Introduction
The modern society has one of the major issues, crime. With the growth in crime, there is an increase in the need to seek justice for the society, and especially for the victims of crime. Corrections have been used for ages as the means to punish criminals. Perpetrators of crime are sent to the correction facilities to make amends for the crime that they have committed (Dolovich, 2012). The view of the facilities as the means used by the law to punish crime has remained controversial. There is the argument that prisoners should be punished for the crime, while others claim that it should be a way of rehabilitating them to effectively integrate them back to society. At the same time, there is controversy surrounding the value and effectiveness of the modern correctional facilities. The debate is evident in the political and public arena. Correctional facilities are expected to be effective in line with the cost of the services they provide to society (Mason, 2013). Evidence from research indicates that the current correctional facilities are ineffective due to overcrowding leading to high cost to taxpayers. The proposed solution to the problem is privatization of correctional facilities.
Privatization of Correctional Facilities
There is no doubt that there is a need for an effective solution to the problem of ineffectiveness and inefficiency in the corrections facilities. The issue of efficiency is the basis for the argument in support of the privatization of corrections. The policymakers seek to enhance the level of service delivery without necessarily increasing the cost of services. On the other hand, they focus on decreasing the cost without jeopardizing the quality of service (Mason, 2013). Correctional facilities’ privatization entails the entry of private companies in the provision of correction services. The facilities that are operated by the state will be expected to provide the services more efficiently, or they run the risk of losing the resources and finances they have invested in the services. The move to privatize the correctional services has been an area of growing interest in the country and outside, such as the UK, following the efforts to lessen overcrowding of the available facilities and the current budgetary constraints. The growth in prison population has increased the cost of rehabilitating the inmates (Welch, 2013). The issues have led to the need to consider alternatives to the state-run correctional facilities
In the efforts to provide quality and efficiency at a lower cost, private operators enter into contracts with the government such that they pay, partly or wholly, for the services provided in the facilities. In one of the privatization models, the private operators agree to pay a rate per month for each prisoner. There is another model that entails a complete takeover of the state-run correction facility by a private operator. Using the model means that all the services provided by the facility are the responsibility of the private company. The private companies are even given the mandate to construct and operate private correctional facilities (Dolovich, 2012). The UK is one of the nations to adopt the model within their correction system. In the 1970s, the United States witnessed the rise in the movement that support privatization of the correctional facilities. The move has been necessitated by the problems that are facing the criminal justice system, including the increase in the cost due to the increase in population.
Factors Behind Privatization
One of the most critical factors behind the privatization movement is the increase in the prison population. It is behind the factor related to the increase in cost of the services amid limited financial resources in the government’s kitty. The United State remains one of the countries in the world with the highest rate of incarceration. By the end of 2009, the incarceration rate in the country had increased significantly. The US Bureau of Justice indicated that by the end of this year, approximately 2,292,133 adults were in the jails and prisons in the country. The number is about 1 percent of the adults in the country. The Department of Justice (2008) shows that between 2002 and 2008, there was an increase of 159,200 people in the prison and jails in the country. The majority of these people, about 60 percent, were incarcerated for violent crimes. The increase in the prison population has its basis in the increase in the war on drug, which led to major arrests in the country (Travis, Western, & Redburn, 2014). The rise in the prison population has led to major negative effects on the quality of services offered to the inmates.
The Benefits of Privatization
One of the benefits of privatization of corrections is the cost saving advantage. The growth in prison population, no doubt, increases the cost of services. The burden on the taxpayers is huge, a major factor in making the correction facilities less effective. Looking at the financial element of running correctional facilities, it becomes possible to understand the benefits of the private prisons. On the privatization move, there are many private operators who are prepared to invest in the correctional facilities. The PEW Charitable Trusts organization performed a research project under the title “One in 100: Behind Bars in America 2008,” in which they indicated that in 2007, there was an increase in the amount used to maintain jails and prisons to $49 billion. Across the country, the cost of maintaining a prison, in 2005, was an average of $23,879. The cost has been increasing over the years, and it is expected to continue to increase, necessitating a cost-cutting measure. The supporters of the privatization movement cite efficiency and effectiveness as the critical factors behind their support. The importance of growing the two factors and at the same time cut on the cost provides the basis for privatization of correctional services.
The cost-benefit of the movement cuts on the need to use an alternative source of funding for the corrections services. The increase in the private investors within the corrections system will allow for the increase in the funds that will go into the running of the facilities. Most sectors have benefited from going the private way because of the increased funding that are pumped into the previous government-run systems. The market model of operations will also be beneficial to the correctional facilities. Participation on the private sectors is opening up major possibilities in the running of the corrections (Welch, 2013). Privatization of the correctional facilities will lessen the burden of operating the prisons and services from the government, and by extension, the taxpayers. The pressure will be less on the already constrained government budget. At the same time, the potential for construction of additional facilities means that there will be a greater pool of facilities to deal with the increase in crime in the society. Researchers have shown that the government is overburdened, which has led to the increased need to release prisoners before they complete their term. The inefficiency in proper rehabilitation will be addressed by the increased funding and correctional facilities.
The Drawbacks of Privatization
The effectiveness of the private correctional facilities has been questioned even as the movement has become on the increase. Poor management is one of the issues that are most likely to affect the working of the private facilities. To be effective, the management of the correctional facilities has to be properly administered because of the additional challenges of dealing with problematic members of the society. The extra challenge is the basis for the level of quality and effectiveness of the private facilities. Improper management can jeopardize the security level required for the correctional facilities (Mason, 2013). There have been reported cases of escapees in prisons whose security level is not the utmost because of poor management. Some researchers have shed doubts on the soundness of the support for the privatization of the correctional facilities. The move to cut down on the cost can have a negative impact on quality and security.
Conclusion
Regardless of the potential drawbacks, if well managed, privatization of corrections holds the potential to solve the major challenges that are impacting on the system in the United States. The cost-saving benefit and the potential for solving the issue of prison growth are the rationale for the continued support to the private jails and prisons. The current state-run model of corrections is not effective in dealing with crime in society because of the cost implications. Despite the increase in the number of jails and prisons in the country, the only achievement has been the continued increase in the cost of maintaining them. Due to the challenge, the intent of the corrections of addressing crime in society is not met. This suggests the basis of the need for change to address the cost and inefficiency. The proposed model, bringing the private actors into the equation is the much needed solution to the problem. The investors can come in to subsidize the state funds or they can be used as a replacement for the funds from the taxpayers in running the correctional facilities.
References
Dolovich, S. (2012). How privatization thinks: the case of prisons.
Mason, C. (2013). International growth trends in prison privatization. Sentencing Project.
PEW (2008). One in 100 Behind Bars in America 2008. PEW charitable trust
Travis, J., Western, B., & Redburn, F. S. (2014). The growth of incarceration in the United States: Exploring causes and consequences.
Welch, M. (2013). Corrections: A critical approach. Routledge.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
