The Privatization of Justice: It's Not Just Prisons Anymore

[AthenaAwakened]

Why the Private Prison Industry is About so Much More Than Prisons

Nowhere has the outsourcing of public functions to private companies been more systematic than in the criminal justice system. It’s so pervasive that the phrase we use to describe the industry – “private prison companies” – is far too limiting to accurately depict the situation.

Actual housing of convicts in prisons and jails is only one part--perhaps the smallest part--of the overall industry revenue stream. Private companies seek to pull profits from the moment someone is suspected of a crime to the final day they meet with a parole officer. Private industry transports prisoners, operates prison bank accounts, sells prescription drugs, prepares inmate food, and manages health care, prison phone and computer time. And that's just the start. The money comes from the taxpayer, in state and federal contracts, and the suspects, inmates, and parolees themselves, in fees and add-ons. Those caught in the web represent what marketers would call the ultimate “captive audience”: there is no way to shop around for a better deal.

“We’ve created a system to squeeze everything we can out of people, the vast majority of whom are poor,” said Alex Friedmann, activist and publisher of Prison Legal News.

Corporate financial incentives to shuttle people into the criminal justice system may seem to conflict with intensifying bipartisan concerns around America’s role as the most incarcerated nation on earth. But private prison companies can prosper whether the incarceration rate expands or lowers, by controlling the other ends of the pipeline, from pre-trial supervision to post-prison re-entry. The greatest source of profits now comes from federal contracts to detain, transfer, and deport undocumented immigrants. The more toxic the immigration debate becomes, the more advantage for-profit corporations take.

Delivering poor services at a premium price is part of the marketing strategy, says Matt Nelson, managing director of the immigration rights group Presente. “They know that cutting costs, services and training for guards increases recidivism,” Nelson said. “They’re familiar that if you have horrible conditions, people stay in the system longer. They know that the younger you incarcerate, it’s more likely they will stay in the system. They keep customers coming back.”

 

[SimpleDon]

Why the Private Prison Industry is About so Much More Than Prisons

Nowhere has the outsourcing of public functions to private companies been more systematic than in the criminal justice system. It’s so pervasive that the phrase we use to describe the industry – “private prison companies” – is far too limiting to accurately depict the situation.

Actual housing of convicts in prisons and jails is only one part--perhaps the smallest part--of the overall industry revenue stream. Private companies seek to pull profits from the moment someone is suspected of a crime to the final day they meet with a parole officer. Private industry transports prisoners, operates prison bank accounts, sells prescription drugs, prepares inmate food, and manages health care, prison phone and computer time. And that's just the start. The money comes from the taxpayer, in state and federal contracts, and the suspects, inmates, and parolees themselves, in fees and add-ons. Those caught in the web represent what marketers would call the ultimate “captive audience”: there is no way to shop around for a better deal.

“We’ve created a system to squeeze everything we can out of people, the vast majority of whom are poor,” said Alex Friedmann, activist and publisher of Prison Legal News.

Corporate financial incentives to shuttle people into the criminal justice system may seem to conflict with intensifying bipartisan concerns around America’s role as the most incarcerated nation on earth. But private prison companies can prosper whether the incarceration rate expands or lowers, by controlling the other ends of the pipeline, from pre-trial supervision to post-prison re-entry. The greatest source of profits now comes from federal contracts to detain, transfer, and deport undocumented immigrants. The more toxic the immigration debate becomes, the more advantage for-profit corporations take.

Delivering poor services at a premium price is part of the marketing strategy, says Matt Nelson, managing director of the immigration rights group Presente. “They know that cutting costs, services and training for guards increases recidivism,” Nelson said. “They’re familiar that if you have horrible conditions, people stay in the system longer. They know that the younger you incarcerate, it’s more likely they will stay in the system. They keep customers coming back.”

Also, perhaps the most abusive example is the private, for profit parole system. The parolees have to pay for the costs of maintaining their parole irrespective of their ability to pay. It is another trap for the poor. If they miss a payment, averaging ~$400 a month, they are charged outrageous interest and fees that put the parolee further in the financial hole. Eventually they can be sent back to prison not because they have broken parole but because they could not pay for the costs of their parole, effectively they are put in debtors' prison. And they still will owe the money plus accumulated interest when they get out of prison.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Why the Private Prison Industry is About so Much More Than Prisons

Also, perhaps the most abusive example is the private, for profit parole system. The parolees have to pay for the costs of maintaining their parole irrespective of their ability to pay. It is another trap for the poor. If they miss a payment, averaging ~$400 a month, they are charged outrageous interest and fees that put the parolee further in the financial hole. Eventually they can be sent back to prison not because they have broken parole but because they could not pay for the costs of their parole, effectively they are put in debtors' prison. And they still will owe the money plus accumulated interest when they get out of prison.

