3 ms·

But is there really a deterrence factor? Most people don't commit crimes, due to a personal moral code. Those who have morals that don't get in the way of cri

But is there really a deterrence factor? Most people don't commit crimes, due to a personal moral code. Those who have morals that don't get in the way of crime, just use the deterrence factor to find ways of not getting caught. Now what would really help, especially with recidivism, is to use the profit motive of prisons in a different way. First-time offenders-- the prison gets paid full price. If an offender returns to prison, the prison should get paid less, or not at all. That would encourage the private prison system to rehabilitate, and provide post-release re-integration assistance.

knodi123 9y ago
> That would encourage the private prison system to rehabilitate, and provide post-release re-integration assistance. Or to make tiers of service, where second-timers get a cheaper and more brutal experience which happens to be cheaper for the prison.
bluejekyll 9y ago
Alternatively, there could be a payment based directly on the outcome. Say there is a period in which the ex-con pays back 'restitution', probably based on the crime and length of sentence. During that period the ex-con owes some percentage of their paycheck. That is, this prison makes most of its money from the restitution payments. This would encourage prisons to also take an active role in finding ex-cons jobs afterwards, advocating for the highest possible pay (since they make more money), and also encourages them to train/teach the prisoner more to make them more likely to get a job as an ex-con. I think most victim advocates would be ok with this too as there would continue to be a penalty imposed for the crime.
shagie 9y ago
The private prisons have an interest in filling beds. That is where the money is. They don't get money by reducing recidivism, or providing job training, or providing preventative and maintenance health care (dentists to fill cavities so that the person doesn't need to get a root canal when they're released and then runs out of money on medical bills...) Whats more, like stadiums and cities (the city paying the difference if there isn't enough attendance), there are private prisons that have a "lockup quota" ( https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2015/jul/31/report-finds-two-thirds-private-prison-contracts-include-lockup-quotas/ https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2015/jul/31/report-find... | http://www.njjn.org/uploads/digital-library/Criminal-Lockup-Quota,-In-the-Public-Interest,-9.13.pdf http://www.njjn.org/uploads/digital-library/Criminal-Lockup-... ) where the state pays for the bed be it full or empty. This is part of the contract, and officials making short sighted deals that have the appearance of reducing costs while actually raising them in the long term is a oft heard refrain. I have difficulty believing that any private, for profit company would be working to negatively impact its bottom line. While it is possible that there are places where improvements in efficiency over government run facilities can be had, at the end of the day the duty of the company is to the shareholders ( CXW - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CoreCivic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CoreCivic , GEO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEO_Group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEO_Group ) rather than to the taxpayers of a state. https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2016/08/23/866325/0/en/Pomerantz-Law-Firm-Announces-the-Filing-of-a-Class-Action-against-Correction-Corporation-of-America-and-Certain-Officers-CXW.html https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2016/08/23/866325/0/e... > Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) CCA’s facilities lacked adequate safety and security standards and were less efficient at offering correctional services than the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ (“BOP”) facilities; (ii) CCA’s rehabilitative services for inmates were less effective than those provided by BOP; (iii) consequently, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) was unlikely to renew and/or extend its contracts with CCA; and (iv) as a result of the foregoing, CCA’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. The profit motive for a private prison has shown in the past that in the interest in short term gains they will understaff and cut back on programs. Give them everyone who has been incarcerated before and they'll take the profits they've gotten and close that franchise. Furthermore, the lobbying efforts of private companies creates odd incentives in writing laws and negotiating contracts compared to facilities run and maintained by state or federal workers.

knodi123 9y ago

> That would encourage the private prison system to rehabilitate, and provide post-release re-integration assistance. Or to make tiers of service, where second-timers get a cheaper and more brutal experience which happens to be cheaper for the prison.

bluejekyll 9y ago

Alternatively, there could be a payment based directly on the outcome. Say there is a period in which the ex-con pays back 'restitution', probably based on the crime and length of sentence. During that period the ex-con owes some percentage of their paycheck. That is, this prison makes most of its money from the restitution payments. This would encourage prisons to also take an active role in finding ex-cons jobs afterwards, advocating for the highest possible pay (since they make more money), and also encourages them to train/teach the prisoner more to make them more likely to get a job as an ex-con. I think most victim advocates would be ok with this too as there would continue to be a penalty imposed for the crime.

shagie 9y ago

The private prisons have an interest in filling beds. That is where the money is. They don't get money by reducing recidivism, or providing job training, or providing preventative and maintenance health care (dentists to fill cavities so that the person doesn't need to get a root canal when they're released and then runs out of money on medical bills...) Whats more, like stadiums and cities (the city paying the difference if there isn't enough attendance), there are private prisons that have a "lockup quota" ( https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2015/jul/31/report-finds-two-thirds-private-prison-contracts-include-lockup-quotas/ https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2015/jul/31/report-find... | http://www.njjn.org/uploads/digital-library/Criminal-Lockup-Quota,-In-the-Public-Interest,-9.13.pdf http://www.njjn.org/uploads/digital-library/Criminal-Lockup-... ) where the state pays for the bed be it full or empty. This is part of the contract, and officials making short sighted deals that have the appearance of reducing costs while actually raising them in the long term is a oft heard refrain. I have difficulty believing that any private, for profit company would be working to negatively impact its bottom line. While it is possible that there are places where improvements in efficiency over government run facilities can be had, at the end of the day the duty of the company is to the shareholders ( CXW - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CoreCivic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CoreCivic , GEO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEO_Group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEO_Group ) rather than to the taxpayers of a state. https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2016/08/23/866325/0/en/Pomerantz-Law-Firm-Announces-the-Filing-of-a-Class-Action-against-Correction-Corporation-of-America-and-Certain-Officers-CXW.html https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2016/08/23/866325/0/e... > Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) CCA’s facilities lacked adequate safety and security standards and were less efficient at offering correctional services than the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ (“BOP”) facilities; (ii) CCA’s rehabilitative services for inmates were less effective than those provided by BOP; (iii) consequently, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) was unlikely to renew and/or extend its contracts with CCA; and (iv) as a result of the foregoing, CCA’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. The profit motive for a private prison has shown in the past that in the interest in short term gains they will understaff and cut back on programs. Give them everyone who has been incarcerated before and they'll take the profits they've gotten and close that franchise. Furthermore, the lobbying efforts of private companies creates odd incentives in writing laws and negotiating contracts compared to facilities run and maintained by state or federal workers.