BANKING ON BONDAGE

Private Prisons and Mass Incarceration

w

AMERICAN CVL LIBERTES UNION
125 Brosd e, 190 Flor
Nework, WY 10004
e

Because Freedom Can Proect el

BANKING ON BONDAGE

Private Prisons and Mass Incarceration

'BANKING ON BONDAGE:
Private Prisons and Mass Incarceration

November 2,201

FSACLU

AMENICAN CIL LUBERTIES NN
125 Brond Sret, 100 P

e York, Y 0030

adiory

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

s rpor has been rjact o ACL Nationt Pris Prject and Cenie s Justce and was ihorsd
by Do Shasir 5t Atorny. Nationl Prisan Projc. Firt and fremt, th author wald he 1o
ha ie Tortgts Paaigat. Katanst PrisenProjclfor s manyconirbuton o h repor, nd Do
Fat [Diecor, NatontPriso Projc]ad ana upts ACLU Depuy Legal et for the supprtf
1 proact. Numerous indvidulsgeoarcsly eiewed drals o stheris cotriuled i wisdom and
s, nctuing Arjl Abraha, Rachel Boam, Mik Bickner, i Chetr, ScotCrichon,Shars
Dic Terence Daughery. Mook Esman, Al Fredmann, Joer Gita, Lis Grapbl, oy Grene,
Rochel Jordan, B Uil Vit Lops. Wi Mathews, Rachel Myers, N Naarjn,Saghen P,
DaritPochod. sy Rbinvit, v Riches, Tom Sanson, Wit Tracess, enmfer Wedekid Morgart
Winter and P Wright

Come mag:Stev McAUsterPhatgraphar' ChoicelGttyImsges
TABLE OF CONTENTS 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.

PART s THE PRIVATE PRISON EXPLOSION.
Excty Expoimant inFor-Prfit Imprisonment
The Exponeiial Growth of Privat Prsans.

Enarmous Profit o the Pivate Prison Industy,
Private Prisons, Mas Incarcration,and the Amrican
Legilative Exchange Counc....
Immigraton Detenton and Privat Prsan Expansir

PART : THE FALSE PROMISE OF PRIVATE PRISONS e 18

Control of normaton.

coNCLUSION — r

L ——

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The imrisonment of human beings a record leve i both 2 moralfalre and an acanemic
‘one—sepacially a time when more and more Americans are siruggling o make ands meet
nd when sats governmants confront snormous fiscal ries. Thie repor inds, hvwever, that
mass Incarcaraion provides gigantc windiall for ona spacial Inarest 9roup—the prvale
prien Industry—even a8 current Incarcaration evels harm the couniry 23 & whee. Whla
the nalon's unprocadented rate o Imprionment deprves indhiduta of frandom, wrests
oved anas from hei famils, and drains the resources of goveraments, commaniies, and
Lxpayars, the privet pison Industy rapa ucratve rewards, As the publc god suers from
mass Incarcaraion, rivata prisn campanie abtan more and more government dliacs, and
orivatpraen exacuives a heLanding comparies rak In enermeus companstion packugen.
n o casestotatig milions of dolars.
The Spoils of Mass Incarcer

. Y
Ittt e it ottt -
i iy
ik i o e el ]
e ik, e i e
T e et e e
e U e A skl b

numbers of Americans saddies government budgets withising deb and eacerbates th curent
scal crisescontonting siats across he nation

Leading privae pritan comparies essentally admit that hee busioess model depends on hgh
rates ofncarcraton.Fo exampl.ns 2010 Annust Report led withthe Securities and Exchange
Commisson. Carrections Corporation of Americ ICCAL, the arget prate prison compary.
Sated: The demand fr ou acltes and service could be advrsely alleced by .. leiency in
conviction r parole standards and sentencng practces...

s incarcaation ates skyrocket the prvteprson industry expands a expanental raes, hlding
‘ever more people in s prisons and jais, and generating massve proft. Prvte prisons for
‘5duts wers viwally hon-esstant uni the ealy 19805, but the number of prisones n private
risons increased b approsimately 140D% betwaen 1990 and 2000 Tody, or-proft comparies
areresponsibefr approimatey 6% of sat pisoners, 16% ffderal pisonrs,and, according
1o one repot, nearly hall of il immigrans dtained by the fedeal goveroment n 2010 the two
Largest prva priso companies slane receied nearly§3 ilon dolars in revenve, nd her1op
executves, accoding 1o ane source, each receved annual compensation packages worth wel
owr $3millon®

ADanger toState Finances

Wit supportes ofprvatizaton ot the deathat governments can save maney through private
{aciiies the svidencefo supposed cotsmings is mied at best."As sate goverments acress
The mtio conirnt deep iacal deficite, the sssetln that privae prisons demonsirably reduce
he cost o ncarceraton can b dangerous and Irrespansibi. Suchcaims may e saes info
bldingprvate prisonsor privaisng exstng ones raher than educing incarceraion ates and
imitog corrections spending hrough seriouscriminal fustice rform.

