- Joined
- Sep 3, 2011
- Messages
- 34,817
- Reaction score
- 18,576
- Location
- Look to your right... I'm that guy.
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
If we have to have private prisons... meaning prisons run by private corporations via contract... how should the contracts be structured? Should the corporations be paid...
1) Per inmate,
2) Flat fee (same whether they have 1 "customer" or 1,000),
3) Some combo of #1 & #2,
4) Something else entirely.
Question presumes you get to make the choice how this will be done for all future contracts and renewals. Current scenarios are irrelevant.
And no, we don't have to have them, but we do, and they're not going away anytime soon. It's just a phrase.
Are you suggesting they have no influence whatsoever?The claim that privatized prison operations increase incarceration numbers is unfounded rhetoric (aka-a lie). Companies that run prisons are not part of the court system that determines who goes to prison, and it is illegal for those companies to give kick-backs in any form (such as campaign contributions to prosecutors or judges). I'm not a supporter of, nor am I against, privately run prisons, but they are no different than having a private company operate a lock and dam system on a river for the US Army Corps of Engineers. Private companies can do the same work for less money than most government agencies can do the same work in many, although not all, circumstances. That's why the government hires private companies.
I chose a combination of 1 and 2 in the poll.
Are you suggesting they have no influence whatsoever?
The claim that privatized prison operations increase incarceration numbers is unfounded rhetoric (aka-a lie). Companies that run prisons are not part of the court system that determines who goes to prison, and it is illegal for those companies to give kick-backs in any form (such as campaign contributions to prosecutors or judges).
Just because a private business can do it doesn't mean they should.Law enforcement and incarceration are some of those things private companies should not handle due the fact they are motivated by profits and not by justice.I'm not a supporter of, nor am I against, privately run prisons, but they are no different than having a private company operate a lock and dam system on a river for the US Army Corps of Engineers. Private companies can do the same work for less money than most government agencies can do the same work in many, although not all, circumstances. That's why the government hires private companies.
I chose a combination of 1 and 2 in the poll.
The claim that privatized prison operations increase incarceration numbers is unfounded rhetoric (aka-a lie). Companies that run prisons are not part of the court system that determines who goes to prison, and it is illegal for those companies to give kick-backs in any form (such as campaign contributions to prosecutors or judges). I'm not a supporter of, nor am I against, privately run prisons, but they are no different than having a private company operate a lock and dam system on a river for the US Army Corps of Engineers. Private companies can do the same work for less money than most government agencies can do the same work in many, although not all, circumstances. That's why the government hires private companies.
I chose a combination of 1 and 2 in the poll.
Part of why I feel a flat rate should be done.A 90% occupancy rate for 20 years does not sound like unfounded rhetoric. It sounds like an incentive for states to keep prisons full.
Private purchasing of prisons locks in occupancy rates – USATODAY.com
At a time when states are struggling to reduce bloated prison populations and tight budgets, a private prison management company is offering to buy prisons in exchange for various considerations, including a controversial guarantee that the governments maintain a 90% occupancy rate for at least 20 years.
"Lockup Quotas," "Low-crime Taxes," and the For-Profit Prison Industry
6 Shocking Revelations About How Private Prisons Make Their Money | Alternet
States Guarantee High Prison Populations for Private Prison Industry?s Profits
Just because a private business can do it doesn't mean they should.Law enforcement and incarceration are some of those things private companies should not handle due the fact they are motivated by profits and not by justice.
If we have to have private prisons... meaning prisons run by private corporations via contract... how should the contracts be structured? Should the corporations be paid...
1) Per inmate,
2) Flat fee (same whether they have 1 "customer" or 1,000),
3) Some combo of #1 & #2,
4) Something else entirely.
Question presumes you get to make the choice how this will be done for all future contracts and renewals. Current scenarios are irrelevant.
And no, we don't have to have them, but we do, and they're not going away anytime soon. It's just a phrase.
The claim that privatized prison operations increase incarceration numbers is unfounded rhetoric (aka-a lie). Companies that run prisons are not part of the court system that determines who goes to prison, and it is illegal for those companies to give kick-backs in any form (such as campaign contributions to prosecutors or judges). I'm not a supporter of, nor am I against, privately run prisons, but they are no different than having a private company operate a lock and dam system on a river for the US Army Corps of Engineers. Private companies can do the same work for less money than most government agencies can do the same work in many, although not all, circumstances. That's why the government hires private companies.
