ENGL 102

November 5, 2019

***ROUGH DRAFT***

The United States has more of its population incarcerated than any other nation. To deal

with this high number of prisoners, the government contracts outside corporations to fund and

maintain prisons in order to, supposedly, save taxpayers money. Private prisons were created to

decrease taxes because “governments are less likely to use their limited budgets to fund projects

that serve historically unpopular groups such as the homeless” (Baliga 443). This raises some

ethical questions such as, should corporations be given the right to imprison other human beings?

Private prison populations have been rising in the United States. “The first private prison was

created in Texas in 1989, by the end of 1989, procurement contracts were in place for 44 secure

adult prisons in 14 states with a capacity of 78,000” (Harding 277). Multiple factors led to the

growth of private prisons such as, increasing incarcerated populations, overcrowding, and

concern about recurrent costs. “One of the most significant changes in the contemporary criminal

justice system over the past 30 years is the exponential growth of the for-profit private prison

industry. Currently, 30 states and the federal government contract private companies to own

and/or operate prison facilities. According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, the number of

inmates held in private prison facilities increased from approximately 7,500 in 1990 to almost

129,000 in 2012” (Ramirez 217). This rise is very concerning to those who believe that private

prisons are unethical. The authority to imprison human beings should not be given to outside

corporations because it encourages cost saving measures and prioritizes the need to make profit
which leads to a lower quality of confinement, and private prisons use their money and power to

influence criminal policy which in turn will give them more money.

Privatizing prisons is unethical because they prioritize profit over the rehabilitation of the

prisoners under their care. Corporations exist to make money and the need to make profit

conflicts with the care provided. Baliga argues that “[the corporation’s] first priority is of

accruing profit for its investors.” Their first priority should be rehabilitating their prisoners, not

accruing profit because in order to make a profit, they will either have to lock more people up or

spend less money on other things. The rapid growth in private prison populations is harmful for

both inmates and workers. Having more inmates decreases safety in private prison facilities.

Evidence shows that the privatization of prisons encourages cost saving measures. Prisons often

take these cost minimizing measures at the expense of prison conditions and inmate human

rights. That means that these corporations will cut corners and deny their prisoners basic rights in

order to make money. The right to imprison other human beings should not go to a corporation

because there is room for corruption.

These factors lead to a lower quality of confinement in private prisons. Private prisons

experience overcrowding due to their need for the most amount of prisoners they can squeeze

into the prison in order to make the most profit. Overcrowding creates unsanitary and unsafe

conditions. These unsafe conditions are worsened by the fact that many private prisons are

understaffed, and the staff that is available are undertrained. “Some evidence suggests that the

private sector prison providers had problems in maintaining adequately trained and experienced

staff and that there were critical lapses in appropriate security practices.” (Harding 169). These

grievous offenses must be taken seriously. Prisons house dangerous criminals and any lapse in

security can lead to danger for the prisoners that these corporations are supposed to protect.
Prisons should not be private because they influence quality of the prison. Private prisons need

to increase the quality of care they provide to decrease violence and reoccurring offenders.

“Private sector companies also experienced serious group disturbances in 1999, most of which

could be viewed as riots. CCA (five incidents), WCC (three incidents), and CSC (one incident)

experienced group disturbances in which chemical agents had to be used to control inmates,

and/or injuries resulted to staff members, and/or significant property damage occurred.” (Camp

ILA 3)

Private prisons have contributed to a rise in prison populations and have even influenced

public policy. “Private prisons engage in a great deal of lobbying for legislation that would

increase the prison population and, consequently, their profit margin. The two largest private

prison operators, Corrections Corporation of America and The Geo Group, Inc., spent

approximately $20 million on lobbying expenditures and $4.8 million on political contributions

between 2003 and 2012 Much of this money was to encourage the enactment of new laws and

increase mandatory sentencing laws across states” (Ramirez 220). In this way we can see how

corporations are essentially running the United States. The corruption not only affects the

prisoners already under their care but potentially innocent people too.

Private prisons must be abolished for the protection of our citizens. If this system cannot

be weeded out, then there must be significant changes. “Increased transparency of private prisons

could make up for shortcomings in oversight resulting from both conditions generally applicable

to corrections and to conditions unique to the industry” (Tartaglia 1692). Private prisons must be

monitored in order to ensure that they are not violating their prisoners’ human rights. Private
prisons must prioritize rehabilitation over profit. “Rehabilitation programs lower recidivism

rates, thus potentially saving the government millions of dollars” (Baliga). No one should be

allowed profit off of the incarceration and torture of others. “The authority to hold and deal with

prisoners is derived from public law, not private arrangement.” (Harding 266)

“Imprisonment is an intrinsic or core state function that by definition cannot legitimately be

delegated in any of its aspects to a nonstate agency without undermining the very notion of the

state and its responsibility to and for its citizens.” (Harding 266)
 Works Cited

Baliga, Shifali. “Shaping the Success of Social Impact Bonds in the United States: Lessons

Learned from the Privatization of U.S. Prisons” Duke Law Journal, vol. 63, no. 2, 2013,

pp. 437–479. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/23792929.

Camp, Scott D., and Gerald G. Gaes. Private Prisons in the United States, 1999: An Assessment

of Growth, Performance, Custody Standards, and Training Requirements. Federal Bureau

of Prisons, Mar. 2000, permanent.access.gpo.gov/gpo22703/orepr cg2000.pdf.

Harding, Richard. “Private Prisons.” Crime and Justice, vol. 28, 2001, pp. 265–346. JSTOR,

www.jstor.org/stable/1147676.

Logan, Charles H. “Well Kept: Comparing Quality of Confinement in Private and Public

Prisons.” The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-), vol. 83, no. 3, 1992, pp.

577–613. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/1143839.

Ramirez, Mark D. “African Americans’ Principled Opposition to Prison Privatization.” Journal

of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, vol. 13, 2015.

Tartaglia, Mike. “Private Prisons, Private Records.” Boston University Law Review, vol. 94,

2014.