This yar, advacates offor-profi pisons roted ou prialzaton schemes 33 3 supposed answer
1 budgeary woes in rumerous stat

= Arizons has announced plans to award 500 ddiional prson beds to privale
Contracors,® despte » recant satament by the Arizons Auditor General tht for-
orei imprisonment n Arzons may cest more han ncarceraton i pubic-opersted
Tacitien" Arzona’s Dapartment o Corrctions i the onyLarge agency i that
et subjct 1o 8 budget cu i fscl yoar 2012—in ac,the Departmant’ budgel
Increased by $10 milion. According o a news epor,private prison employee and
Corporat afcers contributed money 1o Governor Jan Brewer s resecton campaign.
‘3nd high ranking Brewer Adminitration ofcials previously worked a5 prate prison
obbyits”

= Flarida has responded to explading ncarceration costs largely through increasing
reiance on privat prisons.* Altvugh the assetion tha privae prisons save axpayer
money i highly questionabl, suppatersofprivatizatio, ccoring o 3 recent ews
<port,claim that pevatiztion in Forda is necessay o ren n the prison system's
oudget which stood st 23 billon in 2010 A recent edtorist nthe Orlando Sentnel
expresced the view that privtizaton “has ectpsed and shehed potentally more
il cost-flectve changes. One of them s senenciog relorm.™ On Septamber
30, 2011 lrida court enjine the Department f Corrections from implementing
he privatzation of prison n 18 counie, finding tha the panned prvtzationfled
o comply withprocedures mandsted by site Low.” The cour stated, lhe dcison o
isse oy e rqss o propasll and ol ane coiact for i 29 risn fcilis
st proposedritizlion]was o ancorvabence and pect s thon
onaryGemonarted s o berel saenge s

= Olo recently announced hat it wil bcome, on Dacember 31, 201, the frst o i
thenaionto sl ublcyoperatd pison, Lake ErieCorrections Faciy. 1 prte
company.CCA” Notably. the head of Ohio's corrections department had 3eved as
managing directorof CA* Theclaim tht prisan prvatizaion demansirably reduces
costs and trims governmant budgets may detractfrom the critcat work of reducing
the state’s prson poputation.™

= Louislana narrowly delested 3 proosal, pushed by Gousrnor Babby Jindal n »
desperate atempt 10 generate shor-erm revenue, 1o sell of vee sate prsons
1 prvae companies. The Louisians House Appropristons Commitee bocked the
bill by a vot o 1312, with leisators expressing deep concern bout he wisdom of
seliog of the tae’s ssets”

= Tha fedaral govaramant s inthe midst of 3 private prison expansion spree, drven
prmariy by Imigration and Customs Enforcement ICl, an agency that locks up
roughly 40,000 imigrants each year and spends ove 1.9 bilon sl on custody
‘perations *ICE nowintends o cruae newnetwork of massie immigation detenton
‘conter, managed argely b pivata companies, insates including Mew Jrsey, Texas,
Florda, Callornia and llinle.* According o & news report.in August 2011, ICE5
plans o send 1250 immigraton detinees o Essex County New Jerseythraatened o
nravel amid aliegations that private prison company seckingthe caniract, whose
anacutives enoped clse ties 1o Governor Chis Chie, received “spacia reatment”
rom the county Thefsclcriss conlroting the fedral government, however,has

done nothing lo dampen Washingtons spending binge on prkaized immigration
detenion.

Atroclous Conditions.

Wil evidence is mixed, cartain smpicical sudies show 3 hightened lve o vioence against
risonersnprivatensitulions. This ey rfect i part the higher rae of sl urnover i prets
prisons, which cn reul ninesperienced guards walkingtheters.” Alte an inamous eacape
rom an Arizona privete prison in 2010, for exampl, the Arizons Depariment of Corracions
roportad thal ot the prson, sttt ar iy ‘groen’ scose sl shits
‘weapons,” and habitully ignore sounding aarms» Pivate faciiles have aiss been Unked 10
atrocious condions. In v faclty n Txas, for xample, sudors reported, -(llls were
iy smelld offoces and urine.

