In 2014, there were 131,261 prisoners housed in private, for-profit prisons in the United States, which constitutes 8.4% of the overall U.S. prison population (Carson 13). A private prison incarcerates individuals using a third party company that is contracted by a government agency. The company is paid monthly based on the amount of prisoners in the facility or for each space available, whether occupied or not. The shift from public to private prisons was not instantaneous; two major factors aided in the creation and expansion of for-profit prisons. Selman and Leighton, professors in the department of sociology, anthropology, and criminology at Eastern Michigan University, state that “the first important factor is the explosive growth in the
…show more content…
The expansion of the prison population required increased criminal justice expenditures and provided politicians the basis to gravitate toward unconventional methods for reparations. Also, Republican leaders in the 1980’s believed government involvement was an issue, so they argued for outsourcing services to businesses to reduce cost and improve service, which lead to the creation of private prisons. Private prisons were created to improve the system, yet these institutions promote mass incarceration, sacrifice quality of care, lack in cost benefits, and threaten inmate safety.
The promotion of mass incarceration from the private prison industry is fueled by the direct monetary benefits from mass incarceration. Mass incarceration refers to the fact that the United …show more content…
The drive behind private prisons is the belief that they save taxpayer money and fuel local economies, but evidence for these benefits is mixed. Although some studies support this belief, numerous other studies and reports indicate that private prisons do not save money, and those that do are not significant amounts (Shapiro 19). An issue arises when legislators, operating under the highly controversial belief that for-profit prisons save money, turn to privatization as a solution, rather than decreasing expenses by reducing the number of prisoners. For example, despite a recent statement by the Arizona Auditor General that for-profit imprisonment in Arizona may cost more than incarceration in publicly-operated facilities, Arizona has announced plans to give an additional 5,000 prison beds to private contractors (Shapiro 41). In addition, one clear cost disadvantage of private prisons is that, in many states, employees cannot be denied the right to strike (Donahue 16). Prison can not shut-down seamlessly, so the employees of private prisons have more leverage when bargaining. This may eventually result in higher wages and benefits that public employees would not be privy to due to their inability to strike unobstructedly. Private prisons are not as cost effective as they claim, and these majorly false claims allow leaders to approve expansions that do not benefit the
The expansion of the prison population required increased criminal justice expenditures and provided politicians the basis to gravitate toward unconventional methods for reparations. Also, Republican leaders in the 1980’s believed government involvement was an issue, so they argued for outsourcing services to businesses to reduce cost and improve service, which lead to the creation of private prisons. Private prisons were created to improve the system, yet these institutions promote mass incarceration, sacrifice quality of care, lack in cost benefits, and threaten inmate safety.
The promotion of mass incarceration from the private prison industry is fueled by the direct monetary benefits from mass incarceration. Mass incarceration refers to the fact that the United …show more content…
The drive behind private prisons is the belief that they save taxpayer money and fuel local economies, but evidence for these benefits is mixed. Although some studies support this belief, numerous other studies and reports indicate that private prisons do not save money, and those that do are not significant amounts (Shapiro 19). An issue arises when legislators, operating under the highly controversial belief that for-profit prisons save money, turn to privatization as a solution, rather than decreasing expenses by reducing the number of prisoners. For example, despite a recent statement by the Arizona Auditor General that for-profit imprisonment in Arizona may cost more than incarceration in publicly-operated facilities, Arizona has announced plans to give an additional 5,000 prison beds to private contractors (Shapiro 41). In addition, one clear cost disadvantage of private prisons is that, in many states, employees cannot be denied the right to strike (Donahue 16). Prison can not shut-down seamlessly, so the employees of private prisons have more leverage when bargaining. This may eventually result in higher wages and benefits that public employees would not be privy to due to their inability to strike unobstructedly. Private prisons are not as cost effective as they claim, and these majorly false claims allow leaders to approve expansions that do not benefit the