5 ms·

Do private prisons really cost less? If we wanted to reduce costs we could finally end The War on Drugs and reduce the prison population (and the court costs,

Do private prisons really cost less? If we wanted to reduce costs we could finally end The War on Drugs and reduce the prison population (and the court costs, etc).

philwelch 5y ago
Legalizing drugs would not reduce the prison population as much as you may assume: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2020.html https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2020.html
- runarberg 5y ago
  Your source isn’t as clear on that matter as you claim: > Police still make over 1 million drug possession arrests each year, many of which lead to prison sentences. Drug arrests continue to give residents of over-policed communities criminal records, hurting their employment prospects and increasing the likelihood of longer sentences for any future offenses. > Nevertheless, 4 out of 5 people in prison or jail are locked up for something other than a drug offense — either a more serious offense or an even less serious one. To end mass incarceration, we will have to change how our society and our justice system responds to crimes more serious than drug possession. We must also stop incarcerating people for behaviors that are even more benign. My interpretation is that releasing drug offenders alone will not reduce the prison population significantly. However—and this is a big however—harsh punishments for drug offenders and crimes related to drug use is a driver of mass incarceration. It was my understanding that legalizing drugs is more about treating drug addicts humanly and offering treatments over punishments. To offer drug users safe usage sites and other benefits so that they are not forced into commit crimes for acting on their addiction. The legalization is only a part of a much broader policy change which may ultimately reduce criminal behavior in addicts, criminal behavior which includes, but is not limited to, possession. Your source seems to agree with my understanding: > For example, the data makes it clear that ending the war on drugs will not alone end mass incarceration, though the federal government and some states have taken an important step by reducing the number of people incarcerated for drug offenses. > Are state officials and prosecutors willing to rethink not just long sentences for drug offenses, but the reflexive, simplistic policymaking that has served to increase incarceration for violent offenses as well? TLDR; Your source is very much for legalizing drugs, however it acknowledges that legalization by it self is not sufficient in ending mass incarceration.
  - philwelch 5y ago
    > TLDR; Your source is very much for legalizing drugs, however it acknowledges that legalization by it self is not sufficient in ending mass incarceration. This is the point I was trying to convey when I said, “Legalizing drugs would not reduce the prison population as much as you may assume”.
- pstuart 5y ago
  Thanks for the link!
xyzzyz 5y ago
Yes, they really do cost less. In California, for example, state run prisons cost almost 3x per inmate than private prisons do. California recently banned private prisons, which will cost its budget $100M. But, then again, California is not the best example here, as California cost per prisoner is way, way above national average (despite being below national average 30 years ago). California has pumped its cost per prisoner through the roof, which is then used to justify reduction of prison population, as too expensive. Either way, California is not known to care much for its fiduciary duty to its taxpayers. In Arizona, private prisons are still cheaper, though the disparity there is only 1.25x, not 3x. Also, state prisons in Arizona are cheaper than private prisons in California. State prisons in California are 5x more expensive than private prisons in Arizona. If California contracted Arizona private prisons and shipped its prisoners there, it could save >$10B annually, more than 5% of its entire budget, which could then be used on schools, infrastructure, and public safety. Of course, this 80% reduction in prison spending will never happen, prisons being expensive is too politically convenient.
- gusgus01 5y ago
  That comparison is incredibly hard to make. The following article discusses it in depth, it actually specifically calls out a few reports about California. https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2016/oct/3/apples-fish-public-and-private-prison-cost-comparisons/ https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2016/oct/3/apples-fish-...
  - istjohn 5y ago
    Also from that article: Yet a 2010 report by Arizona’s Office of the Auditor General, based on data from the state Department of Corrections, noted that privately-operated prisons were actually more expensive than their public counterparts.
    - xyzzyz 5y ago
      It may have been true in 2010, but hasn’t been true in 2018. https://corrections.az.gov/sites/default/files/REPORTS/Operating_Per_Capita/adc-percapcostreport_fy2018-final.pdf https://corrections.az.gov/sites/default/files/REPORTS/Opera... Highest cost private prison was cheaper than cheapest state run prison.