Cortain privat prison companies mply shrawe tactcs 1o obiain more and more govermment
£ONVact to inarcarate prioners. In February 201, fr xamele, » fry comiud. formar

o guestonabl fnancal ncenivs; banefitin from he “revoling doar” beween publc. o
prvale corections; estensive lobbying; avish campaign contributons and lfrts 1o cortrol
informatin®

Part One o this Repart races therise o the for-proit prison indusry over the past 20 years.
damonstraing hat pivte prisons resped lucrative spolls asincarcerton ates reached itoric
evels. Part T focuses o the supposed benefts associaed with prvte prisos, showing that
the view tha prvte prison companies provide demonsirale acanomic benefs and humane
acifis s debatable ot best Part Three discusses th tactics private prison comparies have
sed 1 obain control o more and mare human bengs and taxpayer dolars. ¢

Thetmeto el the axpansionffor-proftincarceratonta now. The evidence st priae prisons
Drovide savings compared o publiclyoperaed aclies is gy questonabl,andcertanstdies
et to woree contions i for-prof acies. The prvate risan indusry helped 1o cratethe
Trons incarcaraton criis and eeds ot ofthis soca L. Prvate prisons cannotbe part of the
ototionecanomic or ethical—1o the problem of mass ncarceration.

PART I:
THE PRIVATE PRISON EXPLOSION

Mass incarcaration sirain state budgets and deprives indviduls of Ubery n record numbers.
But the socal i of mass Incarceration i » bonanza or the priate prison ndusty, which has
extracted more and more tavgayer dolas rom sate budgts 25 govrnments ispatch rsoners
o private facies inever-ncreasing numbers.

This chaperchroices the raid ascent of the prvateprisonindustry over the past S pears—a
development that want hand-in-hand with expasive growih i incarceraton ates. Although
variows forms o orrectional prvtizaton had eted i arlir canturies,for-proftIncarceraton
Lon—untl,beginning n the 1980, peivateprisons suddenly eemerged

taking pesd.

Today,private companies imprisan roughly 130,00 prisoners* and, ccording

ol mmigration detainees in the United Sates ot ary given ime.® As sz
and more peopie o pricon,they funnel ever grater amaunts of taxpaye maney 1o pvat prison
aperators. By 2010, annul revenoes fthe e op prva prison companie alone stoodat eary
STbition

‘Terminology Used in This Repert

orhat all members f the prvate o

Early Experimants in For-Profit Imprisonment

{nthe yarsfollowing he il War: th UnitedSttes lsosxperimiedwithaformaf privatization.
The convc lesse sstem—which has been called “substitute for slvery @—tos ot s e
South.Under this systam, satsand local governments managed he prions,but prisoners were
sased out o work fr prate compariesor indduals. Uik the prnate ‘Keapers” i Enlond,
thesacontactors had il ncenive 1o treat prisoners humanaly. Accoring o Profosser et
Mxander, “Dasth rtes were shockingl high. for the privat contractars had no interest i e
eath and well-being o thi aborers,unlk the eate iave-owners who heeded i stwr.
atminimum, o be heaithy enaugh to suriwe hard labor-5

Jeward he nd fth Nieieanth Centry, taes bgan o outiaw conve lasing, and Congress
forkade th easing o fedarl prsonars in 1887 By 190, virtualy sl governmants arouns 1
world had assumedresponaibily ko management oftheit own prisons -

‘The Exponential Orowth of Private Prisons
Prosidont Richard Noon st announced the “war on gy

has adopied “ough on cima” aws that have give i th dubi
incarceration ot inthe world. These aws inclue

Mandatoy minimum sentencing Laws: Such Laws impose lang seniences and prsvant
judges from exercising discreton Lo impose. mare.leient punshrments. where
‘3pprprite, based on the crcumstances ofthe crme and th delendants inditont
characarisica.

