How To Privatize Prisons
Privatizing prisons?
Abstract
The main goal of a prison that is considered to be privatized is to maximize the profits within that prison. In order to maximize profits the budgets that include services for the inmates, protection for the public and staff, as well as the salary and benefits of the staff of the privatized prison may be analyzed and cut. By allowing the privatization within the prison system the public, the staff, and the inmates will find themselves in jeopardy. Some prisons that have been privatized have taken only a portion of the prison and privatized the services that are entailed in the prison system, where other prisons have encompassed the privatization of the entire prison.
During …show more content…
the evolving process of the privatization of prisons the public has seen various corruption schemes, escapes that endanger the public, horrific conditions that the inmates are subjected to, and not to mention salaries and benefits that are below standard compared to that of security guards under the employ of a governmentally controlled prison. Thankfully today we have state and local governments that pay private companies to house inmates humanely, but at what cost and to who?
Privatizing prisons?
Introduction
In order to give the controversial topic a sounder analysis I chose to only write about one of the governmental activities, that regarding of allowing prisons to remain under the governmental control and funding or if they should be privatized. A for-profit company is all about maximizing their profit, so how can that be beneficial to the public sector? By privatizing prisons, the public runs the risk of allowing these prisons to not uphold the standard of “providing safe and humane conditions of confinement to the human beings in their custody” (Winter & Eber, 2012). While maximizing profits privatized prisons can find themselves cutting the budgets of “essential services within the prison -- from medical care, food and clothing to staff costs and security -- at the endangerment of the public, the inmates and the staff” ("Prison," n.d.). How can the private prison benefit the public sector by having lower pay and fewer benefits to their security guards, and even not having enough guards to safely maintain control of the safety of the prisoners and themselves (Mason, 2012, p. 7)? My stance on this is that by allowing prisons to be privatized it can only cause more harm than good. Not only will the safety of the public and the staff be in jeopardy, but also the prisoners will not get the humane treatment and services that they would while in a prison that is controlled and funded by the government.
History of the privatization of the prison system
How did our country begin the privatization of a prison system? Our country is full of prisons since its inception. Tracy Chang and Douglas Thompkins mentions in their article that was published in the Labor Studies Journal that the earliest prison privatization could be seen in Philadelphia at the Walnut Street Jail in 1790, where the prisoners were contracted out so that a profit would be made (Chang & Thompkins, 2002). Through the history of the United States the prison system had : “( 1) the contract, ( 2) the piece-price, ( 3) the lease, ( 4) the state-account, ( 5) the state-use system, and ( 6) public works and ways” (Chang & Thompkins, 2002, para. 21). The most well-known prison type labor is the lease: where the labor from the inmates would be sold to the highest bidder for a certain period. This type of labor was common in the South to replace slavery in agricultural production type positions in 1825. The person, or company, that would “lease” these prisoners would “assumed entire control of prisoners, including their labor, food, clothing, shelter, and discipline” (Chang & Thompkins, 2002, para. 21). Prison labor was used all the way up until 1940, when the Sumners-Ashurst Act was passed (Chang & Thompkins, 2002). Since the inception of prison labor, it had been protested against, mainly because of unfair competition (Chang & Thompkins, 2002). The people spoke out that prisoners were cutting them out of jobs that they desperately needed during the Great Depression. The Sumners-Ashurst Act outlawed not only prison labor within the private sector, but the sales of prison-made goods. This allowed the public to maintain a higher quality of life through the income that they received to help the country get out of the Great Depression. After the inception of the Sumners-Ashurst Act union labor started to run rampant, and the government felt the need to step in once again by creating the Prison Industry Enhancement Certification Program in 1979 (Chang & Thompkins, 2002). This once again allowed the companies to use the labor of prisoners and sell the prison-made goods (Chang & Thompkins, 2002). Corporations were receiving labor at a cheaper cost, while the prison system was providing the prisoners with new life skills that they could use once they were out of prison and had completed their rehabilitation period behind the walls of the prison (Chang & Thompkins, 2002).
Where did privatization go wrong?