Do private prisons really cost less? If we wanted to reduce costs we could finally end The War on Drugs and reduce the prison population (and the court costs, etc).

philwelch 5y ago

Legalizing drugs would not reduce the prison population as much as you may assume: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2020.html https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2020.html

runarberg 5y ago
Your source isn’t as clear on that matter as you claim: > Police still make over 1 million drug possession arrests each year, many of which lead to prison sentences. Drug arrests continue to give residents of over-policed communities criminal records, hurting their employment prospects and increasing the likelihood of longer sentences for any future offenses. > Nevertheless, 4 out of 5 people in prison or jail are locked up for something other than a drug offense — either a more serious offense or an even less serious one. To end mass incarceration, we will have to change how our society and our justice system responds to crimes more serious than drug possession. We must also stop incarcerating people for behaviors that are even more benign. My interpretation is that releasing drug offenders alone will not reduce the prison population significantly. However—and this is a big however—harsh punishments for drug offenders and crimes related to drug use is a driver of mass incarceration. It was my understanding that legalizing drugs is more about treating drug addicts humanly and offering treatments over punishments. To offer drug users safe usage sites and other benefits so that they are not forced into commit crimes for acting on their addiction. The legalization is only a part of a much broader policy change which may ultimately reduce criminal behavior in addicts, criminal behavior which includes, but is not limited to, possession. Your source seems to agree with my understanding: > For example, the data makes it clear that ending the war on drugs will not alone end mass incarceration, though the federal government and some states have taken an important step by reducing the number of people incarcerated for drug offenses. > Are state officials and prosecutors willing to rethink not just long sentences for drug offenses, but the reflexive, simplistic policymaking that has served to increase incarceration for violent offenses as well? TLDR; Your source is very much for legalizing drugs, however it acknowledges that legalization by it self is not sufficient in ending mass incarceration.
- philwelch 5y ago
  > TLDR; Your source is very much for legalizing drugs, however it acknowledges that legalization by it self is not sufficient in ending mass incarceration. This is the point I was trying to convey when I said, “Legalizing drugs would not reduce the prison population as much as you may assume”.
pstuart 5y ago
Thanks for the link!

xyzzyz 5y ago

Yes, they really do cost less. In California, for example, state run prisons cost almost 3x per inmate than private prisons do. California recently banned private prisons, which will cost its budget $100M. But, then again, California is not the best example here, as California cost per prisoner is way, way above national average (despite being below national average 30 years ago). California has pumped its cost per prisoner through the roof, which is then used to justify reduction of prison population, as too expensive. Either way, California is not known to care much for its fiduciary duty to its taxpayers. In Arizona, private prisons are still cheaper, though the disparity there is only 1.25x, not 3x. Also, state prisons in Arizona are cheaper than private prisons in California. State prisons in California are 5x more expensive than private prisons in Arizona. If California contracted Arizona private prisons and shipped its prisoners there, it could save >$10B annually, more than 5% of its entire budget, which could then be used on schools, infrastructure, and public safety. Of course, this 80% reduction in prison spending will never happen, prisons being expensive is too politically convenient.

gusgus01 5y ago
That comparison is incredibly hard to make. The following article discusses it in depth, it actually specifically calls out a few reports about California. https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2016/oct/3/apples-fish-public-and-private-prison-cost-comparisons/ https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2016/oct/3/apples-fish-...
- istjohn 5y ago
  Also from that article: Yet a 2010 report by Arizona’s Office of the Auditor General, based on data from the state Department of Corrections, noted that privately-operated prisons were actually more expensive than their public counterparts.
  - xyzzyz 5y ago
    It may have been true in 2010, but hasn’t been true in 2018. https://corrections.az.gov/sites/default/files/REPORTS/Operating_Per_Capita/adc-percapcostreport_fy2018-final.pdf https://corrections.az.gov/sites/default/files/REPORTS/Opera... Highest cost private prison was cheaper than cheapest state run prison.