Truth i sentencingLows: Such aws sharply cutail probation and parce sligily
equiring omates o remainn prison ong aftar they have been ehsiliatd.
Three triesLws:Such ws subject defendants comictd ofthre crimes o extremaly

1ong sentences. In one case head by the US. Supreme Court, & man charged with
ealing ol clbs received santenc of 2 yeors ko e under & thre skes owie

Mass ncarcaraton has urthar weskened depressed commites by depopuiaing them and
suiping even novilen former pisanersof oppotuniies 1o i employmant and meaningly
reenar sociaty. And whi publicsalety rquire the ncarcaratio o certaincrimints, curant
rtes ofincarcaraton are 5o anarmalousthtthey provide Ue f any U 43ty beneh

Beusan 1970 and 2005, the umber of paopl ncarcerated i the Uit Statesgrew by T00%
Today. the United Staes incacerates approsimtely 23 milion people * According 15 the
Congressional Resaarch Servace, he Uriad Sates has sy 5% of th worl'

2%t prisoners ™

THE U5 PAISON POPULATION ROSE 8Y TOO% FROM 1970 10 2005, A RATE FAR
(OUTPACING THAT OF GENERAL POPULATION GROWTH AND CRIME RATES.
Even compared to this breathtaking ate ofoveral growth nincarcaaton the rae of axgansion
o for-proft Imprisonment far oupaced th fed, accountng fo 3 disproportionate increase in
he nurmber of eoplefocked up. In 198, private dul prisons dd ot exst on Amrican s, bu
by 1990 prvte prison companies had established a irm fothod,bossing &7 for-prft ciies
ad n average daiypoputation of roughly 7,000 prisoners.? During the next twenty years irom
990 10 20091 the number o peape ncaceratedin private pisons incrased by marethan 1400%,
growing from approximatey 7,000 o approimaely 129,000 nmates®

Incressing incarceation rates fueled this massive expansion of private correctons. CCA—
the largest prvte prison company in the United States—admits that currnt sntencing aws
incrense thecompany's prfits by swelingprson populations, whereaspolciesamed at reducing
Incarceraion rates creat inanciaisks for th corporaton.Specfical,ina 2010 Al Report
submited to the Securiies and Exchange Commission [SECI, CCA sated, under th hesding
“Risks Related 1 Our Business and Idusty

Our abilty 0 socure newcantracts o deveap and manage correctional and datenton
acikies dependsonmany aclos utsideour controlOur grawthisgeneraydepandent
pon our abilly 1o ablan new contracts o develop and manage new corrctonal
and detention faciltes. This posibie growth depands on number of factors we
Camat conrol,ncludiog cr rates and sentencing paterns i various jorisdicions
nd acceptance of pratizaton. Th demand or our acltes and services could be
‘dversely afectd by the relaxation of anlocemant eforts,leniency Incomviction o
parse standands and senencing practices o Irough the decriminalzation ofcatain
Sctviestha recurrently proscribed b ou riina avws. Fo instance, any changes
with respect o drugs and controlled substances o Hlegal imigraton coud affect the
umber o persons arestad, comicid, and senenced, thareby potential reducing
Gemand fo correciona acltes o hause then. Legistaion has been proposed in
umerous juridictions that could ower minimum sentences for some fon-violent
crimes and make mors inmates elgile for early rlease based on good behario.
Aiso, semencing alemative under considerstion coud put some ffenders on
probation with elecironic monioring who would otherwise be incarceraed.Siary.
Feductons in crime rates o resources dedcated o prevent and enorce crime could
lead to reductions i arrests, comvictions and sentences reqiring Incarceation at
Correciona acites

The GEO Group, the second largest private prison opeator, denifed sl
Our Business and Industy” i SEC g

Risks Rlated to

Our growh depends on our abily 1o secure contacts o devlap and manage
new corrctional, detention and mental health faciis,the demand for which i
outsde aur contol .. Ay changes with respect 1 the docriminalization of drugs
2nd contrlled substances could sfect the number o parsons arested, convicted,
Sentenced and Incarcerated, thereby potentil reducing demand for correctonal

facies to house them. Sy, reducionsn crime eaes coud esd 10 reductions
n armasts, convictions and sentencesrequiring ncarceration at corrctions acles.
Imiigraton rform s which ae curenly a fous fo egisiators and paicians
th ederal. stae and ocal evel a0 could materialy adversly impact s

9

The incarcaraion explasian ove the past several decades produced vry few winners. Mass
imprisonment boke siate budgets, ore farvle and communities apar, and aked o promote
public saety in any signiican way ™ But as mass incarcaration led o isastrous sfecs or the
aion 2 & whol, e specal interest group—the priva prson indusiry—emerged 3 3 cear
‘winner. A massive ranser f axpayer dolars o he prvte prison industry accompanied the
unprecedent