I think this might be the first time we agree. The ability to pay should be factored into the court decision.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Also, perhaps the most abusive example is the private, for profit parole system. The parolees have to pay for the costs of maintaining their parole irrespective of their ability to pay. It is another trap for the poor. If they miss a payment, averaging ~$400 a month, they are charged outrageous interest and fees that put the parolee further in the financial hole. Eventually they can be sent back to prison not because they have broken parole but because they could not pay for the costs of their parole, effectively they are put in debtors' prison. And they still will owe the money plus accumulated interest when they get out of prison.

I think this might be the first time we agree. The ability to pay should be factored into the court decision.

Or just have the government pay the costs like normal countries do.

 

[coloradoatheist]

I think this might be the first time we agree. The ability to pay should be factored into the court decision.

Or just have the government pay the costs like normal countries do.

fines are a part of a punishment for breaking a law. We are disagreeing on the amount.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Or just have the government pay the costs like normal countries do.

fines are a part of a punishment for breaking a law. We are disagreeing on the amount.

But this isn't a fine.

 

[coloradoatheist]

fines are a part of a punishment for breaking a law. We are disagreeing on the amount.

But this isn't a fine.

It is a fine though. It's a payment for the crime committed. So instead of jail time they pay a fine. The other option instead of the fine and getting parole is more jail time for the crime.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

But this isn't a fine.

It is a fine though. It's a payment for the crime committed. So instead of jail time they pay a fine. The other option instead of the fine and getting parole is more jail time for the crime.

No the fine isn't just a payment for the crime committed, but it is a generator for fees and interest that make the debt to be paid disproportional to the crime committed and can lead to jail time.

 

[coloradoatheist]

It is a fine though. It's a payment for the crime committed. So instead of jail time they pay a fine. The other option instead of the fine and getting parole is more jail time for the crime.

No the fine isn't just a payment for the crime committed, but it is a generator for fees and interest that make the debt to be paid disproportional to the crime committed and can lead to jail time.

I said we are arguing over the amount that the fine is. Instead of jail time they are getting a chance to get out earlier with parole but has associated costs with that instead of going to jail. Instead of parole, they could server a long jail sentence for the crime.

 

[Elixir]

Instead of jail time they are getting a chance to get out earlier with parole but has associated costs with that instead of going to jail.

'Scuse me? Parole is more expensive than jail? I doubt it. The cost of incarceration runs $30,000 to $170,000/yr.
It can't possibly cost that much to have someone on parole.

 

[Jarhyn]

Or just have the government pay the costs like normal countries do.

fines are a part of a punishment for breaking a law. We are disagreeing on the amount.

I disagree on the premise of punishment. Do we want to punish people, or treat whatever it is that causes them to commit crimes so that they don't commit them?

Let's be clear and honest, punishment is nothing but *revenge*. It's making them hurt because they made us hurt. At the very best it can control by fear, but fear can be mitigated by being clever enough to not get caught, or such cleverness can be attempted, at any rate.

That isn't productive. It serves no utility other than making a convenient person to point to that we can justify hurting to satisfy some perverse boner for violence.

I say letting the punishment 'got the crime' is barbarism. Let the punishment *end* the crime and no more.

 

[coloradoatheist]

fines are a part of a punishment for breaking a law. We are disagreeing on the amount.

I disagree on the premise of punishment. Do we want to punish people, or treat whatever it is that causes them to commit crimes so that they don't commit them?

Let's be clear and honest, punishment is nothing but *revenge*. It's making them hurt because they made us hurt. At the very best it can control by fear, but fear can be mitigated by being clever enough to not get caught, or such cleverness can be attempted, at any rate.

That isn't productive. It serves no utility other than making a convenient person to point to that we can justify hurting to satisfy some perverse boner for violence.

I say letting the punishment 'got the crime' is barbarism. Let the punishment *end* the crime and no more.

Based on that reasoning, if a guy shoots his wife because she is sleeping with someone else there would be no jail time because the wife is dead and the reason for killing someone is gone. Punishment to prevent a crime is a part of a justice system.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

No the fine isn't just a payment for the crime committed, but it is a generator for fees and interest that make the debt to be paid disproportional to the crime committed and can lead to jail time.

I said we are arguing over the amount that the fine is. Instead of jail time they are getting a chance to get out earlier with parole but has associated costs with that instead of going to jail. Instead of parole, they could server a long jail sentence for the crime.

We are not arguing over the fine. We are arguing over an extrajudicial fee. These fees are designed to extract revenue. Parolees are not allowed to chose the company they wish to be supervised by.

- - - Updated - - -

fines are a part of a punishment for breaking a law. We are disagreeing on the amount.

