Introduction
The U.S. government has always been interested in addressing economic, social, and political problems with the help of various policies and laws. Considering that the business area and government currently have overlapping interests, they cooperate in terms of the prison industrial complex (PIC). Now, this complex includes thousands of corporations that operate on the basis of the goal to get a high level of profit.
For instance, a vast number of prisoners are required to work for a minimum wage, whereas employers have the opportunity to develop their businesses. Therefore, profit has been considered the priority of PIC in the past several decades. Taking into account that the welfare of PIC considerably depends on the number of incarcerated individuals, there is no doubt the government might have the intention to arrest more people. In order to predict the likelihood of this trend taking place in the future, it is essential to analyze the history of PIC in terms of profit.
The PIC and Mass Incarceration
The first privately-operated adult correctional facilities appeared in the U.S. at the end of the 20th century. In turn, around 130,000 individuals were housed in for-profit lock-ups in 2010 (Norris & Billings, 2016). In other words, the past several decades are characterized by the foundation of numerous private prisons that are integral elements of a multi-billion dollar business. In fact, over two million Americans are incarcerated at the moment, while approximately four million individuals are on probation or parole (Norris & Billings, 2016).
These statistics have been discussed by a variety of researchers and lawmakers, as the current proportion of American prisoners is way higher than it was expected in the past. Even though the U.S. population accounts for around 5% of the worldwide population, nearly 25% of all prisoners in the world are Americans (Norris & Billings, 2016). This contradiction has encouraged people to wonder whether the U.S. government is interested in arresting more people.
Due to politically influenced decisions regarding people who should be locked up and the length of their arrest, imprisonment was transformed into an enormously profitable industry. At the end of the 20th century, a mix of several tough-on-crime laws was adopted, thereby increasing the number of people who would be prisoned in the future. Currently, incarcerated Americans face longer sentences and fewer leaves on a regular basis. For example, the number of U.S. prisoners has increased over three times since the 1980s (Gotsch & Basti, 2018).
As a result, multiple business industries have joined PIC in order to increase their profits. In addition to organizations that operate prisons, a variety of other companies are involved in PIC. For instance, prison medical care privatized probation supervision, and prisoner transportation are directly associated with this complex. Therefore, many organizations that manage and operate correctional facilities create an enormously profitable market opportunity.
As the two largest for-profit companies from the perspective of private prisons, CCA and GEO account for billions of taxpayer dollars. At the same time, representatives of these organizations highlight that they can be significantly impacted by the relaxation of enforcement efforts and the decriminalization of activities that are proscribed by the laws (Burkhardt, 2019). Therefore, the movement of these organizations depends on the government and incarcerated individuals. In turn, the number of American prisoners is connected with law regulations in the context of drugs and immigration. If the government makes the decision to simplify policies related to drugs and illegal immigration, the profit of correctional facilities will considerably decrease.
Privatization
Presently, CCA is considered America’s most prominent private prison, with a total of 61 facilities across the country. For instance, in 2014 and 2015, the company spent approximately one million dollars on expenses of direct politicization at the federal level (Bauer, 2018). The committee that deals with political action also donated more than 722,000 dollars towards state politics. At the same time, CCA is just a single example of a business that is actively engaging in PIC. This organization spends a lot of money to ensure that they gain politicians’ support and influence them to merge their interests with their own (Bauer, 2018). In other words, they invest a huge amount of financial resources in the prison business, expanding the industry in the system of criminal justice.
Another technique that similar companies frequently use in order to manipulate their way into influence is based on employing former officials who used to work for the government. It is a widely used practice when companies hire people from correctional agencies and law enforcers. In turn, these individuals make use of the connections they had initially to get the PIC system running. Moreover, numerous companies take appropriate measures to hire research partners who are supposedly impartial to conduct studies that applaud privatization benefits. For instance, Charles Thomas, a former professor at the University of Florida, consulted a research study analyzing the advantages of the privatization of prisons (Green & Jackson, 2017). As a result, this person was discredited on a moral basis since CCA had paid him three million dollars to produce that research.
In addition to making a profit from privatized prisons, the PIC demonstrates increased recidivism and ferocity among inmates. Incarcerated individuals who are exposed to violence in prison on release are more likely to recidivate. In order to determine the reasons why there are higher violence levels in private prisons, it is essential to comprehend the model of the business assumed by PIC. At a fundamental level, private and public prisons are similar in terms of structure and operation. A greater percentage of the expenses incurred in prisons are based on staffing (Hemming et al., 2020). In that sense, privatized prisons reduce the cost of staffing to produce a profit. These prisons hire fewer workers compared to public prisons and pay their employees less with fewer benefits and less training.
The result of employees being given lower wages, inadequate training, and fewer benefits is the high rates of turnover by staff compared to public colleagues. Accordingly, the high levels of turnover, in turn, imply that most of the employees lack experience and knowledge in the context of institutions where they work, resulting in instability (MacDonald, 2018). Understaffing is also associated with higher turnover levels because vacant positions are not filled immediately when workers resign or when they are terminated.
How Prison Labor Impacts the Economy
In the majority of prisons, inmates are subjected to labor with tremendously low returns in the name of rehabilitation. For example, there are 18 state prisons where business involves furniture making today (Duwe & McNeeley, 2017). At the same time, prisoners working for the welfare of this business are not paid the same way a typical factory worker would be paid on the outside. Thus, prisoners have become a readily available source of cheap labor in the country.
