Arkansas is once again toying with the idea of private prisons. Arguments for this include the amount of money the state would save if there were some prisons run by private companies. It would also help the constant overcrowding of state prisons. If other companies were allowed to have their own prisons, the state penitentiaries would be under less stress to humanely house their occupants. A past failed attempt causes caution. In 1990, the state let the Wackenhut Correction Corp. take over two prisons. After only 3 years, they were taken over by the state because of allegations of poor conditions.
Privatization is the transfer of control of a company from government to private ownership. It has raised more than $600 million worldwide for governments from 1992-2002. It is economically very efficient for governments because money doesn't have to be spent on maintaining such Crown corporations and politically difficult decisions could be made more easily. However, profit is generally the motive of privatization and most Crown corporations protect the interests of society. Maintenance is a high priority because the voting citizens can pressure the government to provide effective and efficient services. This would not be so for private companies who could do as they wish to make a profit.
I think that such unmet public goods or services such as prisons and the postal system, it is better to have the power in the governments hands. Political parties are governed by the people that they represent and therefore must act on the people's wishes. I think it would be a very bad idea if private organizations got a hold of such powers because they don't have to obey or follow the morals of society. Their main concern would be making a profit and I believe that the services provided wouldn't be up to the standard of government run corporations. Although criminals have done bad things, giving them a reasonably humane place to serve their sentence should be mandatory, and therefore, prisons should not be privatized.
http://www.canada.com/windsorstar/news/letters/story.html?id=35af9fea-e91e-44cc-bd9c-435bcb44291a
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
The privatization of prisons is a bad idea and that many controversial issues will arise if prisons are privatized. Prisons are classified as an unmet public good, meaning the free-market system cannot provide that service due to the difficulty of charging people for the service. If prisons are privatized, then who would pay for the service? Do we expect he criminals to pay for the service themselves? They probably will not pay for the service because they either don’t have any money or even if they do they won’t pay because they know there won’t be any serious consequences that follow (they are already in jail). Cleanliness and proper security might also be concerns if prisons are controlled by crown corporations. At least currently, the government have strict regulations in place. Because prisons are an unmet public good, the prisons should be under government control, so everyone would have to pay for the service. It is a benefit for every citizen to have the criminals off our streets and kept in prisons. Therefore the government should continue to charge taxpayers for prison services because it provides them safety and protection. Although it is tempting to privatize prisons to save money for the government, the service provided to the criminals and the public would be in worse shape if prisons are privatized.
Jason Tong
Post a Comment