Enormous Profits for the Private Prison Industry

101 arly 19805 priate pisons barly xistadin e United Sates, bt ht decade wouldwitness
the oundiogof th v companies tha dominate theindusrytoday—Corracions Corporation o
Amarica (CCAI and the GED Group then calad Wackenhut Correcions Carparation By 010,
anua reverue o these tws companies alane had rown ta nearty $3 bilion s

Government contract state ocal, and fderal provide the dominant source of priv
revenun Thervlore, thess astronomical. revanue figures demons
comparies receive massive amounts f spayer dollars 4

@ hat priate prison

The ailty fprivateprison companies 1o captue azpayer dotarsrests in handsome rewards
forthei lop exucutves. Accrding 1o one sourc,n 201, CCAsPresident and CED received more

than $3.2 millon inexscuive compensation, and GED's hairman and CED received neary $3.5
millon

Private Prisons, Mass Incarceration, and the American Legislative
Exchange Councll

CCA.theleacing pivae prison cormpary has lng provided major suppert o, and h
ith,the American Lgisaive Exchange CouncHIALEC)—sn orgamizaion o sate e
has achocatad harsh senancing and datation Lows. such ok mandalory mnimum sentencing
status. ALEC provides sat leglslators with model laisaton, and each pea. ALEC members
{ntroduce undreds o thess model bl talehouses across the country

ALEC opaates by hasing avish retreats that bring logethr state legislaors and corporate

eculves. Almcst 2000 siae legitaors belon 1 the organizaton * Accoding o Narioral
Public Raio, t ALEG annual coderences, “companies get o st around » e andwrite ‘madet
" with the stat agislatos, who then Lake them home 1 theirsates.” Lagsitor. b
been reported, pay naminal fee 1 atend the meetngs S50 for an annual membershipl, whi
the corporataparticpants pay thousands o dolars in mermbership due. As one ALEC member

Top Private Prison Companies.

Damon Hininger President

2. TheSEOGraus

inthe Late 1990s: The crgonization s supported
by money om the corporate sector, and, by paying 1o be n .
mermbers, corporationsare alowed the opportoiy to st down 1€ demand for our

atthe table and discuss thessues tha they have an terest -+ facilities and services could
Afer ALEC mestings. egislatos rtum 1o heic b sates wih b adversely affected by

ALEC mesegion
e leniency In conviction

ALEChaspushediegsationthatbeneftsprvateprisoncompanies or parole standards and
by promotn polcies tha et n mas ncarceraton nthe PV R

19905, ALE champloned—snd, according 1o ane report by an Sentencing practices..
sdvocacy group, succaeded in anacting in 2 staes—"ruth in

e i e s e So o ety oGt
i cvte et it ol o o et

1 the amautoftxpayer money unneled o prisons.

n the 1990, ALEC's mass ncarceration legsaton met with

. o Stges e Moo Mo Vo | e 1 I sentencng

a former ALEC Task Force Diector boasted, Tnlow, truth in WS, based on an ALEC

Senincingaws,based o an ALEC mode W, requieinmates model bill, require inmates to

1o serve B0 10 0 prcen fthei sevences beor becoming

ool Serve 80 to 90 percent of their
sentences before becoming

W prate pison companiesdery okingsepa 0 sfrmatoey -

support legislation that promotes mass incarceration.” and eligible for parole.

ithough GCA e ALEC i 2010, ccordig o recent v —Farmer ALE Tk Fore Dt

Tepor,lorthe past wo decads, CCA vt has bewn s crators

member of th councifs la frc tht] prduced more han

5 ol il and resluions that requi foughr crminal

sentncio. expanded immiraton anorcament and promoted pion prvtzation . CEAS

i drectorof busines develapmentwa he e secircha o h ok frc i e it

1oLt 704 whn produced erie f odel bl promotin tvgh-cn-<rm essues et

wouid send mare peopt o prisanfr » onger e Accaring o e epart by 3 non-prft

ergniantion, i 197, CCA e the ALEC]Presdents Lt o conrbtions 0 ALECsStes

and Ntanl Paiy St Wackenhot s spomsored e coferenc.

