Soma Bissoondharry Professor Reed Univ 112 15 November 2013 Should incarceration be limited to government rather than private industries in the U.S.? People are caged by bars that are funded by U.S. tax dollars and the money from the taxpayers could be used to help the prisoners or it could just be going straight into the prison owner’s pockets. Private prisons are prisons owned by individuals. These individuals receive money from the state governments for them to be able to maintain the prisons. The money they receive is based on the amount of prisoners they have: the more prisoners, the more money. Private prisons are cheaper than state prisons, which is why the government would rather use them. This raises many problems. First, many believe that incarceration should only be limited to government because they feel that private prisons undermine a state’s authority. Second, since private prison owners receive money based on the amount of prisoners that they have then they would want stricter legislation passed to have more people incarcerated. Third, there is no way to find out if the private prison owners actually spend the money to keep their prisons orderly. Is the treatment between private prisons and state prisons different? Are private prisons really saving the government money? These are only a few of the questions that arise when discussing private prisons. Almost 7% of America’s felons are housed in private prisons. Supporters of private prisons think that since private prisons are smaller, they should be in better conditions therefore it has a good effect on the inmates. Even though private prisons are

cheaper than public prisons, what are the other differences? Martin P. Sellers conducted a study comparing three private prisons and three public prisons. He compared the services offered, the costs per day per inmate and other details. When comparing the services offered at RCA’s Weaversville Intensive Treatment Unit, Northampton, Pennsylvania, and Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare’s North Central Secure Treatment Unit, Danville, Pennsylvania, he found that they both offered about the same services. NC, the public prison did not offer work release or after care. RCA, the private prison did not offer canteen, commissary, or laundry service. The cost per day per inmate was an eleven-dollar difference in 1985 with the private prison being less. There was a $393,164 difference for the cost per inmate in 1985 with the private prison being less. Although when it comes to the condition of the facilities, there’s a difference with the public prison being better. North Central’s condition was “clean” while Weaversville’s was “worn”. They both have the same amount of inmates but North Central had a couple extra beds. Weaversville had a democratic management style while North Central was authoritarian. Weaversville had a 1:1 ratio of administrator to inmate while North Central was 1.25:1. The health care for Weaversville was comprehensive while North Central also had a nurse on duty. The educational programs were better at North Central because they had computers unlike Weaversville, on which they did vocational learning. All in all, while private prisons are a lot cheaper, public prisons have better treatment, which better affect the inmates.  

Private prison owners receive money based on the amount of prisoners they have.

Wouldn’t this mean that they would lobby for politicians who they could pay to make laws harsh? This would benefit them because it might result in more people violating the

law and consequently being imprisoned. Then they would receive larger amounts of money from the government. From my point of view, I would think that private prison owners are only looking for what will make them the most profit and the government allows this. “One of the concerns raised by present critics of correctional privatization is that profit-motivated firms will make decisions that maximize profits at the expense of the rights and well-being of prisoners” (Price, 19). Private prison owners would only look out for what would benefit them. They do not care about the impact it would have on others. The government doesn’t regulate how the private prison owners spend the money. “Privatizing prisons has support from conservatives and public choice scholars on the grounds that the private sector can operate the prisons more efficiently and effectively. Critics argue, there is not enough evidence to support that contention because of the many hidden costs accompanying the transfer of resources to a private entity” (Price, 18). This proves that the government doesn’t know how the money they are paying the private prison owners is being spent. According to Price, once prisons become private, citizens lose access to their records. “Ohio had made an arrangement with Washington DC to house medium-risk prisoners in its medium-security prison; however DC sent Youngstown maximum-security prisoners. The prisoners from DC eventual murdered several other prisoners. The citizens in this community were unaware of the hardened prisoners that were shipped to Youngstown because the facility did not make this kind of information public.” (Price, 19)

This is an instance in which citizens are unaware of what is going on because of private prisons and people ended up being murdered. Since private prisons are private, information is kept from the public. In public prisons, the government knows what is going on and regulates everything. Because of the fact that the government does not know how the private prison owners are spending the money, I would argue that the government is giving unnecessary power to private individuals. Incarceration should only be limited to the government because private individuals should not have so much authority over felons, without any regulation of the government. “They further argue that a distinction must be made between the choice to punish and the administration of punishment. Under this line of reasoning, scholars assume it is perfectly acceptable to recognize the decision to punish an individual as the government’s responsibility and equally acceptable to allow a private entity under governmental supervision to administer the punishment, that is, operate the prison—implying social contract theory.” (Price, 19) This is evidence that the government does not regulate private prisons at all. If the government had at least some regulation over private prisons then it would not be as big of a problem but the government just leaves the lives of the prisoners in the hands of the owners. The government does not regulate the treatment of the prisoners, the conditions they live in or anything. “For instance, critics point to the infamous incident in Brazoria, Texas, in which a guard was captured on tape dragging a prisoner across the floor, announced a welcome to Texas and said, “Enjoy the ride. It’s like Astroworld” (Price,

19). This would most likely not occur in a public prison. If it were to happen, the government would find out and disciplinary action would be taken against the guard. Along with the fact that the government does not know how the private prison owners spend the money they are granted and does not regulate private prisons, there are many differences between public and private prisons. “About 95 million dollars a year in taxpayer money is given to corporate jailers to house their prisoners in Colorado for private prisons” (PBS). Your taxpayer money is what is being used to pay these private industries, yet the government does not know exactly what the money is used on and what goes on in the private prisons. Donna Como said that, “private prisons are morally wrong and unsafe for the people that guard them—state facilities had lower assault rates and better rehabilitation programs” (PBS). Como quit her job at the Colorado Crowley private prison because of serious security lapses and she worried about her own safety. There was an incident when she called for back up with a violent inmate and it took 28 minutes for someone to help her. If the government gives private prison owners money, they should have enough to hire enough staff to take care of the prisoners. Since the government does not regulate how the money is spent, it’s impossible to know if everything is up to par unless someone like Como complains. Even though private prisons are cheaper for the government, cheaper is not always better. Conditions are better not only for the inmates but for the workers in state prisons. Private prisons are a waste of our tax dollars. Maybe if the government had some regulation over private prisons it would be better, but then the owners might not appreciate the government being a part of their business. Incarceration should not even be part of consumer practice but with private prisons, that’s exactly what it is. Incarceration

should only be limited to government because the government regulates the law and have the authority to incarcerate people. The government should get rid of private prisons and either add more state prisons to hold felons or convert the private prisons to state prisons. All in all, individuals should not own prisons.

Bibliography Sellers, Martin. The History and Politics of Private Prisons. London: Associated University Presses, 1993. Print. Price, Byron Eugene. Merchandizing Prisoners: Who Really Pays For Prison Privatization? Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2006. Print. Harding, Richard W. Private Prisons and Public Accountability. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1997. Print. PBS NOW. “Prisons for Profit.” Youtube, 4 July. 2011. Web. 13 November. 2013.