I disagree on the premise of punishment. Do we want to punish people, or treat whatever it is that causes them to commit crimes so that they don't commit them?

Let's be clear and honest, punishment is nothing but *revenge*. It's making them hurt because they made us hurt. At the very best it can control by fear, but fear can be mitigated by being clever enough to not get caught, or such cleverness can be attempted, at any rate.

That isn't productive. It serves no utility other than making a convenient person to point to that we can justify hurting to satisfy some perverse boner for violence.

I say letting the punishment 'got the crime' is barbarism. Let the punishment *end* the crime and no more.

This is true. And the punishment leads to more crime.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I disagree on the premise of punishment. Do we want to punish people, or treat whatever it is that causes them to commit crimes so that they don't commit them?

Let's be clear and honest, punishment is nothing but *revenge*. It's making them hurt because they made us hurt. At the very best it can control by fear, but fear can be mitigated by being clever enough to not get caught, or such cleverness can be attempted, at any rate.

That isn't productive. It serves no utility other than making a convenient person to point to that we can justify hurting to satisfy some perverse boner for violence.

I say letting the punishment 'got the crime' is barbarism. Let the punishment *end* the crime and no more.

Based on that reasoning, if a guy shoots his wife because she is sleeping with someone else there would be no jail time because the wife is dead and the reason for killing someone is gone. Punishment to prevent a crime is a part of a justice system.

How many people who kill others care about the consequences? Seriously, the guy who shoots his wife is going to do it anyway regardless of the consequences. Fear of punishment does not significantly prevent crime.

 

[Jarhyn]

I disagree on the premise of punishment. Do we want to punish people, or treat whatever it is that causes them to commit crimes so that they don't commit them?

Let's be clear and honest, punishment is nothing but *revenge*. It's making them hurt because they made us hurt. At the very best it can control by fear, but fear can be mitigated by being clever enough to not get caught, or such cleverness can be attempted, at any rate.

That isn't productive. It serves no utility other than making a convenient person to point to that we can justify hurting to satisfy some perverse boner for violence.

I say letting the punishment 'got the crime' is barbarism. Let the punishment *end* the crime and no more.

Based on that reasoning, if a guy shoots his wife because she is sleeping with someone else there would be no jail time because the wife is dead and the reason for killing someone is gone. Punishment to prevent a crime is a part of a justice system.

This is based on the faulty reasoning that just because his wife is dead, your logic assumes that, sans corrections, if he acquired another wife who also cheated in him, he would not also kill her. Maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't, but we don't know until he has been through the gamut of the corrections infrastructure. We know that this particular human has proven that they are wont to violent solutions.

If it was established that after shooting his wife he was not likely to ever shoot someone again, even given the same circumstances, then I don't think he needs to be put through prison. Yes a woman is dead, and parents are grieved, but their grief does not justify torturing anyone, and our society should be shaped around an understanding of that fact rather than a concession to barbarism.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Based on that reasoning, if a guy shoots his wife because she is sleeping with someone else there would be no jail time because the wife is dead and the reason for killing someone is gone. Punishment to prevent a crime is a part of a justice system.

How many people who kill others care about the consequences? Seriously, the guy who shoots his wife is going to do it anyway regardless of the consequences. Fear of punishment does not significantly prevent crime.

Punishment is certainly a deterrent to behavior whether its driving within the speed limits to the spending life behind bars for killing someone or robbing a bank. What's stopping someone from robbing a bank if instead of going to jail the government is going to give them money so that they don't have to rob a bank?

 

[Jarhyn]

How many people who kill others care about the consequences? Seriously, the guy who shoots his wife is going to do it anyway regardless of the consequences. Fear of punishment does not significantly prevent crime.

Punishment is certainly a deterrent to behavior whether its driving within the speed limits to the spending life behind bars for killing someone or robbing a bank. What's stopping someone from robbing a bank if instead of going to jail the government is going to give them money so that they don't have to rob a bank?

What if, instead of robbing a bank, we didn't give them money, but the skills to do a job that is needed, which would resolve their motivation for robbing bank if it is for the desire for money? And if they are so deranged that they do it for the thrill of the act, the risk of punishment *increases* their propensity to do it. In which case no punishment will stop them from doing it again when they get out. Instead, it would be far preferable to instill an understanding about how robbing banks is less fun than all the other things we humans can do in life, and if it is impossible to instill such a respect for society into a person, then give them access to a limited and monitored society where they can lead a the best life they can while being kept from their predilection, or offer them the option of self termination or more invasive corrective measures.

It is very hard for me to see any motive for just *hurting* people unless doing so is, for you, a drug.

Your incredulity as to the options available to correct bad behavior over satisfying your revenge boner is telling.