Deadly Healthcare
The concept of privatizing a portion of the prison, or the whole prison is wonderful to the government. In the journal article written by Appleby one concept of privatizing a portion of the prison is mentioned, which includes having the healthcare under a private contract. Due to the rising costs and the influx of prisoners, of up to 1.6 million Americans, the government was finding that they were paying up to $3.3 billion in medical costs alone per year (Appleby, 1997). They needed to cut costs somehow, so they started to look at contracting the healthcare out. A New Jersey prison contracted their healthcare out in 1996, and Gov. Christine Todd Whitman was expecting to see a savings of up to $14 million in the first year (Appleby, 1997). By contracting the healthcare portion of the prison out to a private firm, the government can see a savings “between 5 percent and 15 percent, depending on the facility” (Appleby, 1997, para. 8). As any for-profit company wants is profit, but where is the catch?
When companies are being contracted out to provide healthcare to prisoners the health of the prisoners are at stake. Within the article from Appleby it has personal communication in it from a registered nurse that is the health services administrator of the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office (Appleby, 1997, para. 10) stating that:
“The sheriff 's office dumped private contractor EMSA in January, halfway through its three-year contract, after a 24-year-old female inmate died of a heart attack while under its care. An investigation found that the inmate had complained of discomfort, but EMSA 's medical director did not allow a hospital visit until 13 hours later--when she was beyond help.”
Another instance where the healthcare caused prisoners to pass away due to the medical staff not doing what they needed was included in the article from PA Times. In this article Daniel Rosenbloom states that “between 2000 and early 2005, there were 23 deaths attributed to inadequate medical care in a state’s county jail” ("Deadly Healthcare," 2005, para. 2). This article also discusses three cases where there was inadequate medical care that resulted in the death of three prisoners. The first case included a pregnant female prisoner. When the nurse noticed blood, she mistakenly assumed that it was just a miscarriage, when in fact the prisoner delivered a premature child while sitting on the toilet. The child was not found until the paramedics inquired where the child was after getting the story from the prisoner of what happened on the way to the hospital. The guards did the best that they could do to keep the baby alive, but unfortunately the baby passed away three days later. The second case where there was malpractice includes a male prisoner who had Parkinson’s disease. In order for this prisoner to maintain a normalcy of life without tremors, he needed 32 pills. The medical director of the prison withheld a majority of his medication. Sadly, this resulted in the male prisoner losing consciousness and eventually passed away due to septic shock, all because the nurses at the jail believed he was faking. The last case includes a female prisoner that had a heart attack because, once again, she did not receive the appropriate medication after having an EKG showing a heart problem ("Deadly Healthcare," 2005).
Another area where privatization of the healthcare within a prison system can cause more harm than good is what happens to all the contracted employees once that three-year contract is up. During the three years, employees will finish their 90-day probationary period and gain seniority over other employees who are just hired, but once that contract is up that is all reset when a new contractor wins the bid and are hired with that firm (Appleby, 1997).
Prison industries, management contracting and private financing of prisons leading the way in privatization of prisons
In what ways do prisoners of today use their labor for privatized corporations? Patrick Kinkade and Matthew Leone mention this within prison industries. The area regarding prison industries is where the private sector of business will utilize the cheap labor of the prisoners for their business. The article provides examples such as reservationists for hotels, print shops, manufacturing of furniture, maintaining the marketing division of the private prison, and even an optical lab (Kinkade & Leone, 1992). Lucas Reilly wrote an enlightening article naming eleven items that were actually made by prisoners: books for the blind, lingerie, park benches and picnic tables, military jackets and battle garb, human silhouette targets, old IKEA products, baseball caps, canoes, artsy knick-knacks, blue jeans, and where they train wild mustangs so that they can be adopted (Reilly, 2013).
The theory behind allowing the prisons to provide cheaper labor for these corporations is great in theory, but when you analyze it further, it is actually harming the private sector. Labor unions will be threatened due to these prisoners providing labor at a lower rate (Kinkade & Leone, 1992). Kinkade and Leone also state in their article (Kinkade & Leone, 1992, para. 4) that:
“It is also noted that the economic concerns of maintaining such enterprise might come into conflict with penal purpose and institutional routine. Production schedules, in other words, may be difficult to keep in light of security problems that may occasionally arise. Moreover, the training that one might receive to work in a prison-based industry may not, itself, make one qualified for outside employment. Rehabilitation as approached though vocational training may then be sacrificed in an effort to maintain adequate supplies of laborers.”