Likewise, it is one of the main reasons that there are 22 federal prisons involved in the textile business. In fact, the prisoners hired to work for this business cannot demand an hourly pay of 10.95 dollars that textile laborers earn outside the prison walls (Duwe & McNeeley, 2017). The fact that prisoners make wages that range between 0.12 dollars to 1.15 dollars every hour makes it understandable why the government might have intentions to arrest more people in the future.
Furthermore, prison labor has indeed made jobs unavailable for free individuals in the manufacturing sector, as well as farm work. For instance, when Shaw Industries Group hired prisoners to create the high-priced flooring brand, the company’s profits went high. However, this initiative has significantly affected the lives of other employees serving their functions outside the prison. In fact, this organization fired over 300 individuals in 2019 due to the high amount of financial resources that were allocated for their salaries (Duncan, 2019). Hence, the prison industrial complex has brought prison labor back to the economy, and it has resulted in considerable losses of jobs and exploitation of those workers who are out of prison.
The other reason why the PIC might be encouraging the government to arrest more people is that the increased amount of work performed by the incarcerated individual is associated with a reduction of the cost of criminal justice. Taking into consideration that approximately three-quarters of the income earned by people in prisons is used to reduce the financial burden on taxpayers, the government is interested in arresting a vast number of citizens (Archibong & Obikili, 2020). As a result, in the next several decades, the number of prisoners is expected to increase as well. In the case at least 50% of incarcerated individuals worked for the private enterprise while being in prison, the government would get the opportunity to reduce taxpayer costs by several billion per year.
Conclusion
In spite of the fact that there are numerous debates regarding the development of the PIC and the participation of the government in the idea to arrest more people, there are facts demonstrating that the country’s financial state is dependent on the number of incarcerated individuals. Society apparently recognizes the harm caused by criminals to other people. For instance, nothing can compensate for the pain of rape and the violation one experiences with robbery or the life-long reminiscence of an assault. At the same time, in the past several decades, the U.S. government has been adopting tough-on-crime laws that considerably affect the number of potential prisoners and the amount of time that they have to spend in correctional facilities. Subsequently, the number of American prisoners has increased three times since the 1980s.
Such a considerable increase in the number of arrests can be explained by the fact that PIC has become an enormously profitable market. Some experts state that PIC promotes harsh laws of sentencing criminals behind the scenes to cause more people to receive longer sentences at the industry’s advantage. This belief is based on the idea that working prisoners can help the government reduce the financial burden on taxpayers. Thus, to benefit the country’s economy, the U.S. government might be encouraged to arrest more people in the future.
Annotated Bibliography
Archibong, B., & Obikili, N. (2020). Prison labor: The price of prisons and the lasting effects of incarceration. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2(52), 85-95. Web.
The article aims to analyze prison labor as an intervention to serve the country’s economic and other extrajudicial interests. As a result, researchers conclude that the labor force can be used to reduce the financial burden on taxpayers.
Bauer, S. (2018). America’s shocking history of private prisons. Time. Web.
This article is based on the idea to analyze specific features of America’s history of private prisons. The author takes into consideration the period of slavery and the foundation and development of CCA at the present time.
Burkhardt, B. (2019). The politics of correctional privatization in the United States. Criminology & Public Policy, 18(2), 401-418. Web.
The main purpose of this article is to review private correctional organizations as political actors. The main factors affecting the success of these firms are determined.
Duncan, C. (2019). 120 layoffs at the South Carolina plant, and some work moved to upstate prisons, officials say. The Charlotte Observer. Web.
This article takes into account Shaw Industries Group from the perspective of prison labor. The author states that over 300 employees were fired from this organization due to the high amount of allocated financial resources for their salaries.
Duwe, Guet., & McNeeley, S. (2017). The effects of prison labor on institutional misconduct, post-prison employment, and recidivism. Corrections, 5(2), 89-108. Web.
By using a retrospective quasi-experimental design, researchers analyzed the impact of prison labor on the country’s economy and the life of prisoners after leaving correctional facilities.
Gotsch, K., & Basti, V. (2018). Capitalizing on mass incarceration: U.S. growth in private prisons. Web.
This report covers several essential points, such as trends in privatization and challenges of private prisons. Moreover, the authors focus on private contractors and their expanding reach.
Green, D., & Jackson, M. (2017). Prison industrial complex. The Encyclopedia of Corrections, 17(2), 1-5. Web.
This research analyzes the prison industrial complex from different perspectives taking into account the main figures in this field. Furthermore, researchers highlight the harms caused by this multibillion‐dollar industry.
Hemming, L., Pratt, D., Shaw, J., & Haddock, G. (2020). Prison staff’s views and understanding of the role of emotions in prisoner suicide and violence. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 31(6), 868-888. Web.
The role of staff in American prisons is identified in this article. In addition, researchers explored the staff’s understanding of the PIC with the help of interviews.
MacDonald, M. (2018). Overcrowding and its impact on prison conditions and health. International Journal of Prisoner Health, 14(2), 65-68. Web.
This article explores a variety of issues associated with American prisons, including understaffing and overcrowding. Also, the mental and physical health of prisoners is analyzed.
Norris, A., & Billings, J. (2016). Colorblind ideology, mass incarceration, and controlling racial images: An intersectional analysis of presidential rhetoric from 1969–1996. Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, 15(1), 78-98. Web.
The main goal of this article is to determine the image of a typical criminal of the past century and provide relevant statistics in terms of American prisoners. In order to achieve this goal, researchers employ a qualitative content analysis.