Evan 2 ALEC has recenty pushed cortin piecament reforms for low-isk prisoners, the
organizationcontinues to trumpet harsh mandatory minimurms, staingon 1 webie

Each year, close 1o 1,000 bils, based ot least I part o ALEC Meodel Logislation,are
ntroduced inthe tate. Of these, an average of 20 prcent become aw ... Since s
founding, ALEC has amassed an unmatched record of achieving ground-breaking

changes in public polcy. Polices such as mandatory minimum sentencing fo vlent
criminas represent st handll of ALEC's vitoies inthe staes.

iy dane work that helped ncrease the amoun of aspayer maney spent on
carrctons ganerally but has siso supparted paliies kel to increase the proortin of
carrectonsspending unaeld o prvate corporatons. I ac, the “Private Correciona Faciiies
Act” another ALEC model bi, authorized for-proit incarceration conracs betwean state and
local governments and piva prison oparatrs. Tha model ctstated: This Actwould allow any
unt ofgoverament 1o conract with the e sector 1 prfarm sarvics crranty priormed by
3 corrections agency.™ The model cturthar provided tha tae prisoner ey be carcersted
in lacity consirucd o cparatad by privala ey pursuant 1o coniact under this Act and
parmitied conracts fo the prvae purchase o lease o corrctional faciies fo period of up
1030 yoars.™ Accoding 1o repot by an advocacy group, ALEC's Crininal Jusice Tash Force
at e poit eported that prison pivatzation was & major issua” on which il wet focusing "
0 accating 10 arecant v roport. “[laring i the 1990, [an) ALEC task korc . produced
model bills diwctly promoting prison privatzation. These included bils 1o e prvte prisons
houseinmlas rom ofherstates without permission of lcal governmens,require proatizaion
of prisons and correctional sarvices and encourage cotractingfr prison abar ™
"

Immigration Detention and Private Prison Expansion

In recant ysars, pivate prisons have proiad na any from harsh sentencing policies b alsc
#rom an unrecedenied icrease n the number of deained immigrants—s group incorcerated
pursuan tocivl delention authorit but housed i prison-ke condhions. Acording t one roup.
{aciin aperaid by prvate prison companies curenty house nearly SO% of the mars than
30,000 mmigrans dtained by mvigraton and Customs Entorcament CE)atao ghven ima.®

ik mprisonment. imnigraton detanon has sxpanded dramticllyinrecer pears. In 199, the
‘verage iy population of deained immigrans stoodat 4,785 In 1995, Congress paseed the
lega mnigrant Relorm and Immigrant Responsisilty Act IRIRA) which masively expanded
the dotention ofimmigrant.® Some of the staute s povisions wers simed a nanciizans with
crminal canvitons, authoizing thei mandatoy land i some cases indeiite detenton. Other
provisions tareled aslum saskers, who became subjct 0 axpedied remaval process that
150 mandated dention. By 2001, the rumber of immigrans detsined at ny ghen time had
more han rled 1o 20,4294

Yot even tht umberwould contnue 0 grow, 5 theSeplember 1, 2001 stscks rthr ueled tha
elance onimmigralion detetion, i urn brining new businessfo e pivate prson industry.
Just waeks ata Septambar 11, th head o pivate prison company poke with stock analyss.
Acording 1o ane reportsubmited 1o the UN. Specal Rapporteur on the Rights of Migrants. he
st

s clear tha snce September 11 there's a heghtened focus on detenion. More
JeEle e300 gt cugh. ol would sy s poitve, The el busines s
businessfor us, and September 11 i ncrasiog that business

The past dacade has borne oot the predictin that /11 would
e good business fo prvale prisans. By 2010 the average daiy
Bopulation o imigraton detinees stood at 3,020, more thana PETCENLage increase in

S0%craase ver the 2001 evel land anncreaseof rughly 450% _ immigration detention since

o the 199 el 1994: 45T%

e, ALE e v e e it ity
i vt ot o e
A 2,251, A Cor o Beves v
Sese B 17, sttt e oo i Aons_ Getinees currently in
e 3k prople otk paers g b sncomers s privatfacllen,
:n‘mi-n-mw “reasonable suspicion” that they are private faciltes: 47%

o oyt Srue O 67,40 e oo .ot b e,
Lo e sacted n severl o st e o pon s
1o e e e of s doie. ety
ding o rcrs 5 btd v It dtetoncomer, |

Percentage of immigration

Russel Pearce, currnty President of the Arizora Stae Senste

‘and 3 member of ALEC's Public Slety and Elacions Task Force, w8 ponsor and movig orce
ehindthe Aizona bIL" and he presented the idoa fo the Low at an ALEC maeting. Accoding
103 roport by Natonal Public Radic which s disputed by Pearce and CCAL the prvate prison

Wil mass incarceratonjoes the hation a3 2 whle, pivat pison companies enjoy v
‘windial, etracting ever greaer amounts o taxpaye dolarsfrom the pubic . As shownnthe
est chapter,such government argesse toward private prisoncampanies resuts aleast I part
rom aseriesof highly questonable claims about rivatization ha ancourage bingespenciog on
Tor-profitacttes.

