Is Tent City the Answer to Prison Overcrowding?
Sheriff Arpaio’s Tent City solution to prison overcrowding should not be replicated. A relatively uncommon establishment in the US criminal justice system had numerous underlying contradictions due to the uniqueness of the concept. As a facility that housed inmates outdoors in post-war tents, it did not separate the prisoners to eliminate personal contacts, which is required by a high-security system (Lockdown: Tent City, 2007). It might be assumed, therefore, that the prison had minimum security; however, the guards were heavily armored and conducted regular raids to control the contraband, which is a characteristic of a high-security prison. As seen from the inconsistencies in security, continuous criminal activity, a possibility of riots, and numerous human rights violations, Tent City cannot be considered a viable alternative to regular prison facilities. Thus, the practice of Tent City should be abolished as an ineffective approach to solving the prison system’s space limitations.
Although Sheriff Arpaio’s Tent City was banned in 2017 as an inhumane establishment that violated the human rights of the prisoners, the identical facility continued to operate in Arizona State Prison, Florence. It hosted up to 500 prisoners in an outdoor area similar to the initial concept of Sheriff Arpaio. Kenski (2018) reported that the temperature in the tents’ shade reached 107 degrees, which is unsuitable for inmates, especially those who are prescribed antipsychotic medications. Security and criminal activity issues arose within the system, which indicated its ineffectiveness. However, as per the facility’s benefits, it solved the overcrowding issue and housed inmates that otherwise would not be provided adequate space in regular jails. As a result, this approach is also deemed cost-effective. If I were a Chief of the facility, I would implement a long-term solution like split-sentencing or discuss community-based punishment of non-violent inmates, which is an approach that identifies less dangerous prisoners and allows them to return to society quicker than more dangerous criminals.
Is More Privatization of Prisons Needed?
Private prisons are a relatively new development that has benefits and risks from a managerial point of view. Firstly, as it concerns the advantages, from the business side, this endeavor is highly cost-effective and profitable. Private prisons are reported to provide better correctional and rehabilitation opportunities for the inmates, which will contribute to overall safety and decrease the number of convicts resuming their criminal activity. “Privatization has shown that it can provide high quality and the development of new prisons on a very cost-effective basis, quickly and very professionally” (The War on Drugs, 1999, p. 15). The possible downfalls, however, include a possibility of decreased demand for private establishments (Kaeble & Glaze, 2016). Furthermore, increased violence in private prison facilities linked to a lack of trained staff and vague legislative policies can pose risks.
The obstacles that one will face during this venture are legislative and administrative difficulties. Government agency representatives should be involved in the administration since “without some direct management by federal employees, agencies face the risk of being unable to adequately oversee and control private prison operations” (Gonzalez, 2018, p. 389). This requirement, along with a vague legislative framework and the need to share data with the government, might be challenging to implement. Additionally, training the staff to address and maintain the security needs of the establishment adequately is going to be not only costly but also time and effort-demanding. On the other hand, as government prisons still report overcrowding and a decrease in the quality of living, a facility with higher standards will meet the newly emerging market demand.
References
Films Media Group. (1999). The War on Drugs [Video Transcript].
Films Media Group. (2007). Lockdown: Tent City [Video Transcript].
Gonzalez, M. (2018). Information Asymmetry in Private Prison Management: Monitoring and Oversight as the Basis for Private Prison Legitimacy. Public Contract Law Journal, 47(3), 377–398.
Kaeble, D., & Glaze, L. E. (2016). Correctional populations in the United States. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Web.
Kenski, K. (2018). Right of center with potential to change. In D. A. Schultz (Ed.), Presidential Swing States (pp. 307-318). Rowman and Littlefield Publishing.