If by allowing production to be outsourced to prisoners just for a lower rate can cause this much harm, why is it still being allowed? The second area where privatization of prisons can be found is that of management contracting. This entails having a facility controlled by the private sector to house inmates on a daily basis to go through a specific program (Kinkade & Leone, 1992). One of the better examples that can be seen of this manner is in California. “In the early 1980 's, it became legal for private facilities in California to house and treat multiple D.U.I.s for up to one-third of their mandated sentence” (Kinkade & Leone, 1992, para. 5). This particular program is seen through the management of Behavioral System Southwest. Some downfalls to management contracting within a privatized prison system need to be addressed. These include not only legal issues regarding “the constitutionality of turning state social control functions over to private parties” but the operation of the facility as well (Kinkade & Leone, 1992, para. 5). It all comes down to profit once again. The rehabilitation center might reduce the budget when it comes to the food or recreational equipment, as well as considering a minimal staff or even not having enough surveillance equipment to maintain the safety of the staff, prisoners and even the public (Kinkade & Leone, 1992). Some questions come to mind when one thinks of these pitfalls. How do they allow for discipline within the facility: what they would in any private rehabilitation facility or something more stringent for the prisoners? Would they allow deadly force when a prisoner gets beyond control and threatens the safety of other prisoners or staff? How do they prevent escapes from happening that would cause safety issues with the public? The third area of where privatization of prisons can be found includes private financing alternatives. The “typical arrangement the government will lease a facility that has been built by a private firm, thereby eliminating the need for voter approval of government general obligation bonds” (Kinkade & Leone, 1992, para. 6). This might be great in one state, but other states actually prohibit this from happening. This type of funding actually can have larger financing costs attributed to it than traditional bonds (Kinkade & Leone, 1992, para. 6).
Services and Safety fall behind
Did you know that private prisons are exempted from federal disclosure laws?
For instance, a private prison does not have to disclose “the number of abuses reported against prisoners over a certain period of time at a certain prison, or the context of civil rights lawsuits filed against certain staff members” (Stroud, 2013, para. 3). Stroud mentions how much Correction Corporation of America (CCA) spent in lobbying over 2012, $970,000 (Stroud, 2013, para. 13). He also states (Stroud, 2013, para. 14):
“The company operates 67 facilities, 47 of which it owns, according to its website. The facilities, which have more than 90,000 beds, are located in D.C. and 20 states. For the first nine months of 2012, CCA received $570.2 million from the U.S. government, the company’s most recent quarterly financial report …show more content…
shows”
A prison that is privately controlled is all about the profit, and sadly the safety and conditions for the prisoners are coming second within the list of goals (Winter & Eber, 2012). Per the Sentencing Project, Cody Mason writes that the two highest budgets that are included within a prison system, personnel and programs, are the first to be analyzed to see where they can cut corners so they can maximize in the profits. Personnel labor costs “account for 60 to 70 percent of annual operating budgets” (Mason, 2012, p. 10). In order to lower these costs within a private prison the salaries and benefits of the security guards will be drastically lower than their counterparts within a governmentally controlled facility, “equal to about $5,327 less in annual salary for new recruits and $14,901 less in maximum annual salaries” (Mason, 2012, p. 10).
