<html>
<body>
<h2><b><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-mcgowan">Daniel
McGowan</a></b></h2><font size=3>Posted: May 21, 2010 09:21 AM <br>
</font><h1><font size=1><b>
<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-mcgowan/urgent-appeal-from-a-secr_b_584668.html" eudora="autourl">
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-mcgowan/urgent-appeal-from-a-secr_b_584668.html<br>
</a></font>Urgent Appeal from a Secret Prison <br><br>
</u></b></h1><font size=3>After three years in prison and hundreds
(thousands, even) of letters mailed out, I have gotten to the point where
there is little to write about. Prison life is remarkably staticso
unchanging in its daily routinethat news resonates here in a pronounced
way. The early part of April brought some major announcements that will
profoundly affect my life here in the Bureau of Prison's
<a href="http://www.supportdaniel.org/cmu/exposing_cmu_dm.html">
Communication Management Unit (CMU)</a>. Finally, my friends will be
saved from the endless litany of letters about what TV shows I watch,
Prison drama, my workouts and books I have read that week!<br><br>
In February, after completing 18 months of "clear conduct"
here, I requested a transfer to a "normal" prison (that is, one
without punitive restrictions on my contact with the outside world). My
request was denied on April 5th and did not come as a major shock. The
written rejection notice did not offer a reason for my denial; instead
just informing me that I can apply again at my next "program
review." I am not the only one who has had my transfer request
denied and who faces the paradox of being held here without any
explanation why. Despite twenty months of "clear conduct" (the
BoP term for no disciplinary sanctions) and participation in classes, I
am still being held here at the government's discretion.<br><br>
On March 30th, the <a href="http://www.ccrjustice.org/cmu">Center for
Constitutional Rights (CCR)</a> filed suit on my behalf against the BoP
regarding this unit (Aref v. Holder, D.C. Circuit). The suit raises a
number of substantial constitutional claims and violations of federal
law. Also included in the suit are fellow prisoners at this CMU, the
other CMU at Terre Haute, my wife Jenny and another prisoner's wife. The
suit is asking for injunctive relief--that the court intervene and fix
these constitutional violations. While this is a positive step in
addressing the massive problems with the concept of the Communication
Management Unit, the journey through the courts is a slow and somewhat
tedious affair.<br><br>
Just one week after the lawsuit was filed, the Bureau of Prisons released
proposed rules for the CMU, opening a 60-day comment period for the
public
(<a href="http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=0900006480ad11c7">
BoP Docket # 1148-P</a>, Communication Management Units). The unfortunate
part of this proposal is that they represent a huge reduction in
communication for prisoners. The new rules would set the following
standards: <br><br>
1) Only one phone call per month (to immediate family). <br>
2) Only one hour, non-contact, visit per month (with immediate
family).<br>
3) Only one, 3 page letter, to and from a single recipient per
week.<br><br>
These rules are remarkable and fly in the face of the BoP's supposed
ideas on the positive aspects of communication between prisoners and
their community, family members and friends. The proposed rules are far
worse than the current conditions, and current conditions are bad enough.
I can assure you that attempting to maintain healthy, close relationships
on 2 phone calls a week and 8 hours of non-contact visits a month is
exceedingly difficult and expensive. (My family lives 1,100 miles from
this prison creating bills of $600+ for a two day trip). The irony is
that most of the men in this unit do not even have communication
violations so why the reason for the new rules? Normally, a government
agency (such as the BoP) proposes rules <u>before</u> implementing a
policy. In this case, the CMU has been in operations for nearly three
years. Not only is that an obvious violation of federal law but the
proposed rules have an air of mean-spiritedness and retribution.<br><br>
You can submit public comment on these proposed rules easily online at
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=0900006480ad11c7">
www.regulations.gov</a> or by reading the rules online and sending your
comments to: <br><br>
Rules Unit, Office of General Counsel<br>
Bureau of Prisons<br>
320 First Street, NW.<br>
Washington, DC 20534<br><br>
<i>Please be cordial and to the point with your comments. </i>If you need
help or talking points for your comments, do not hesitate to contact the
organizations below.<br>
Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR)
<a href="http://www.ccrjustice.org">www.ccrjustice.org</a>, 212-614-6480.
<br>
Family & Friends of Daniel McGowan
<a href="http://www.supportdaniel.org/cmu">www.supportdaniel.org/cmu</a>
<br><br>
Daniel McGowan<br>
63794-053<br>
USP Marion CMU<br>
PO Box 1000<br>
Marion, IL 62959<br><br>
<br><br>
<br><br>
</font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#008000">415 863-9977<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#0000FF">
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.Freedomarchives.org</a></font><font size=3> </font></body>
</html>