The Negative Effects of Private Prison Corporations in the United States The United States government had been working closely with private prison corporations for over three decades. Private prisons were first constructed to help the U.S. government house an ever-expanding prison population, and to relieve the government of some expenses. Today, these privately owned facilities have stirred up controversy with the questionable results of their formation. While it can be difficult to compare private prisons to public prisons, several researchers conclude that private prison corporations are harmful to society in the United States because they hinder economic stability, establish systems that negatively impact prison staff and inmates, and …show more content…
By establishing a corrections facility near small towns, prison staff and other individuals are expected to move closer to their place of employment. In turn, local businesses anticipate more customers and the local economy is supposed to benefit. However this benefit is not being observed. In fact, the construction of private prisons can produce the opposite result and hinder the stability of small-town economies. This is due to the fact that many private prison employees are transferred from other prisons operated by parent corporations, and they commute to their new place of employment instead of moving closer to it. According to finding by Gregory Hooks from Washington State University and other researchers, this also hinders the growth of businesses and economies of communities surrounding private prisons (Hooks et al. …show more content…
Dina Perrone of Rutgers University and Travis C. Pratt of Washington State University compared the performance of private and government-run corrections facilities. When reviewing prisons in Louisiana and Florida, “the private prison had more escapes than its counterpart” (Perrone and Pratt 309). When comparing facilities in Tennessee, “the private prison had more injuries on staff and inmates than the public prison,” and when comparing two private prisons and one public prison in Florida, “[the] private facilities in this study also had a higher rate of assaults on staff than did the public facility” (309). Scott Camp and Gerald Gaes of the Federal Bureau of Prisons conclude, “Can the private companies find a way to pay these workers less, yet still maintain adequate skill levels or at least skill levels supplemented by technology? To date, the overall answer to this question is no,” (Camp and Gaes 17). Private prisons create unsafe working environments by cutting costs where funding might be needed the
As prisons grow in size, governments look for new methods to aid in cutting costs and increase efficiency. Over the last decade government run institutions have been replaced with privately funded, for-profit prisons. Although it is cheaper for governments to run contract based institutions this mass industrialization of the prison system has seen many issues with corruption, decreases in efficiency and even mistreatment and exploitation of incarcerated individuals. The prison system should remain under government control and in this essay I will discuss the faults and errors of for-profit institutions and why this system should not be overseen by private corporations.
The economic components associated with maintaining and operating public prisons in the U.S. has become a prominent topic in recent years. Many anti-prison activist such a Angela Y. Davis and Ruth Wilson Gilmore contend that the involvement of private corporations and the prevailing social ideology have contributed to the radical expansion of prisons in America.
Prison Privatization: The Case of Michigan Privatization is a term and action that has grown in prominence and visibility in the United States and in many other parts of the world in recent years. Privatization may be found in virtually all sectors of the U.S. economy and has the potential to impact millions of employees in both non-profit and for-profit organizations. Various factors contribute to the decision to privatize, and much debate has taken place regarding the costs and benefits of this fundamentally system-changing process. While privatization may occur in all sectors, from privately-held corporations to the federal government, the focus of this paper will be privatization relating to prisons, particularly in the state of Michigan.