If we build the kind of society where people aren't driven to rob banks to make ends meet, where they never discover some perverse thrill in doing it nor are rewarded in any way a non-bank-robbing person would be assisted but for the asking, then we wouldnt see so many bank robberies.

You put virtue in vengeance. Maybe you should just look up some gore or torture porn instead of getting your rocks off on the current suffering of persons.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Punishment is certainly a deterrent to behavior whether its driving within the speed limits to the spending life behind bars for killing someone or robbing a bank. What's stopping someone from robbing a bank if instead of going to jail the government is going to give them money so that they don't have to rob a bank?

What if, instead of robbing a bank, we didn't give them money, but the skills to do a job that is needed, which would resolve their motivation for robbing bank if it is for the desire for money? And if they are so deranged that they do it for the thrill of the act, the risk of punishment *increases* their propensity to do it. In which case no punishment will stop them from doing it again when they get out. Instead, it would be far preferable to instill an understanding about how robbing banks is less fun than all the other things we humans can do in life, and if it is impossible to instill such a respect for society into a person, then give them access to a limited and monitored society where they can lead a the best life they can while being kept from their predilection, or offer them the option of self termination or more invasive corrective measures.

It is very hard for me to see any motive for just *hurting* people unless doing so is, for you, a drug.

Your incredulity as to the options available to correct bad behavior over satisfying your revenge boner is telling.

If we build the kind of society where people aren't driven to rob banks to make ends meet, where they never discover some perverse thrill in doing it nor are rewarded in any way a non-bank-robbing person would be assisted but for the asking, then we wouldnt see so many bank robberies.

It's both a detterent and punishment for committing a wrong act. You are rewarding bad behavior. If I want to become President I don't go out and shoot him or her. If I want to be a bank teller I don't go out and rob a bank.

 

[Jarhyn]

What if, instead of robbing a bank, we didn't give them money, but the skills to do a job that is needed, which would resolve their motivation for robbing bank if it is for the desire for money? And if they are so deranged that they do it for the thrill of the act, the risk of punishment *increases* their propensity to do it. In which case no punishment will stop them from doing it again when they get out. Instead, it would be far preferable to instill an understanding about how robbing banks is less fun than all the other things we humans can do in life, and if it is impossible to instill such a respect for society into a person, then give them access to a limited and monitored society where they can lead a the best life they can while being kept from their predilection, or offer them the option of self termination or more invasive corrective measures.

It is very hard for me to see any motive for just *hurting* people unless doing so is, for you, a drug.

Your incredulity as to the options available to correct bad behavior over satisfying your revenge boner is telling.

If we build the kind of society where people aren't driven to rob banks to make ends meet, where they never discover some perverse thrill in doing it nor are rewarded in any way a non-bank-robbing person would be assisted but for the asking, then we wouldnt see so many bank robberies.

It's both a detterent and punishment for committing a wrong act. You are rewarding bad behavior. If I want to become President I don't go out and shoot him or her. If I want to be a bank teller I don't go out and rob a bank.

Do you understand how foolish this whole mess of your post is? Do you even know WHY people rob banks or kill presidents?

Read my post again, trying for comprehension this time. You can't cure cancer by punishing people who get cancer. You don't cure HIV by punishing those people who get HIV. You don't cure criminal ideation by punishing people who have criminal ideation. You cure cancer by cutting out the cancer and administering medicine. You 'cure' HIV by training people how to use condoms and by making PrEP available, and by giving medication. You cure criminal ideation by removing the situations that drive people to become criminals.

Few people WANT to be criminals. Even most of the minority that want that life are introduced to it in the first place by perceived necessity. This necessity will be present no matter how much of a punishment is present, and the *thrill* of being a criminal is increased by such a prospect of punishment.

Instead of punishing people for robbing banks we should be eliminating the benefit of the series of choices that lead to and include robbing banks. If you have food on your table, recreational choices that don't suck, and a roof over your head, skills to do a task people will praise you for, and a place to apply those skills, then robbing banks would, even to most (ex) bank robbers, look like an exercise in foolishness. If it does NOT look like an exercise in foolishness, if they 'break bad' merely to feel 'alive' then no amount of punishment will keep them from continuing to consume that drug. It is an addiction that needs to be treated or in the most concerning cases, interceded on with segration.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

How many people who kill others care about the consequences? Seriously, the guy who shoots his wife is going to do it anyway regardless of the consequences. Fear of punishment does not significantly prevent crime.

Punishment is certainly a deterrent to behavior whether its driving within the speed limits to the spending life behind bars for killing someone or robbing a bank. What's stopping someone from robbing a bank if instead of going to jail the government is going to give them money so that they don't have to rob a bank?

Then why do people still commit crimes?