By Nancy Price
Artificial Intelligence (AI)---Limitations to Consider
Almost ninety-two million low-income individuals in the United States—those earning less than 200 percent of the federal poverty threshold—have some fundamental aspect of their lives influenced by artificial intelligence. Governments, landlords, employers, school districts, and other powerful actors use artificial intelligence (AI), algorithms, and related technologies to make decisions about how low-income people work, live, learn, and survive. AI is often used to determine whether someone gets a rental apartment, how much they pay, whether someone gets a job, how much they earn, what conditions they work under, whether someone gets benefits (like food assistance, unemployment insurance, medical insurance, health services, etc.), and whether families will be investigated for child neglect.
AI is frequently used to decide who receives housing, based on a person’s record of on-time payments, and may be set to reject anyone who has ever been delinquent on their rent. If so, the reason a person was late — job loss or a medical issue —may block their qualification, even if it was a one-time occurrence that happened a long time ago. When a medical record notes a broken leg, AI might cap physical therapy sessions at a typical amount. However, this approach may not consider that older adults or individuals with additional health concerns could require more sessions due to increased severity. Although AI can analyze larger volumes of data much faster than humans, its decision-making may fall short if it does not receive proper instructions on criteria, and it cannot take all relevant information into account as thoroughly as a person would.
People with lower incomes are more likely to be denied housing, healthcare, employment, and many other government services. We need to be aware of this as we move into a world in which AI participates in more decisions. AI parameters must be carefully written.
Supervision in the Legal System---Washington and Missouri
What can the Federal government (vs. state governments) do?
Only a small slice of those incarcerated are being held under federal law. The Federal Bureau of Prisons (FBOP) is holding about 150,000 people, and the US Marshal Service is holding around 63,000 people. In Missouri, there are 1.1 million people under state supervision. The largest segment is about 37,000 on probation.
Federal: For persons convicted of a federal crime, clemency or a pardon may be granted by the President.
The federal level oversees federal agencies, their goals, and any federal funding. Furthermore, the “bully pulpit’ sets not only the policies but the tone of the system.
Missouri state: Of particular concern in MO are the parole system and the need to fund drug use prevention. States obtain only limited financial support from the federal government.The criminalization of mental health and substance abuse has led to decreased funding for programs and an increase in incarceration.
The federal government has withdrawn funding from both Housing First and an LGBTQ hotline, and other programs such as those addressing sexual assault have also experienced budget reductions.
Only 25 states charge for meals when a person is in pre-trial detention. This is commonly called “Pay to Stay.” MO is one of 25 states that allow “pay-to-stay.”
The cost of phone calls from jail is exorbitant.
Deaths in MO prisons, especially in St. Louis City and County, are appallingly high and rising slightly.
Recommendation: Many issues persist in jails and prisons due to a lack of oversight and accountability. A committee dedicated to both oversight and accountability could help clarify the reasons behind issues and identify ways to resolve them. Efforts should also be made to tackle the widespread presence of drugs within the prison system.
https://www.prisonpolicy.org/factsheets/prisonpenalty_factsheet.pdf
