Lock "Em Up: US Prison System Considerations

[Jimbone]

But wide scale arrests to fill up the prisons for a profit motive? Way too expensive... even for corruption.

There are those who believe otherwise and plenty of info (or propaganda?) suggesting that the private sector corporations are steadily gaining more influence and contributing financially to various governmental legislative departments with the profit-motive of harsher and longer sentences. But, I have yet to read anything that proves that assertion.

I hope you're right.

I just think the number of skids that have to be greased to make wholesale arrests profitable would be cost prohibitive. Beat cops, supervisors, brass, judges, jurors... everyone would have to get a taste to make it work.

I readily admit I could be wrong on that, as I have no idea how much money is really able to be made by private sector prisons.

[Riotgear]

Here's a good place to start -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison_commissary

[IMaDick]

A link for the interested.

http://www.cepr.net/documents/publicatio...010-06.pdf

States and minimum sentencing laws, (racial disparities) could be an explaination.

http://www.michiganpolicy.com/index.php?...Itemid=433

[HairOfTheDog]

Thanks for the links, guys. Interesting reads, particularly the 2010 data cited in Dick's cepr link/report.

The Detention Watch Network report (linked below) contains the most data that I could find on the actual lobbying expenditures and activity undertaken by the largest private prison corporations, through 2010. The report suggests that CCA, GEO Corp and a couple of much smaller prison corps have influenced incarceration laws and penalties (particulary those related to immigration), but stops short on being able to prove that assertion and instead contends that more research is needed to prove the correlation. Still, very interesting read, imo.

snipped:
Between the five corporations with ICE contracts for which official federal lobbying records are currently available, the total expenditure on lobbying for 1999-2009 was $20,432,000.(1) In general, corporations lobbied both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Most companies also lobbied the Department of Homeland Security, the agency that oversees Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The larger corporations (CCA and GEO) lobbied a variety of entities related to immigration policy, including the Department of Justice, the Bureau of Prisons, and the Office of Management and Budget. Both CCA and GEO reported lobbying ICE directly. Note: ICE = Immigration and Customs Enforcement
http://www.detentionwatchnetwork.org/privateprisons

$20.4 million over 10 years actually seems like very little in lobbying investment, to me. Maybe because I'm jaded by the amount corporations owned by billionaires contribute to presidential campaigns via super PACs. And, then there's George Clooney and his celeb friends who were able to host an event and solicit donations (+ ticket sales) resulting in $15 million for Obama in one night.

IDK, I think that to wield a great amount of influence on legal policy would require more investment by the private prison sector, but that's not based on anything but my comparing what could be apples to oranges.

[HairOfTheDog]

Good CNN opinion piece about the bloated US prison system and the high cost. Lisa Bloom got this one right, imo.

Snips:

The American public strongly supports reducing time served for nonviolent offenders. But candidates appear afraid to touch this touchy third rail issue, for fear they appear less than "tough on crime."

Largely casualties of our misguided "war on drugs," and vigorously promoted at the federal level by the "drug czar" and a $15 billion annual budget, the number of incarcerated Americans has quadrupled since 1980.

Nationwide, spending on prisons has risen six times faster than spending on higher education.

Here's one stark way to understand our new normal of mass incarceration: If we wanted to return to 1970s level of incarceration, we'd have to release four out of five people behind bars today.

Why do both sides (left and right) accept the framing of this question, so often parroted: In these tough economic times, should we cut more social services or raise taxes? It's a false dichotomy. The third alternative is to stop warehousing our own people.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/03/opinion/bl...le_sidebar

Wish one of the presidential candidates had the balls to address this issue.

[Riotgear]

Less tough on crime = No more money

Amateur hour fear tactics.

"Not tough on crime!?! Say it ain't so!"

[cladking]

You want jobs in the country? Support an enormous public works project, and build a 100 foot wall, 50 feet wide, from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico. Two entry points in each state, Texas gets four because of the size of their border. Watch illegal immigration come to a halt.

This is just make-work.

The federal government needs these "illegals" coming in and will simply fly them right over the wall if you build it.

[HairOfTheDog]

You want jobs in the country? Support an enormous public works project, and build a 100 foot wall, 50 feet wide, from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico. Two entry points in each state, Texas gets four because of the size of their border. Watch illegal immigration come to a halt.

This is just make-work.

The federal government needs these "illegals" coming in and will simply fly them right over the wall if you build it.

Clad, why do you think the Federal government needs illegals coming in? To keep employment in the prison industry up or some other motive?

As far as I know, the federal government does not profit directly from housing prisoners. Vendors to prisons (Fed, State, Local) profit, for sure. Private prisons that house government prisoner overflow profit. But, unless I'm missing something, it's a cost center for the federal government (though there are salaries for positions in the Fed govt like the Drug Czar to consider).

[cladking]

A great deal of the "real work" being done in this country is being done by "illegals". Americans won't work hard for less than good pay but illegals will work for next to nothing. Many industries in this country rely on "illegals" to do the real work. If these people were legal than they'd demand more pay and the brussel sprouts that you pay $3 a pound for would have to sell for $3.10

Illegals are also used instrumental in the sex trade and as servants for the wealthy.

The bottom line really is that "illegals" are the status quo and anything that jiggles the status quo now rocks the entire economy which is held together with duct tape and baling wire as Morgan Stanley contiunues to suck the marrow from the bones. We simply can't have 40,000,000 of our hardest workers leaving and we certainly can't admit to the American people that there is no real choice. Either way the republocrats would look pretty bad so we maintain the illusion that everything is just fine and four more years of the same crap will fix everything.

If Arizona would just get in line it would make the deception much easier.

[Riotgear]

I know I've watched my livelihood evaporate because of what Mexicans will work for. Ten years ago I was living fat. I had real disposable income. Now I count every dollar, drive used cars and spend what little money I do have VERY carefully. I'm the new poor.

[HairOfTheDog]

@cladking,

Re: post #29, I see...

I thought your previous post was suggesting that the federal government would do anything to encourage an infux of illegals for reasons related to pumping the prison system. I now understand that you meant that they would do so for the purpose of promoting price minimization through lower labor costs. Something to think about and read up on a bit more - thanks.