Representative Torrey Westrom has been pushing bills for using private prisons for years--witness this 2009 press release that cites research by an ideological think tank --as a cost-saving measure. As the Star Tribune reported back in March in Push for private prisons draws fire, he's been at it again this year.
Today's New York Times reports that contracts with private prisons may not actually save public dollars but simply cheery-pick inmates who are less expensive to care for.
In Private Prisons Found to Offer Little in Savings, the NYTimes' Richard Oppel Jr reports:
The conviction that private prisons save money helped drive more than 30 states to turn to them for housing inmates. But Arizona shows that popular wisdom might be wrong: Data there suggest that privately operated prisons can cost more to operate than state-run prisons — even though they often steer clear of the sickest, costliest inmates.
The state’s experience has particular relevance now, as many politicians have promised to ease budget problems by trimming state agencies. Florida and Ohio are planning major shifts toward private prisons, and Arizona is expected to sign deals doubling its private-inmate population.
The measures would be a shot in the arm for an industry that has struggled, in some places, to fill prison beds as the number of inmates nationwide has leveled off. But hopes of big taxpayer benefits might end in disappointment, independent experts say.
“There’s a perception that the private sector is always going to do it more efficiently and less costly,” said Russ Van Vleet, a former co-director of the University of Utah Criminal Justice Center. “But there really isn’t much out there that says that’s correct.”
Such has been the case lately in Arizona. Despite a state law stipulating that private prisons must create “cost savings,” the state’s own data indicate that inmates in private prisons can cost as much as $1,600 more per year, while many cost about the same as they do in state-run prisons.
The research, by the Arizona Department of Corrections, also reveals a murky aspect of private prisons that helps them appear less expensive: They often house only relatively healthy inmates.
Go read the whole article; it's worth it.
Though no specific company or facility is mentioned in Westrom's bill, the only private prison in Minnesota is the now-shuttered Prairie Correctional Facility in Appleton, owned by Corrections Corporation of America. The company is known for its aggressive drafting and lobbying of bills to build its business.
In the Strib coverage of the bill, Kevin Giles reported:
Westrom said it makes sense to use the Appleton prison rather than let it sit empty.
This is curious. Why should the fact that the prison is empty be reason in and of itself to fill it? It's not empty at government expense; that's a privately owned facility. Perhaps Westrom's hollow reasoning helps underscore the problems with treating prisoners or detainees like any other commodity to be traded in a market. A government mandated market for human bodies? May not be the best illustration of a free market at work.
AFSCME has more at Private Prison Savings Are a Hoax
Photo: The CCA facility in Appleton, via Minnesota Public Radio.
This might sound like an odd question, but would there be any impetus by the state to simply purchase the property for future use as either a state facility, a regional facility for local agencies, or even a state mental facility?
Just curious.
Posted by: Mike Worcester | May 25, 2011 at 02:13 PM