CCA

  • July 19, 2012

    by Jeremy Leaming

    The failed “war on drugs” certainly helped the proliferation of for-profit prisons, but the federal government’s increasing reliance on many of the same companies to detain undocumented immigrants and others awaiting court resolutions is not only furthering private prison profits but the need for mass incarceration, a new report from The Sentencing Project reveals.

    In “Dollars and Detainees: The Growth of For-Profit Prisons,” Cody Mason, a program associate for The Sentencing Project, reports that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), created after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, and the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) have turned to for-profit companies to detainee individuals while the courts decide their fates. ICE detains undocumented immigrants and the USMS, among other things, holds “all federal detainees from the time they enter federal custody until they are either acquitted or convicted,” Mason writes.

    Both of those entities, Mason explains jump-started the for-profit prison industry. ICE’s predecessor, the Immigration and Naturalization Service first contracted in 1987 with Corrections Corporation of America (CCA). Today CCA and the GEO Group are the nation’s “largest private prison companies.”

    Mason’s report shows that from 2002 – 2011 ICE detainees in private facilities jumped by 208 percent and the number of USMS detainees in for-profit facilities rose by 355 percent.

    “In contrast there was respective growth of 28 percent and 67 percent in the number of state and federal prisoners held in private facilities. As a result, the combined population of privately-held ICE and USMS detainees nearly equaled the number of federal prisoners in private facilities in 2010,” Mason writes.

    ICE’s increased use of private detention facilities, not surprisingly, provided a big boost to the prison companies’ profits, a $5 billion industry. Mason notes that the private detention centers are run by “many of the same companies that own and manage private prisons, and that it is common for these facilities to house detainees for ICE and USMS alongside persons sentenced for criminal convictions.”

  • March 9, 2012

    by Joseph Jerome

    After the Supreme Court barred inmates in for-profit private prisons from lodging federal lawsuits alleging constitutional violations against individual corporate employees, the costs and purported benefits of our increasing reliance on private prisons warrant careful consideration.  

    As one local report by the Monmouth County, N.J., Correctional Facility Evaluation Task Force concluded, the legal implications alone question the appeal of private prisons. However, rather than look at the greater legal or policy ramifications of prison privatization, public officials are too quick to embrace private prisons, assuming they will save their states money. 

    For example, Florida Governor Rick Scott (R) recently pushed for the largest private prison plan in the nation with the argument that it was “an opportunity to save money.” Republicans and Democrats in the state senate, however, joined together to defeat the measure. The legislators were dismayed that private prisons already operating in Florida actually cost more money than their state-run counterparts. “They need to start acting like any business in the private sector would and stop using imaginary numbers,” Senator Paula Dockery (R-Lakeland) complained.

    So are private prisons cheaper than state-run alternatives? According to a report last fall by the ACLU, evidence of cost-savings is “mixed at best.” While Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) and the GEO Group tout the cost-savings of their prisons, many studies by localities, states, and the General Accounting Office have questioned the veracity of such claims. 

    Even if it can be proven that private prisons save money, the larger concern is whether these savings truly come from productivity innovations only the private sector can provide or from cutting corners on safety, security, and rehabilitation. Adequately overseeing the inner-workings of our prisons is often a challenge, but the issue becomes especially salient with respect to private prisons.