PART Il
THE FALSE PROMISE OF PRIVATE PRISONS

privte prison supportars and polcymakers have pul forth priatizaton as part o a soution
1o budgetary crises confroning sates. across the nation" Siiarty, leding prate prson
companie promise 1o provde costffective alernatves 1o governmentally operaed prsans.
CCA asserts on s wbsite, “[whih state and federa budgetssrviched and public needs abvars
compting with iiteddolars, egisators aefaced wihcriica chokces onwhare 1o spend scarce

maintain thee prisons
lows goverrmant 1o car for hardworking aspeyer dolars, whis prtecing critca pririios
ke education and heslth cae. ™ Other pivatsprdon companies ssert that privatzation saves
money. or is therwise cost-flctve. GED, fo sxample, claim (o provide -20% 1o 30% cost.
Sings” n facilty development, and 1% 16 20% costsavings”n facily management

This chapter demanstates that th supposed henefts (aconomic and otherwise of prvate
prisons afen il o withetand scrutiny The view that private prisons save taxpayer money,fuel
Tocaleconomies,and adequately rotect the safetyofpisoners heps o feed mass ncarceration
oy makingprivtzaton appess 1 be n aircive alternaie 1 reduing prison papulaions. But
the vidence for such beneis i mined at best. Notanly may privatization ol o save aspayer
money,but rivate prison companies, a fo-prof nstutions,ar strongly Incenized o cul
cormers and thereby maximize profit, which may come a the expense o pubic saley and the
el being o prisoners ™

Infated hopes about the supposed benafis of pivatzation are sspecilly dangerous now.
25 severl states, spurred by fscal nacessty, have begun the dffcull work of reducing mss
incarceration Such progress threatens the pivate riso indusry. As CCA stted n s 2010
Aol Report, under the heading “Risks Reated o Our Business and Industry.” “legisation
has been proposed in numerous urisdctions that could ower minimu sentences o some o
ole crmes and make mre inmates lgible for ealy elease based on good behavir Also,
sentencingaiternative under considerstion could put some offendes onprobaion - who would
etherwise be incorcerated™

The danger currenly posed by the private priton ndustry s tha lgilalors, aperating under
h Nihly questionabl view it prvae prisons save maney. wil s o prvaiation s 3 scal
soluin, rather then cutting corections spending by reducing the number of pople behind
bars. For example, despte a recent stalement b the Avizona Auditor Ganera that for-proft
imprisorment in Arizona moy cost more than Incarceatin in publcy-operted facliie.”
Avizona has announced plans to contrac ot an addional 5000 prisen “beds. ™ 0
Accortingly,an anatysis o thekey banets suppesedly assocaed wih prvate risons—thtfor-
Brfit prisons save money stimulats economic growth, and adequately ensure the wel-being of
Brisoners—s especialy relevan in I present momen. Suchclaims are examined below.
Supposed Cost Savings /3

Evidance thatprvate prisons sav public money is mised atbesk. Whi some research supparts

uch view, ™ umerous ihershudies and reports have ndicated tht private prisos

notsave

money, ol be demansirated 1o save money in meaningll amounts, o may even cos mors

than goveromental opeated prisons. For sxample:

= 1n2010,the Aizona Audor Ganera tted that anlysis by the Arisons Dupariment of
orrecions“ndicated hat it may be maro cosly ko hovse inmates nprate prisons”
thanpublcntiluons. ndeed, atar making acjustments o alow o mare accurse
comparisen, rates paid 1o pivate facilies wers highe for both mimimem- and
medium-custody beds—the two categoriesof b for which he Arzons Depariment
ofCarrctone] cotracts. ™

= 102010, the Havwall Stte Audor isuad a scathing report which ound het e sist's
Department of Pubiic Satey “rapeatedly mised poicymakers and the publc by
reporting Inaccurat ncacecaton costs.” I usiling the decison o send prisoners
10 CCA prsons inthe cotinntal Unied States,rather than publicly operated pisoms
I Howal the Department used » “fawed methodelogy,”‘provideld] atical mmate
cost,” andengaged n “skewed costreporting.”™