At the expense of the young, to the detriment of the poor, and on the backs of the immigrants is the means by which the private prison companies have constructed a business that trades freedoms for profit but more concerning is to what ends these freedoms are being exchanged. The advancement of the private prison system has changed the face of the prison industry as we know it. Because little attention has been given in the media to the private prison industry, they have been able to expand their influence and their revenue by means the average American would consider unscrupulous. Private prisons came about to act as the solution to a problem facing federal prisons, overcrowding, which was created due to the war on drugs, but in acting as a solution to one problem they created another one that could be more problematic than the one it intended to fix. Proponents of private, for profit, prisons claim that it is a better alternative than federal prisons because they can provide the same service for less and save taxpayers money in the process. They also contend that the service they provide would help to stimulate the economy. However, privatization of America’s prison systems will contribute to an increase in the incarceration rate and unfairly target certain demographics of the population, which could lead to psychological trauma affecting the people of those demography’s that it
Nonetheless the minimal benefits that could originate from the privatization of prisons is outweighed by the extensive draw backs. The American Civil Liberties Union of Texas reveals that the apparent savings and economic benefits of private prisons is drastically dramatized, “While you often hear the opposite, for-profit prisons do not save taxpayers money. State governments end up paying more because for-profit prison companies routinely underestimate the cost of oversight, healthcare, and background checks in their proposals. Studies have shown that building for-profit prisons results in no economic benefit to local communities” (ACLU of Texas 1). Furthermore the ACLU of Texas goes on to explain that, “the Safety and Conditions of these for-profit facilities are often more dangerous and have worse conditions than state-run facilities. They are found to have 50% more inmate-on-staff assaults and 2/3 more inmate-on-inmate assaults” (ACLU of Texas 3). Finally the ACLU of Texas explains that there is a gross lack of transparency, “For-profit prisons are exempt from many open government laws that apply to state-run facilities and do not have the same reporting requirements as state-run facilities. As a result, it is more difficult for a community to learn about what is happening inside private prisons, including abuse, unsanitary conditions, and misuse of tax dollars” (ACLU of Texas 2).
America loves to claim they`re the beacon of freedom throughout the world and yet ironically, it has the highest prison population in the world. According the ACLU, America, which only makes up 5% of the world’s populace, holds nearly 25% of the world’s inmates, surpassing Russia. This doesn`t add up when compared to the statistics. If crime rate is at a low, why is the prison population so high? What is contributing to the mass incarceration across the nation? Well, with the evidence presented, it would appear that the private sector is the main contributor to this new American pandemic and more specifically, the privatization of prisons
As the number of prisoners have constantly been rising at an exceedly fast pace, several governments around the world have embraced the use of private prisons. Private prisons are confinements run by a third party, through an agreement with the government. In the United States, it is estimated that there are over 1.6 million inmates, of that there are 8% that are housed in privately-operated prisons. While the other 92% are housed in the public prison system. Private prisons have existed since the 19th century. Their use increased in the 20th century and continues to rise in some states. When a government makes an agreement with a private prison, it makes payments per prisoner or vacancy in jail on a regular basis for maintenance of the prisoners. Privatization became involved due to the fact that prisons were becoming overpopulated. Public prisons contracted the confinement and care of prisoners with other organizations. Due to the cost-effectiveness of private firms, prisons began to contract out more services, such as medical care, food service, inmate transportation, and vocational training. Over time private firms saw an opportunity for expansion and eventually took over entire prison operations. However, now their security, how they treat the inmates, and their true cost effectiveness has come into question
What is the effect of prison privatization on incarceration rates and operating costs? While both states and private prison contractors have reported that privatizing prisons is cost effective and saves the states a considerable amount of revenue, proponents argue that in order to maximize their profits, private prison contractors are cutting corners and increasing incarceration rates. The effect of prison privatization on incarceration rates and operating costs has been a highly debated issue since the first private prison opened its cells in the 1980s. There are advocates that report the privatization of prisons is fiscally sound and reduces the financial responsibility of the states. On the other hand, critics claim that not only do private prisons not alleviate the financial
Thesis: Private prisons actually exacerbate many of the issues they were designed to solve by incentivizing increased incarceration, and at the same time they produce lower value than regular prisons while ultimately costing more, such that private prisons should be abolished and incarceration should remain exclusively public.