Conclusion
Privatization of prison systems, either portions of it or the entire prisons, can only cause more harm than good. Robbin Ogle states that the privatization of a prison system results in a “destructive cycle of regulation, violations, and increased regulation, increasing the costs to both the company and the government” (Ogle, 1999, p. 20). A for-profit company is all about the bottom line, which is profit. When privatization is brought into the prison system, it can lower the salaries and benefits of security guards or bring in the lowest bidder for a contract that can have mediocre healthcare that results in deaths of prisoners. It can also cut budgets so that security gates and/or fences or even surveillance cameras are not used like they are intended or they are not the quality that is needed, and it can even cut out unions and public labor because the labor of prisoners is drastically lower. By allowing prison labor to continue it can cause the economy to decline because the public are going to be turned away because they can pay the prisoners at a fraction of the cost. In order to have the economy of the United States to thrive the public needs to have jobs and income so that they can spend money, how is this possible if more prisons allow prison labor to continue? In order for a privatized security guard to maintain a quality of life he must have an income that matches the cost of living in his or her area, how can this happen when private prisons offer a lower pay by equal to about $5,327 less in annual salary for new recruits and $14,901 less in maximum annual salaries” (Mason, 2012, p. 10)? How can the rehabilitation facilities that house prisoners within a private management facility maintain the prisoners so that there are no escapes that can cause harm to the public? These are all questions that need to be addressed so that if privatization of prisons does continue then “the essential services within the prison -- from medical care, food and clothing to staff costs and security” are met so that there will be no endangerment to the public, the inmates and the staff ("Prison," n.d.).
References
Appleby, C. (1997). Prisons. Going private to capture savings. Hospitals & Health Networks, 71(10), 70. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.brenau.edu:2048/ehost/detail?sid=8b7e4f17-d274-4c7e-92a1-87caef77a657%40sessionmgr10&vid=1&hid=11&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=mnh&AN=9179046
Chang, T. H., & Thompkins, D. E. (2002, Spring). Corporations go to prisons: the expansion of corporate power in the correctional industry. Labor Studies Journal , 27(1), 45. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.brenau.edu:2048/ehost/detail?sid=b10acdd7-02a6-4f17-a941-c50ab68a4d63%40sessionmgr11&vid=4&hid=11&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=bth&AN=6456764
Convicts picking cotton [photgraph]. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://usslave.blogspot.com/2011/09/mimicking-of-slave-system-structure-in.html
Goal, Walnut Street Philadelphia [Photograph Plate]. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.ushistory.org/birch/plates/images/plate24.jpg
Kinkade, P. T., & Leone, M. C. (1992, December). The privatization of prisons: The wardens’ views. Federal Probation, 56(4), 58. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.brenau.edu:2048/ehost/detail?sid=1919a942-51de-4a5d-8ebd-6e366dc996ca%40sessionmgr12&vid=1&hid=11&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=fth&AN=9502164052
Mason, C. (2012). Too good to be true private prisons in America. Retrieved from The Sentencing Project website: http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/inc_Too_Good_to_be_True.pdf
Ogle, R. S. (1999, September). Prison privatization: An environmental catch-22. Justice Quarterly : JQ, 16(3), 579-600. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.brenau.edu:2048/docview/228199638/abstract?accountid=9708
Perrone, D., & Pratt, T.
C. (2003, September 1). Comparing the Quality of Confinement and Cost-Effectiveness of Public Versus Private Prisons: What We Know, Why We Do Not Know More, and Where to Go from Here. The Prison Journal, 83(3), 301-322. Retrieved from http://brenau.worldcat.org.ezproxy.brenau.edu:2048/title/comparing-the-quality-of-confinement-and-cost-effectiveness-of-public-versus-private-prisons-what-we-know-why-we-do-not-know-more-and-where-to-go-from-here/oclc/437796861&referer=brief_results
Prison Privatization. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.correctionsproject.com/corrections/pris_priv.htm
Privatization and deadly health care in prisons. (2005). PA Times, 28(7), 12. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.brenau.edu:2048/ehost/detail?sid=96a4bd8d-a754-4758-ad0a-b3c3edbbe43a%40sessionmgr14&vid=1&hid=11&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=bth&AN=17770675
Reilly, L. (2013, June 11). 11 products you might not realize were made by prisoners. mental_floss. Retrieved from
http://mentalfloss.com/article/51037/11-products-you-might-not-realize-were-made-prisoners
Stroud, M. (2013, February 7). Updated: private prisons are exempted from federal disclosure laws; advocates say that should change. Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/mattstroud/2013/02/07/private-prisons-are-exempted-from-federal-disclosure-laws-advocates-say-that-should-change/
Winter, M., & Eber, G. (2012). Private prisons are the problem, not the solution. Retrieved from http://www.aclu.org/blog/prisoners-rights-criminal-law-reform/private-prisons-are-problem-not-solution
Abstract
The main goal of a prison that is considered to be privatized is to maximize the profits within that prison. In order to maximize profits the budgets that include services for the inmates, protection for the public and staff, as well as the salary and benefits of the staff of the privatized prison may be analyzed and cut. By allowing the privatization within the prison system the public, the staff, and the inmates will find themselves in jeopardy. Some prisons that have been privatized have taken only a portion of the prison and privatized the services that are entailed in the prison system, where other prisons have encompassed the privatization of the entire prison.
