Privatization Case

Prison Privatization

Prison Privatization

This paper deals with issues of privatization of prison and the pros and cons of the subject matter. First, what is prison privatization? Prison privatization means the transfer of prison functions from the government sector to the private sector. This can take various forms in the case of prisons. One of the reason why there was a need to allow privatization is the problems of prison overcrowding and high costs may be the "privatization" of prisons. By using the private sector to build or manage prisons, many states believe that they can reduce costs. So far, most state correction agencies have used the private sector only to manage minimum-secure or non-secure "community" correction centers, such as juvenile institutions and halfway houses. Currently over half the states have passed legislation to allow for this form of prison privatization.

I support the use of privatization for our jail system; I believe privatization of the jail system would allow these facilities to operate through a coordinated and cost-effective management approach. Work cooperatively with state and local governments to obtain needed detention bed space and services. Operate efficiently and effectively the Justice Prisoner and inmates in general by securing our communities and at the same time rehabilitating the inmates.

The privatization of the jail system would help to better protect the public, the issue of over-crowed in the state own jail would be a thing of the past - once the jails are privatized. The primary concern of the justice system around the country is to ensure that the public are well protected. It is however impossible to achieve these goals if our prison system is over-crowded and futile. For instance, incarceration statistics have skyrocketed, crime rates have increased much more slowly. In fact, from 1975 to 1985, the serious crime rate actually decreased by 1.42 per cent while the number of state and federal prisoners nearly doubled. The number of people sent to prison is actually much more higher; in order to better prepare for the future it is better to contract the management side of our prison system to a private sector, while we can still hold on to the administration side of the operation. One of the core functions is for the confinement of persons convicted of crimes and sentenced to terms of incarceration, and those charged with any types of offenses and detained while awaiting trial or sentencing, a hearing.

The primary responsibility consists of maintaining secure, safe and humane correctional institutions for sentenced offenders placed in its custody. Our goal is to develop and operates correctional programs that seek a balanced application of concepts of punishment, deterrence, and incapacitation with opportunities to prepare the offender for successful reintegration into society.

The facility will be privately operated facilities, including half-way houses and community corrections facilities. It would also house special problems that accompany the long-term custody and care of sentenced offenders from all counties, etc.

The private sector can do it cheaper and more efficiently. This assortment of entrepreneurs, free market ideologues, cash-strapped public officials, and academics promised design and management innovations without reducing costs or sacrificing the quality of service agreed upon during their initial contract with us. However, public sector corrections systems are in a state of chronic failure most measure, and no other politically or economically feasible solution is on the table to eradicate this problem across the board. Thus, in order to prevent another non-efficient ideology; it is my recommendation that this task force should consider a private sector to run these facilities.

The public employee unions representing public sector prison workers, such as the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal. Employees (AFSCME) fear that extensive privatization will reduce salary and fringe benefits for prison workers. Private contracting poses much less of a threat than the unions claim. In common with most contracting practices at the state and local levels,