What was the reasoning for allowing a for-profit criminal justice system? More specifically, why do a handful of states have private probation companies? These companies are being sued for charging people for things that are not issued by the court(there are many other quarrels but I’d rather not go there myself). Any answer that’s more adequate than just “corporatism” would be great.
Corporatism 
Well, that’s essentially what it is. Corporations are much more powerful than people with a criminal background. Criminals are an easy target, there are very few who advocate for their rights, and their voices are easily drowned out by the “think of the children” people. Given a corporations ability to influence both politicians and electorate, and most criminals not even being allowed to vote… It is pretty much the natural progression of things.
If your question is why do we not have better protections to prevent such abuses from happening, well, because very few care what happens to a criminal, even after they have paid their debt to society.
I think the theory is that government is always inefficient and businesses are always efficient, so giving it to a business will save money.
I assume this theory comes from people who have never actually worked in a large corporation. The flaws, which are obvious, probably should wait for GD.
And it’s just horrid that government should *spend *that money when they can instead pay it to a company for services rendered. Or, so often says the man who will be the recipient of that payment.
I’m not as familiar with probation, but jails and prisons it came down to cost and politics.
Throughout the 1980s and 1990s we got “tough on crime” and consequently State prison populations soared. The way states normally deal with needing more prisons is building them and hiring new Department of Corrections employees to operate them. But in the political climate of the 1980s and 1990s more and more state legislators started saying “maybe instead we should contract with a private company, since private companies are more efficient!” At least that was the political rhetoric.
The reality is, evidence on private prisons as cost savings vehicles is murky at best. But what isn’t murky is private prisons do tend to save “more visible money.” The way State budgeting is done, private prisons tend to help the legislature keep its budget goals (which are usually political) on track.
For example if Ohio needs to build a new prison for 100m, it will typically issue bonds or use money from a capital building fund to pay for it. This money is due to the builders of the facility right now. If they work with a private prison, what usually happens is the private prison company builds the structure, and usually gets 20-year ownership of it, or something like that. Once that initial ownership period is over, the State gets ownership of the facility and can start charging the private prison rent. The State normally pays the private prison company a certain amount of per incarcerated person, and then in the contract it generally guarantees say, 90% occupancy (thus insuring the private prison company a certain, predictable, minimum of revenue.)
Now, of course the private prison company isn’t building the prison for free. During that initial 20 year period, as part of its contract the state is basically paying for the building, and often at a higher total cost than they would’ve paid in interest if they had funded it with a bond issue. But a long-term contract with a private vendor actually “looks different” for state budgeting purposes than a 20 or 30 year bond backed by the full faith and credit of the state.
Additionally, the private prison, even if its cost per employee might be a little higher (and sometimes it is) than a state prison, the state accrues no long term health/pension obligations on its books.
So basically the why is two fold–increased incarceration, and what amount to legislative “tricks” with State budgets. They usually don’t save money, and in some cases they cost more than a State run prison, but they appear to cost less in terms of long term debt and that has value to state legislators.
Now, that’s how the industry was born. Like any industry that’s so deep in with government (defense contracting is another), once it became a multi-billion dollar industry obviously it got its teeth into state legislatures via lobbying.
Now, keep in mind private prisons aren’t that big a part of our system–there were about 2.2m inmates in 2013, and about 133,000 were in privately owned/ran facilities.
Private Prisons donate to the GOP. Prison Guard unions donate to the Dems.
That’s all you have to know.
Most privately run facilities are located in the southern and western portions of the United States and include both state and federal offenders.[20] For example, Pecos, Texas is the site of the largest private prison in the world, the Reeves County Detention Complex, operated by the GEO Group.[21] It has a capacity of 3,763 prisoners in its three sub-complexes,[22]… Louisiana, which has the highest incarceration rate in the world and houses the majority of its inmates in for-profit facilities.
There is no real cost-savings:
Proponents of privately run prisons contend that cost-savings and efficiency of operation place private prisons at an advantage over public prisons and support the argument for privatization, but some research casts doubt on the validity of these arguments, as evidence has shown that private prisons are neither demonstrably more cost-effective, nor more efficient than public prisons.[8] An evaluation of 24 different studies on cost-effectiveness revealed that, at best, results of the question are inconclusive and, at worst, there is no difference in cost-effectiveness
Eh, it’s satisfying to believe in that sort of thinking, but it rarely is true. Private prisons were largely created by State legislative initiatives, in the era in which privatization across a range of industries was heavily en vogue. Like anyone with a guaranteed and nice government-funded revenue stream, once created, private prisons were of course going to lobby and make political donations to keep the money flowing. But you’re putting the cart before the horse so to speak.
Plus, people usually overestimate the amount of political donations and how much influence they have. (This is frequently seen on topics like the NRA and gun control, when the NRA frequently gives less than 1% of donations to most state/local campaigns.) I’d wager that given the size of the industry and of guard unions donations on either side aren’t all that big as a share of total political spending.
The same reason for allowing a for-profit [fill in your formerly-government function here]. Sometimes it works well, sometimes it doesn’t. There is nothing special about prisons and probation that makes privatizing them any different.
Some government functions that aren’t privatized are corrupt and inefficient. Your mileage may vary.
Our town outsourced the police. Works fantastic. Your mileage may vary.
And even that can fail when children are the victims of a corrupt private prison in league with judges.
Kids for cash.
They result in someone losing their liberty or freedom.
Yeah, there should never be a profit motive for putting people in jail. That’s a path that cannot ever end well.
There is nothing inherent about making these functions for-profit that does this. People lose their liberty or freedom when these functions are run by the government as well.
Your question was why is this allowed. The reason is the same as other functions. They privatize parking, parks, trash pickup, police, road maintenance, animal control, etc. These are all “allowed”, and often work very well. There is nothing so different about prison and probation that means “they” have to be corrupt or crazy to “allow” it.
I suspect the question you really want to ask is different than the one you asked, and is likely not a factual question at all.
Why are almost all the private prisons in GOP territory then?
Private prisons do not cause persons to lose their liberty. The courts are still public an dit requires a court order to put someone in prison upon conviction.
Prisons and probation services, whether public or private, carry out orders of the court.
The problem is when they start influencing the court, at least one example cited above.
When government takes away peoples liberty or freedom that is on behalf of us all. When a company takes away peoples liberty or freedom that is on behalf of a small group of individuals. Also just to clarify my question, what is the reason for private probation companies. I understand there may be a burden on the state and the private sector can relieve that burden, but there must be more to it than simply that or corporatism.
This is more of a factual question than a general one, because I’m seeking elaboration on the topic, maybe some information on the actual rulings made. I’ve searched the web for this but cannot find it and my best bet is to seek answers and elaboration from you dopers.
These are for-profit companies though, especially the probation companies. We’ve seen numerous lawsuits rise in states that have private probation companies, due to them making charges that the court has not issued.
Privatization in general is much more associated with the Republican party. State funding for school vouchers is also more prevalent in red states, for example. The only real exceptions are Wisconsin and Maine, which may be blue in Presidential elections but which both have typically had strong State GOPs.
The District also has school vouchers but it was probably opposed locally–the District can have policies forced upon it by an activist Congress.
Vermont has one of the highest rates of assigning prisoners to private prisons, but isn’t precisely controlled by the GOP. Same thing with California.
Which actually echoes what I’ve said–political donations aren’t likely why private prisons became what they are. California in particular has had a funding crisis for ages and terrible credit rating, so it would have major incentives to try and finance prisons through the private prison process versus bond issues. California was required to release lots of inmates recently due to Federal courts finding they are unconstitutionally inhumane due to overcrowding.