March 28, 2024, 10:58:30 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: NEW CHILD BOARD CREATED IN THE POLITICAL SECTION FOR THE 2016 ELECTION
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Are Laws to Protect Our Children Too Expensive?  (Read 5339 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
JessStar
Monkey Junky
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 1490


Please Help Find Justice for Nevaeh


WWW
« on: May 23, 2010, 09:32:01 AM »

See, it always comes down to the almighty dollar.  It's fine to send billions upon billions overseas, to spend billions upon billions to bail out the richest of the rich, but it's not okay to spend a few million to protect our children.  I'm so fed up with this.

updated May 22, 2010
Analysts: Calif. bill targeting child molesters for long prison terms would cost many millions

Associated Press

SACRAMENTO, Calif.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A state corrections department analysis of a bill being considered by California lawmakers found that mandating life sentences for some child molesters and lifetime parole for others would cost tens of millions of dollars annually after the first decade.

The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst puts the ultimate tab much higher: hundreds of millions of dollars each year, some of it to build new cells for sex offenders serving longer terms.

The projections come as the Assembly Appropriations Committee prepares to consider on Friday whether the state can afford the bill named after 17-year-old Chelsea King. Convicted child molester John Albert Gardner III was sentenced to life in prison this month after pleading guilty to raping and murdering King and 14-year-old Amber Dubois in San Diego County.

Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher, R-San Diego, said AB1844, nicknamed Chelsea's Law, would have a relatively low cost for the first decade. He said it is worth the money to protect children.

The annual cost would top $1 million in 2015, $9 million by 2020, and $54 million by 2030, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

It would add nearly 400 inmates and increase the number of parolees by more than 7,300 by 2030, the department projects.

"We would consider this to be a conservative estimate," Jay Atkinson, chief of the department's Offender Information Services Branch, said Saturday. "The impact won't truly be seen until way far out in the future."

The legislative analyst said increasing penalties would cost "at least a few tens of millions of dollars annually within the next decade" and "at least in the low hundreds of millions of dollars annually after several decades."

Backers, who include Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Democratic Assembly Speaker John Perez, have not suggested any funding source beyond taking the money from the existing state budget, which faces a $19 billion deficit this year.

"There's virtually no cost for a decade," said Fletcher. "If you look at a budget that annually exceeds $100 billion a year, that's a small price to pay to protect our children."

His bill would allow life sentences for a first offense of forcible sex crimes involving a child under 18, up from the current 15-year to 25-year sentence. The life term would be reserved for cases with aggravating factors that include kidnapping, using a weapon, torture, binding or drugging a victim or a previous sex crime conviction.

It would double sentences for some other sex crimes involving children and double parole to 10 years for felons released after serving sentences for forcible sex crimes.

The bill also would require the state to use GPS tracking for lifetime monitoring of those convicted of forcible sex crimes against children under 14. Currently, most tracking ends when offenders leave parole, despite an existing state lifetime monitoring law.

It would ban sex offenders from parks, going beyond the state law that already limits how close offenders can live to schools and parks.

The Assembly analysis suggests deleting provisions that could potentially send offenders to prison for life for inflicting a bruise during a sex crime, or subject them to lifetime parole for acts that could include touching a child over his or her clothing. That would cut the bill's costs substantially, the analysis said.

"I think it's undeniable there are significant costs," said Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, who chairs the Senate Public Safety Committee. "It's clearly a very important issue, a highly emotional issue, and we need to be grounding ourselves in fact."

Fletcher said he is open to minor changes. But he said backers will go to voters with an initiative before they accept major amendments.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/05/22/analysts-calif-targeting-child-molesters-long-prison-terms-cost-millions/
Logged

      
JessStar
Monkey Junky
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 1490


Please Help Find Justice for Nevaeh


WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 23, 2010, 09:46:15 AM »

Who prefers to spend the money this way?  I know this bill changed before it was enacted, but this just goes to show where our "leaders" priorities lie.