During …show more content…
the evolving process of the privatization of prisons the public has seen various corruption schemes, escapes that endanger the public, horrific conditions that the inmates are subjected to, and not to mention salaries and benefits that are below standard compared to that of security guards under the employ of a governmentally controlled prison. Thankfully today we have state and local governments that pay private companies to house inmates humanely, but at what cost and to who?
Privatizing prisons?
Introduction
In order to give the controversial topic a sounder analysis I chose to only write about one of the governmental activities, that regarding of allowing prisons to remain under the governmental control and funding or if they should be privatized. A for-profit company is all about maximizing their profit, so how can that be beneficial to the public sector? By privatizing prisons, the public runs the risk of allowing these prisons to not uphold the standard of “providing safe and humane conditions of confinement to the human beings in their custody” (Winter & Eber, 2012). While maximizing profits privatized prisons can find themselves cutting the budgets of “essential services within the prison -- from medical care, food and clothing to staff costs and security -- at the endangerment of the public, the inmates and the staff” ("Prison," n.d.). How can the private prison benefit the public sector by having lower pay and fewer benefits to their security guards, and even not having enough guards to safely maintain control of the safety of the prisoners and themselves (Mason, 2012, p. 7)? My stance on this is that by allowing prisons to be privatized it can only cause more harm than good. Not only will the safety of the public and the staff be in jeopardy, but also the prisoners will not get the humane treatment and services that they would while in a prison that is controlled and funded by the government.
History of the privatization of the prison system
How did our country begin the privatization of a prison system? Our country is full of prisons since its inception. Tracy Chang and Douglas Thompkins mentions in their article that was published in the Labor Studies Journal that the earliest prison privatization could be seen in Philadelphia at the Walnut Street Jail in 1790, where the prisoners were contracted out so that a profit would be made (Chang & Thompkins, 2002). Through the history of the United States the prison system had : “( 1) the contract, ( 2) the piece-price, ( 3) the lease, ( 4) the state-account, ( 5) the state-use system, and ( 6) public works and ways” (Chang & Thompkins, 2002, para. 21). The most well-known prison type labor is the lease: where the labor from the inmates would be sold to the highest bidder for a certain period. This type of labor was common in the South to replace slavery in agricultural production type positions in 1825. The person, or company, that would “lease” these prisoners would “assumed entire control of prisoners, including their labor, food, clothing, shelter, and discipline” (Chang & Thompkins, 2002, para. 21). Prison labor was used all the way up until 1940, when the Sumners-Ashurst Act was passed (Chang & Thompkins, 2002). Since the inception of prison labor, it had been protested against, mainly because of unfair competition (Chang & Thompkins, 2002). The people spoke out that prisoners were cutting them out of jobs that they desperately needed during the Great Depression. The Sumners-Ashurst Act outlawed not only prison labor within the private sector, but the sales of prison-made goods. This allowed the public to maintain a higher quality of life through the income that they received to help the country get out of the Great Depression. After the inception of the Sumners-Ashurst Act union labor started to run rampant, and the government felt the need to step in once again by creating the Prison Industry Enhancement Certification Program in 1979 (Chang & Thompkins, 2002). This once again allowed the companies to use the labor of prisoners and sell the prison-made goods (Chang & Thompkins, 2002). Corporations were receiving labor at a cheaper cost, while the prison system was providing the prisoners with new life skills that they could use once they were out of prison and had completed their rehabilitation period behind the walls of the prison (Chang & Thompkins, 2002).
Where did privatization go wrong?
