Privatization of correctional facilities in the United States

Criminal Justice

Service contracts with the private sector have increased over the years in the United States particularly if we consider the case of corrections departments. Various factors such as shortage of funds, cures for the imperfections in the public correctional systems etc. are considered in triggering this change. It is argued that if government cannot provide such services cheaply then privatization can be given this function and responsibility but the issue is not very simple as there are many policy and law issues associated with it. The delegation of responsibilities to the private sector whether for profit or non- profit requires careful examination as to what functions, to what extent and with what conditions can privatization work. Dealing with private sector for food services in corrections center would not become that big an issue as compared to contracting out managerial or custodian or other important control functions.

Background & Major Players

The phenomenon of private prison in the United States started in early 80s when Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) facilities in Texas and California had too many people to handle in their facilities. The inmates were then sent to institutions run by Behavioral Systems Southwest (BSS), a for-profit firm and the trend started. By the late 80s there were a number of private correctional facilities. "Today there are approximately 102 private facilities, holding more than 100,000 prisoners across the U.S. with 43 in Texas, 24 in California, 10 in Florida, and 9 in Colorado" (Campbell, Coyle & Neufeld, 2003). Tennessee-based Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) is one of the oldest and largest players in the prison industry. People who were behind the project of Kentucky Fried Chicken fast-food chain established CCA. CCA has control over about half of all the beds in private prisons operating in the United States. Almost quarters of beds are under the control of another leading name in the prison industry that is Wackenhut Corrections, a subsidiary of the well-established Wackenhut private security service. These are the two major players in the industry. Apart from these, there are about more than a dozen established for-profit private prison firms operating in U.S..

A number of private prisons are in the southern and western United States. Prisons are small towns unto themselves that carry not just the prisoners of the state they are working in but at times prisoners from other sates are also brought in such prisons. These prison facilities also gradually became active on Wall Street. For example shares of CCA were initially offered at a price of $8 per share in 1995 and with the passage of time this industry became a booming industry as reflected in the share prices. The share price of CCA rose to a whopping $100 in just a span of four years. But later on the prices of these shares crashed down for example CCA shares came to $13 while Wackenhut's to about $16. Experts and analysts still view this prison industry attractive for investments.

Legal Issues

Different legal issues also surround the prison industry. Many started legal debate concerning whether it is legally right to source out the correctional facilities. Those who are against this idea of private prisons say that legally detaining, arresting, punishing and handling prisoners should be under the control of federal and state Governments. These people see moral and legal issues behind private prisons. Even American Bar Association considers the act of putting people behind prison an act that should be exercised by the government. Those who are in favor of private prisons say that legally there is no such restriction on delegation of imprisonment task unless otherwise stated in a particular state's jurisdiction and even courts have not yet passed any verdict against it in any case.

However, in order to establish a private facility the consent of state legislature is required. Once a state makes the decision for allowing establishment of a private for-profit prison then corporations are asked to participate in bidding by submitting their proposals. The highest bidder offering better services is awarded the contract. Many states attach certain conditions such as maintenance and provision of educational and rehabilitation services before actually awarding the contract. After awarding the contract government exercises the right of monitoring and accountability by means of thorough inspections, interviews, observations, hearings, and meetings. For example, in the state of Florida there is a legal requirement that such prison facilities can be inspected at least once annually. Some argue that annual and semi-annual inspections are not enough and full-time government monitoring is required but this too may have issues of costs and corruption. To counter this some private firms have taken the point-of-view of accreditation by American Correctional Association (ACA). Still, a fool proof formula for monitoring and checking is not there and cases of human rights related issues have also surfaced over the years concerning treatment of prisoners in private facilities.

Conclusion

One of the main causes of allowing private facilities was cost saving but no significant achievement has been made in this regard. A 2001 study commissioned by the U.S. Department of Justice concluded that "rather than the projected 20% savings, the average saving from privatization was only about 1%, and most of that was achieved though lower labor costs" (Campbell, Coyle & Neufeld, 2003). Though private facilities have been lauded for better services and efficiency at many a times, the issues of costs and many human rights violations have marred the overall prospect of private prisons.