U.S. House backs $48.8 billion foreign aid funding bill

Jeremy Pelofsky and Susan Cornwell
WASHINGTON
Thu Jul 9, 2009 8:19pm EDT


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday approved a $48.8 billion spending bill to bolster U.S. foreign policy and aid efforts, including to allies like Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The legislation includes $2.7 billion in foreign aid for Afghanistan and $1.5 billion for Pakistan as they fight Taliban militants. It also provides $2.2 billion for Israel, another close U.S. ally, for the fiscal year 2010 that starts October 1.

The legislation is $3 billion less than the $52 billion requested by President Barack Obama, with cuts in funds for items such as overseas diplomatic operations and money for agricultural assistance and improved food security.

The House bill, approved 318-106, also took a shot at Obama for trying to avoid close congressional oversight of his administration's actions at the International Monetary Fund, which aims to help countries weather the financial crisis.

But with the Senate also working on its version, the legislation is likely to change before becoming law.

The Senate Appropriations Committee approved its own $48.7 billion variant of the bill and included a provision to codify into law Obama's order lifting restrictions on U.S. government funding for groups that provide abortion services or counseling abroad.

The panel voted 17-11 to include such language despite protests by Republicans like Sam Brownback who warned it would spark a huge fight on the floor, particularly since Obama's order already set U.S. government policy.

The Senate bill also includes $1.57 billion in aid for Pakistan and $2.7 billion for Afghanistan, though the latter drew concern from Republican Senator Judd Gregg. "We need to watch that money very closely" to ensure it is not wasted.

The Senate committee also struck $15 million for the U.S. television service it beams into Cuba, known as TV Marti, after Democratic Senator Byron Dorgan said the signal was jammed by the Communist government so no one there could see it.

Differences between the House and Senate bills will have to be resolved before it can become law.

HOUSE TARGETS OBAMA OVER IMF

The House, furious at Obama's attempt to avoid congressional influence over administration actions at the IMF, approved an amendment aimed at exerting more control.

Obama drew ire from some lawmakers after he said a previous law Congress passed that provided instructions for the administration's interactions with the IMF would "interfere with my constitutional authority to conduct foreign relations."

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank said he had worked hard to get funding approved for the IMF. "The notion that the administration can take the money and pick and choose what it wants to do with the conditions (placed on it) is unacceptable," Frank declared.

Last month, Congress approved $108 billion in credit lines for the IMF as it helps countries with the economic crisis.

The current House legislation includes guidance about how the U.S. representative to the IMF and World Bank should vote on issues like health care. It also requires the U.S. representative to the IMF to oppose allowing countries that have supported acts of terrorism to withdraw hard currency like U.S. dollars, Japanese yen or euros from the IMF.

"I think we can all agree that now more than ever we need to keep a watchful eye on how we spend money," said Republican Representative Kay Granger, who authored the IMF provisions.

The administration has opposed the IMF restrictions.

The House also approved an amendment removing the president's ability to waive a provision blocking aid for Saudi Arabia. "We want to tie the president's hands," said the provision's Democratic sponsor, Anthony Weiner of New York.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE56901T20090710
Logged

      
JessStar
Monkey Junky
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 1490


Please Help Find Justice for Nevaeh


WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 23, 2010, 09:48:01 AM »

Sorry, but maybe this will be enough to get people 

Kucinich: Billions in TARP Money Sent Overseas

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D.-Ohio) said on the House floor Thursday that TARP bailout funds loaned to banks are ending up overseas. Citigroup has sent $8 billion to Dubai, Bank of America has sent $7 billion to China and JPMorgan Chase has sent $1 billion to India. "Banks are taking our tax dollars and they're shipping them abroad," Kucinich said. "It's time that we started to take care of things at home. It's time we started to ask the Treasury to keep track of these TARP funds."

http://www.drudge.com/archive/118840/kucinich-billions-tarp-money-sent
Logged

      
JessStar
Monkey Junky
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 1490


Please Help Find Justice for Nevaeh


WWW
« Reply #3 on: May 23, 2010, 09:54:48 AM »

Can anyone find anything in here where the Federal Government has recognized the need to increase funding to the Department of Justice for crimes against children?  I could not.  Ok, I'll get off my soapbox.  I'm just really annoyed.


http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2011/assets/justice.pdf
Logged

      
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Use of this web site in any manner signifies unconditional acceptance, without exception, of our terms of use.
Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC
 
Page created in 6.206 seconds with 20 queries.