else is new?
<
p>
The president of Iran has proof that the Holocaust was a complete fabrication, just ask him, he has proof, really, in black and white!
Sheesh, I’ve had about enough of you.
<
p>
What the heck are you even arguing? That the Republicans weren’t perceived as having a harder line than Democrats in 1972? That Nixon didn’t make a career out of this?
<
p>
I didn’t write a thing about whether Nixon actually earned his anti-communist reputation.
<
p>
The fact is that Nixon’s anti-communist reputation in 1972 was solid. It was politics, and in politics, perception is reality.
Had a reputation re anti communism dating back to the McCarthy hearings. I was responding to someone else. My apologies.
Damn the indenting can be confusing. I was kvetching at raj.