Deadly Healthcare
The concept of privatizing a portion of the prison, or the whole prison is wonderful to the government. In the journal article written by Appleby one concept of privatizing a portion of the prison is mentioned, which includes having the healthcare under a private contract. Due to the rising costs and the influx of prisoners, of up to 1.6 million Americans, the government was finding that they were paying up to $3.3 billion in medical costs alone per year (Appleby, 1997). They needed to cut costs somehow, so they started to look at contracting the healthcare out. A New Jersey prison contracted their healthcare out in 1996, and Gov. Christine Todd Whitman was expecting to see a savings of up to $14 million in the first year (Appleby, 1997). By contracting the healthcare portion of the prison out to a private firm, the government can see a savings “between 5 percent and 15 percent, depending on the facility” (Appleby, 1997, para. 8). As any for-profit company wants is profit, but where is the catch?
When companies are being contracted out to provide healthcare to prisoners the health of the prisoners are at stake. Within the article from Appleby it has personal communication in it from a registered nurse that is the health services administrator of the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office (Appleby, 1997, para. 10) stating that:
“The sheriff 's office dumped private contractor EMSA in January, halfway through its three-year contract, after a 24-year-old female inmate died of a heart attack while under its care. An investigation found that the inmate had complained of discomfort, but EMSA 's medical director did not allow a hospital visit until 13 hours later--when she was beyond help.”
Another instance where the healthcare caused prisoners to pass away due to the medical staff not doing what they needed was included in the article from PA Times. In this article Daniel Rosenbloom states that “between 2000 and early 2005, there were 23 deaths attributed to inadequate medical care in a state’s county jail” ("Deadly Healthcare," 2005, para. 2). This article also discusses three cases where there was inadequate medical care that resulted in the death of three prisoners. The first case included a pregnant female prisoner. When the nurse noticed blood, she mistakenly assumed that it was just a miscarriage, when in fact the prisoner delivered a premature child while sitting on the toilet. The child was not found until the paramedics inquired where the child was after getting the story from the prisoner of what happened on the way to the hospital. The guards did the best that they could do to keep the baby alive, but unfortunately the baby passed away three days later. The second case where there was malpractice includes a male prisoner who had Parkinson’s disease. In order for this prisoner to maintain a normalcy of life without tremors, he needed 32 pills. The medical director of the prison withheld a majority of his medication. Sadly, this resulted in the male prisoner losing consciousness and eventually passed away due to septic shock, all because the nurses at the jail believed he was faking. The last case includes a female prisoner that had a heart attack because, once again, she did not receive the appropriate medication after having an EKG showing a heart problem ("Deadly Healthcare," 2005).
Another area where privatization of the healthcare within a prison system can cause more harm than good is what happens to all the contracted employees once that three-year contract is up. During the three years, employees will finish their 90-day probationary period and gain seniority over other employees who are just hired, but once that contract is up that is all reset when a new contractor wins the bid and are hired with that firm (Appleby, 1997).
Prison industries, management contracting and private financing of prisons leading the way in privatization of prisons
In what ways do prisoners of today use their labor for privatized corporations? Patrick Kinkade and Matthew Leone mention this within prison industries. The area regarding prison industries is where the private sector of business will utilize the cheap labor of the prisoners for their business. The article provides examples such as reservationists for hotels, print shops, manufacturing of furniture, maintaining the marketing division of the private prison, and even an optical lab (Kinkade & Leone, 1992). Lucas Reilly wrote an enlightening article naming eleven items that were actually made by prisoners: books for the blind, lingerie, park benches and picnic tables, military jackets and battle garb, human silhouette targets, old IKEA products, baseball caps, canoes, artsy knick-knacks, blue jeans, and where they train wild mustangs so that they can be adopted (Reilly, 2013).
The theory behind allowing the prisons to provide cheaper labor for these corporations is great in theory, but when you analyze it further, it is actually harming the private sector. Labor unions will be threatened due to these prisoners providing labor at a lower rate (Kinkade & Leone, 1992). Kinkade and Leone also state in their article (Kinkade & Leone, 1992, para. 4) that:
“It is also noted that the economic concerns of maintaining such enterprise might come into conflict with penal purpose and institutional routine. Production schedules, in other words, may be difficult to keep in light of security problems that may occasionally arise. Moreover, the training that one might receive to work in a prison-based industry may not, itself, make one qualified for outside employment. Rehabilitation as approached though vocational training may then be sacrificed in an effort to maintain adequate supplies of laborers.”