Private prisons have a monetary incentive to keep their prison filled to the max (Mason, Too Good to be True Private Prisons in America). Public prisons on the other hand spend more money and effort on rehabilitation efforts and reintroducing people back into society in a healthy manner. One way in which private prisons reduce costs is by cutting the amount of training and pay prison staff are given as well as the number of staff which in turn leads to a less safe prison. The statistics point to an increase in riots, inmate violence, and even assault on prison staff (Mason, Too Good to be True Private Prisons in America). The quality of healthcare is another major issue in private prisons compared to public prisons and is one such reason why the amount of money spent per prisoner is less in private prisons (Smith, Why the U.S. Is Right to Move Away from Private Prisons). As well as spending less on those who need it, private prisoners do a certain amount of cherry picking taking only healthier and thus cheaper prisoners to hold within their \walls (Smith, Why the U.S. Is Right to Move Away from Private Prisons). Private prisons state innovation and creative methods as the reason for saving money as opposed to public prisons but there
The prison system in America is far from perfect. When Reagan took office, the idea of private prisons took off (Chang & Thompkins, 2002). With the increase of private prisons in America, comes the increase of incarceration rates. Private prisons were designed to keep money in taxpayers pockets; therefore, private corporations came into play to make money in the prison system (Chang at el., 2002). Chang at el. (2002) states, “ Corrections Corporations of America (CCA) is the largest correctional corporation in the US, thus it holds 50 percent of the U.S market”. The capacity of private prisons has increased 300 percent in the last 30 years (Chang at el., 2002). Additionally, private prisons operate at 90 percent of their capacity (Chang at
Privatizing prisons may be one way for the prison population to get back under control. Prisons are overcrowded and need extra money to house inmates or to build a new prison. The issue of a serious need for space needs to be addressed. “As a national average, it costs roughly $20,000 per year to keep an inmate in prison. There are approximately 650,000 inmates in state and local prisons, double the number five years ago. This costs taxpayers an estimated $18 billion each year. More than two thirds of the states are facing serious overcrowding problems, and many are operating at least 50 percent over capacity. (Joel, 1988)” Private prisons may be for profit, but if they can solve the issue of cost then it may be a
The United States has an incarceration problem that personifies issues throughout the entire criminal justice system. "The United States, with just 5 percent of the world 's population, currently holds 25 percent of the world 's prisoners" (Khalek). This issue runs deeper than just incarceration; it permeates every level of the criminal justice system, from incarceration to probation. Many states have turned to private institutions in an attempt shed operating costs, while also increasing effectiveness throughout the criminal justice system. These acts can include anything from providing treatment programs to full blown management of the entire prison system. Overcrowding at prisons and the rising costs associated with them has led many states to turn to some form of privatization within the criminal justice system. However, privatizing the entire correction system would not be beneficial for the state, from both an ethical and a public policy standpoint.
In the United States, there are two primary types of prison federal and private. The federal prison system is funded, operated and monitored by the federal government (thenextgalaxy.com. n.d.). Furthermore, the federal prison does not profit any private parties. However, private prisons are funded and built by a private company as well as completely for profit. Now some of the advantages of a private prison is it helps with the overcrowded federal prisons because they can take in prisoners from the overcrowded federal or public prisons. They are considered low cost because they are not ran by the government or regulated. Therefore, whenever they buy their supplies and equipment they can buy it in bulk as well as at a low price (thenextgalaxy.com. n.d.). There is also the fact that the community where the private prison is located benefits from the prison economically because of the amount of jobs they create and the money they bring into the community. Then there is the fact that private prison outscores federal prison when it comes to categories like security, order, safety and overall morale. Now with advantages come disadvantages in private prisons. Some of the disadvantages of private prisons are corruption, cutting costs and quality, people are good, unhappy employees, training troubles, employee turnover, discourage freedom, rehabilitation suffers and lock up quotas. Although, corrupts is everywhere in the private prison system the prisons are for profits therefore it
Faced with a glaring deficit and terrifying examples of ineffective spending around the globe, lawmakers looking for cost-saving measures would do well to turn to prisons. Prison reform must attain the lowest economic costs, lowering actual taxpayer dollars spent without giving up the benefits of attaining important social goals, which represent another form of cost when lost. Undoubtedly, the current prison system is doing little to separate the US from its international counterparts in minimizing such cost, yet prison privatization has yielded hopeful results, as private correctional facilities seem to have a striking advantage over public ones in reducing both short-term costs in terms of prison operations, and long-terms