I chose a combination of 1 and 2 in the poll.
The fatal flaw in your argument is in relying solely on illegal criteria as your basis. Prison corporations spend a lot of money lobbying legislators for more and tougher laws which spurs more arrests/convictions, lobbying for mandatory minimum sentences which keeps them in longer, and so on. And all of it is absolutely 100% legal.Wow. Touched a nerve, I see.
There is no actual realistic data that proves that utilizing private companies to manage a prison will increase the population of that prison, even when as stated above that prison populations hover around the 90% mark - correlation doesn't imply, much less prove, causation. For those that will not give up the fight, and will continue to point at and link to articles saying such things, please read this: Causation vs Correlation
You see, what some of you folks claim is happening is impossible to be systemic due to laws, regulations, inspectors, auditors, activist groups, and oh yeah, the press. When a very small number of crooks were identified when private management contracts were first started, they were identified very quickly and those involved were sent to - and this is the ironic part - prison.
Rather than saying, that these are "the exception that proves the rule," and given that it is impossible for what many of you believe to be systemic and occurring without hundreds of people going to jail, and since many of you believe it is improbable that a private company would not break the law, maybe we should rather look to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's words instead, "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."
Or, we could just keep banging our heads and railing against the man - private businesses are evil and should never be used by anyone for anything, especially by and for the government, since we know how well the government does stuff.
The fatal flaw in your argument is in relying solely on illegal criteria as your basis. Prison corporations spend a lot of money lobbying legislators for more and tougher laws which spurs more arrests/convictions, lobbying for mandatory minimum sentences which keeps them in longer, and so on. And all of it is absolutely 100% legal.
And any notion that a contract should require a minimum number of criminals is simply repugnant. I could see a minimum payout, as there are overhead costs to be considered whether beds are full or empty, but not a minimum number of "clients". These overhead costs would apply whether private or public.
Just one question: What are these companies paying for?I suggest we agree to disagree. I know the processes involved in these type of contracts, and the claim that they lobby for harsher sentences or increased penalties or tougher laws that feed the system, is just not true, because it is impossible. They cannot legally lobby on legislation that has anything to do with their contract income, which they have to swear to each year when they complete their ORCA Reps and Certs.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...me-the-biggest-lobby-no-one-is-talking-about/
"...have funneled more than $10 million to candidates since 1989 and have spent nearly $25 million on lobbying efforts."
Just one question: What are these companies paying for?
You can't even venture a guess?Ask them. If they're breaking the laws, and committing fraud on their Reps and Certs by saying they are not breaking the law, then lock their ass up. It's actually that simple.
Again, correlation doesn't imply, much less prove, causation.
If we have to have private prisons... meaning prisons run by private corporations via contract... how should the contracts be structured? Should the corporations be paid...
1) Per inmate,
2) Flat fee (same whether they have 1 "customer" or 1,000),
3) Some combo of #1 & #2,
4) Something else entirely.
Question presumes you get to make the choice how this will be done for all future contracts and renewals. Current scenarios are irrelevant.
And no, we don't have to have them, but we do, and they're not going away anytime soon. It's just a phrase.
Ask them. If they're breaking the laws, and committing fraud on their Reps and Certs by saying they are not breaking the law, then lock their ass up. It's actually that simple.
Again, correlation doesn't imply, much less prove, causation.
Wow. Touched a nerve, I see.
There is no actual realistic data that proves that utilizing private companies to manage a prison will increase the population of that prison, even when as stated above that prison populations hover around the 90% mark - correlation doesn't imply, much less prove, causation. For those that will not give up the fight, and will continue to point at and link to articles saying such things, please read this: Causation vs Correlation
You see, what some of you folks claim is happening is impossible to be systemic due to laws, regulations, inspectors, auditors, activist groups, and oh yeah, the press. When a very small number of crooks were identified when private management contracts were first started, they were identified very quickly and those involved were sent to - and this is the ironic part - prison.
Rather than saying, that these are "the exception that proves the rule," and given that it is impossible for what many of you believe to be systemic and occurring without hundreds of people going to jail, and since many of you believe it is improbable that a private company would not break the law, maybe we should rather look to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's words instead, "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."
Or, we could just keep banging our heads and railing against the man - private businesses are evil and should never be used by anyone for anything, especially by and for the government, since we know how well the government does stuff.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?