If by allowing production to be outsourced to prisoners just for a lower rate can cause this much harm, why is it still being allowed? The second area where privatization of prisons can be found is that of management contracting. This entails having a facility controlled by the private sector to house inmates on a daily basis to go through a specific program (Kinkade & Leone, 1992). One of the better examples that can be seen of this manner is in California. “In the early 1980 's, it became legal for private facilities in California to house and treat multiple D.U.I.s for up to one-third of their mandated sentence” (Kinkade & Leone, 1992, para. 5). This particular program is seen through the management of Behavioral System Southwest. Some downfalls to management contracting within a privatized prison system need to be addressed. These include not only legal issues regarding “the constitutionality of turning state social control functions over to private parties” but the operation of the facility as well (Kinkade & Leone, 1992, para. 5). It all comes down to profit once again. The rehabilitation center might reduce the budget when it comes to the food or recreational equipment, as well as considering a minimal staff or even not having enough surveillance equipment to maintain the safety of the staff, prisoners and even the public (Kinkade & Leone, 1992). Some questions come to mind when one thinks of these pitfalls. How do they allow for discipline within the facility: what they would in any private rehabilitation facility or something more stringent for the prisoners? Would they allow deadly force when a prisoner gets beyond control and threatens the safety of other prisoners or staff? How do they prevent escapes from happening that would cause safety issues with the public? The third area of where privatization of prisons can be found includes private financing alternatives. The “typical arrangement the government will lease a facility that has been built by a private firm, thereby eliminating the need for voter approval of government general obligation bonds” (Kinkade & Leone, 1992, para. 6). This might be great in one state, but other states actually prohibit this from happening. This type of funding actually can have larger financing costs attributed to it than traditional bonds (Kinkade & Leone, 1992, para. 6).
Services and Safety fall behind
Did you know that private prisons are exempted from federal disclosure laws?
For instance, a private prison does not have to disclose “the number of abuses reported against prisoners over a certain period of time at a certain prison, or the context of civil rights lawsuits filed against certain staff members” (Stroud, 2013, para. 3). Stroud mentions how much Correction Corporation of America (CCA) spent in lobbying over 2012, $970,000 (Stroud, 2013, para. 13). He also states (Stroud, 2013, para. 14):
“The company operates 67 facilities, 47 of which it owns, according to its website. The facilities, which have more than 90,000 beds, are located in D.C. and 20 states. For the first nine months of 2012, CCA received $570.2 million from the U.S. government, the company’s most recent quarterly financial report …show more content…
shows”
A prison that is privately controlled is all about the profit, and sadly the safety and conditions for the prisoners are coming second within the list of goals (Winter & Eber, 2012). Per the Sentencing Project, Cody Mason writes that the two highest budgets that are included within a prison system, personnel and programs, are the first to be analyzed to see where they can cut corners so they can maximize in the profits. Personnel labor costs “account for 60 to 70 percent of annual operating budgets” (Mason, 2012, p. 10). In order to lower these costs within a private prison the salaries and benefits of the security guards will be drastically lower than their counterparts within a governmentally controlled facility, “equal to about $5,327 less in annual salary for new recruits and $14,901 less in maximum annual salaries” (Mason, 2012, p. 10).
