Member Submission: SB 540 Human Trafficking

The following is a letter sent to the Senate Committee on Criminal Justice (404 S. Monroe Street, Tallahassee, FL 32399-1100) by a member. She graciously shared the letter with us and gave us permission to share it with members.

Feb 21, 2019

Dear Committee Members,

I watched the committee meeting on the SB 540 Human Trafficking Bill and noted supporter,  Chase Daniels, speaking on the study funded by Hunt Alternatives Fund (18:00 minutes into the session.)   In quoting the study, he stated the participants were asked:

“What would stop you from buying sex? The most effective means to deter these individuals from buying sex, 89% said that being added to some sort of registry would deter them. This was higher than a letter to your family, posted on a billboard and it shows this registry and the other components Mrs. Book’s bill have is the best most negative deterrent to end the surge of human trafficking where Florida is unfortunately third in the nation.”

This summary, as stated by Mr. Daniels is not true.   I strongly oppose this bill and and wish to correct his skewed comments.   The study actually stated:

“Our foundation, Hunt Alternatives Fund, recently funded a study on the commercial sex industry in Boston. We interviewed more than 200 men – both buyers and non-buyers – on their attitudes about prostitution.

“An astounding 88 percent of Boston buyers say they’d be deterred by knowing that notification would be sent to a family member if they were arrested. (In Sweden, where street prostitution is down stunningly, a letter ordering the buyer to appear in court is sent to the man, but at his home address.) A majority of buyers say higher fines would dissuade them. Other deterrents include:  being put on a sex offender registry; having their pictures or names in the local newspaper, on a billboard, or on the Internet (although these public measures are disastrous to their innocent wives and children); having a driver’s license suspended or car impounded. In San Francisco, arrests and a first-offender education program have reduced recidivism by more than 40 percent, according to a Justice Department study.”

If there is a registry and it is made public (which is safe to assume as it’s only deterrent benefit is to make it public so as to weigh heavily on shame and perpetual punishment), it will be another costly and bloated burden for tax payers, and if it falls in line with the current sex offender registry, will offer no appreciable benefit in return.  This bill is named “Human Trafficking” and due to it’s title, will give the general public a false impression that anyone on the associated registry had intent to victimize and “traffic” innocent people.

In your committee meeting yesterday, you heard from a “sex professional” who stated she was never trafficked or victimized, and continued in the profession as a matter of personal choice! Not all who engage in these acts are victims!, but everyone on this registry will be painted as predators!  Such a list will hinder and impact all aspects of their lives, including the ability to obtain responsible employment.  As we have seen with registries in the past, the inability to gain employment will expand the need for individuals and families to rely on state programs for support.  Additionally, as we have seen with the sex registry, children of those on this new list of shame, will almost certainly be singled out and targeted by social stigmatism.

“Family members living with an RSO were more likely to experience threats and harassment by neighbors. Children of RSOs reportedly experienced adverse consequences including stigmatization and differential treatment by teachers and classmates. More than half had experienced ridicule, teasing, depression, anxiety, fear, or anger. Unintended consequences can impact family members’”

— http://texasvoices.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/AW_levenson_family_impact_study.pdf

Florida Statute 796.07 already incorporates some of the deterrent factors suggested in the quoted study, such as higher fines, car impoundment, jail time and educational programs that inform participants on the negative effects of prostitution and sex trafficking, without incurring additional tax dollars for “new” and “additional” programs without any real determined benefit.

I also request this committee carefully ponder the collateral damage to families and children before placing someone on a new registry.   Simply implementing an educational program alone shows a 40% reduction in recidivism and would be a much smarter approach than perpetually destroying more families and lives.

If we really think this is an increasing problem or that we are being ineffective, I propose a study to confirm the factual validity and causes, look at the true recidivism rates of prostitution offenses in Florida under our current programs, and realistically and honestly evaluate the cost-effectiveness of alternatives.  We may also wish to reach out to NCMEC for additional support and valuation inasmuch as they receive $66 Million dollars a year in federal funding to educate Law Enforcement agencies, including the FBI, private corporations and individuals, on effective strategies for prevention of sex trafficking.

More importantly, with the tide of criminal justice reform in favor of rehabilitation and redemption, the constitutional questions and increasing litigations now arising regarding lifelong registries, and the mounting scientific evidence indicating registries are not only expensive to maintain, but ineffective in their approach, I petition the committee that if they remain bent on invoking a new “shame list”, they do so only after a second conviction, giving citizens a greater opportunity for remediation in their behavior through counseling and education.

Sincerely,