Conclusion
Privatization of prison systems, either portions of it or the entire prisons, can only cause more harm than good. Robbin Ogle states that the privatization of a prison system results in a “destructive cycle of regulation, violations, and increased regulation, increasing the costs to both the company and the government” (Ogle, 1999, p. 20). A for-profit company is all about the bottom line, which is profit. When privatization is brought into the prison system, it can lower the salaries and benefits of security guards or bring in the lowest bidder for a contract that can have mediocre healthcare that results in deaths of prisoners. It can also cut budgets so that security gates and/or fences or even surveillance cameras are not used like they are intended or they are not the quality that is needed, and it can even cut out unions and public labor because the labor of prisoners is drastically lower. By allowing prison labor to continue it can cause the economy to decline because the public are going to be turned away because they can pay the prisoners at a fraction of the cost. In order to have the economy of the United States to thrive the public needs to have jobs and income so that they can spend money, how is this possible if more prisons allow prison labor to continue? In order for a privatized security guard to maintain a quality of life he must have an income that matches the cost of living in his or her area, how can this happen when private prisons offer a lower pay by equal to about $5,327 less in annual salary for new recruits and $14,901 less in maximum annual salaries” (Mason, 2012, p. 10)? How can the rehabilitation facilities that house prisoners within a private management facility maintain the prisoners so that there are no escapes that can cause harm to the public? These are all questions that need to be addressed so that if privatization of prisons does continue then “the essential services within the prison -- from medical care, food and clothing to staff costs and security” are met so that there will be no endangerment to the public, the inmates and the staff ("Prison," n.d.).
References
Appleby, C. (1997). Prisons. Going private to capture savings. Hospitals & Health Networks, 71(10), 70. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.brenau.edu:2048/ehost/detail?sid=8b7e4f17-d274-4c7e-92a1-87caef77a657%40sessionmgr10&vid=1&hid=11&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=mnh&AN=9179046
Chang, T. H., & Thompkins, D. E. (2002, Spring). Corporations go to prisons: the expansion of corporate power in the correctional industry. Labor Studies Journal , 27(1), 45. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.brenau.edu:2048/ehost/detail?sid=b10acdd7-02a6-4f17-a941-c50ab68a4d63%40sessionmgr11&vid=4&hid=11&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=bth&AN=6456764
Convicts picking cotton [photgraph]. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://usslave.blogspot.com/2011/09/mimicking-of-slave-system-structure-in.html
Goal, Walnut Street Philadelphia [Photograph Plate]. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.ushistory.org/birch/plates/images/plate24.jpg
Kinkade, P. T., & Leone, M. C. (1992, December). The privatization of prisons: The wardens’ views. Federal Probation, 56(4), 58. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.brenau.edu:2048/ehost/detail?sid=1919a942-51de-4a5d-8ebd-6e366dc996ca%40sessionmgr12&vid=1&hid=11&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=fth&AN=9502164052
Mason, C. (2012). Too good to be true private prisons in America. Retrieved from The Sentencing Project website: http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/inc_Too_Good_to_be_True.pdf
Ogle, R. S. (1999, September). Prison privatization: An environmental catch-22. Justice Quarterly : JQ, 16(3), 579-600. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.brenau.edu:2048/docview/228199638/abstract?accountid=9708
Perrone, D., & Pratt, T.
C. (2003, September 1). Comparing the Quality of Confinement and Cost-Effectiveness of Public Versus Private Prisons: What We Know, Why We Do Not Know More, and Where to Go from Here. The Prison Journal, 83(3), 301-322. Retrieved from http://brenau.worldcat.org.ezproxy.brenau.edu:2048/title/comparing-the-quality-of-confinement-and-cost-effectiveness-of-public-versus-private-prisons-what-we-know-why-we-do-not-know-more-and-where-to-go-from-here/oclc/437796861&referer=brief_results
Prison Privatization. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.correctionsproject.com/corrections/pris_priv.htm
Privatization and deadly health care in prisons. (2005). PA Times, 28(7), 12. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.brenau.edu:2048/ehost/detail?sid=96a4bd8d-a754-4758-ad0a-b3c3edbbe43a%40sessionmgr14&vid=1&hid=11&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=bth&AN=17770675
Reilly, L. (2013, June 11). 11 products you might not realize were made by prisoners. mental_floss. Retrieved from
http://mentalfloss.com/article/51037/11-products-you-might-not-realize-were-made-prisoners
Stroud, M. (2013, February 7). Updated: private prisons are exempted from federal disclosure laws; advocates say that should change. Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/mattstroud/2013/02/07/private-prisons-are-exempted-from-federal-disclosure-laws-advocates-say-that-should-change/
Winter, M., & Eber, G. (2012). Private prisons are the problem, not the solution. Retrieved from http://www.aclu.org/blog/prisoners-rights-criminal-law-reform/private-prisons-are-problem-not-solution