= 10 2010, o Loga Review Commitee, esablished by Monmauth County New Jersey,
1 sudy the legal implcatons the Monmouth Couny Correctional
nsittonreprted: Marystudies have been done regarding prison patzation. most
ol which conclucdetht the logal Implcations sssocited tharewith make prvatiation
atiracive. Specicaly. ncreased abilty 1o the public eniy.increased reported
escapes. prvte prison uards who are not rined o the level of v snfercerment
olfcers, increased number of awsuts and Increased vioence and disturbances at
curectionfacilie . Mos objective cost tules show e or o cos savings o npepers
Coupld with n icreased afoyisk . [Prioiztion doe nt sppeat o be s il option
o Monmauth County's masimum securiy faciity doe o the potental icreased vk of
ity and sfetyrisks without poot o cos savinge

= 12007, the Gavernment Acountabily Office [6A0] reported tht the Fderal Bureau
ofPrisons i 0collctadaquatedaia o detarine whether piva ederat prisons.
ware more rless expansv than publicy aperated fderal prsons.™

1 AZ007 meta-anaiysisofprevious privatization stucies by University of Ut esearchers
found:“Castsavings from prvatizaton re n guaranteed and qusliy of services b
ot improved. Acros the boad afec sizes ware smal s0 small that the velve of
moving 10 privatly managed ystem s questionane. =

® Whie o judical decsin does ot constitle » study. it is noeworiy that on
Septembar 30, 201, » Flarda court enjoned th Florids Deparimantof Corecions
fromimplamaningth pivatization of prisers in 18 counte, fining hat the planned
privatizaion faled 1o comply ith procedores. mandated by siat o, cluding
provsons regacing cos efectveness ™ The court stated tht the Department of
Corrections "has not prepared any cost comparison tudy.cost-bene anlyss, or
business case aalsis. I has not consulled th Audor Genera - The decson 1o
s only one RFP and only ane conrac for all 29 pison tacilies was based on
convenience and speed. .. rather than on any demonsirated. savings o benefit
adaniage . From the rcord. it appaars tht the rush fo et lcertain] deadines
s esuled in many shotcomings i (he evaluaion of whether prvatzation s the
bestpublc neres s K eates 1 cot savings and sfecive service. ™ As N report
Went 0 press, Governar Rick Scot reportedy had not decided whether to appent the
ruing =

Whis thersudres hav repore
supprted privalepisons has come i qesion basd on s Unks o priate s companes

cost savings. theindepandance of atlastoneresearcher who
Chartes Thamas, » Uniersity of Flarida academic and one of the mst autspoken popons o
privat prisens, reportedly received 3 millon in consuling fees from prte prison comparies
o elated enties." Although potenial confict o nterest does ot nacessarl imply lowed
research, the Florda Commission an Ethics stated tht Thomas”“contractua relationships
with privae correcions companie, o companies related 1o the priva corrctions ndusty .
conficted with his duty 1o objectvlyevaluate th correctons ndusry through s research with
the Univerity of Florida. ™"

Aside rom supposed costbenefts,th laxding for-proftprvate pison companies asset hal
private prisons spur econamic growth for local communies. The GED roups website, for
Example, caims that GED prisons provide local communitie with an "o o capal hal hs
the abiy tostimulae th econornc makeup of 3 community through consumer spanding, new
business enterprises,and captalimproverments. ™ Sinslarly,CCA prorises that Tokr resence
means mre revenue fo counties,lowns, s 3nd staes. Our acltes maan moreocal o or
Rardorking residents "

Seant Economic Benefitfor Local Communities.

The vew thet_prisons_sbstantly_promle_sconric
Govlopments g uesionale. Acaiing acrantods,

e rans ppenr 1 b fow sy, sconomic banti &~ The findings reported here
5570 sty b rseutoars o Washioton St Uty nd Cat doubt on clais that
Onlo Sae Uniarly sxamind éaa on -l existing nd new

‘prisons in the United States since 1960," reporting findings that peioon bullding ls werth the
“cast doubl on claims that prison building is worth the investment Investment for struggling
o srgalin rr ot A 08 it oY rural communities.”
e e it etk i

e e v Sy mer) .
ot coune e Yrk S, b e it Rerrg e
tans ot o, hes brei g nt i hst cuny o)

o bt g o oot e ok pcetarly oo oo dCotr
I posiontaba e tese b Whla R oo e Lo EreTmen, 76 1

e s Bt aentaebeween ot nd 5447 S

it pian. heeviercctined o s s

ottt apaio e st prvte o et o oo N
ksl

Furthermare, private pisons can impose costs on locsl communiies by sblaining subsidie,
enioing propery tax exemption, and recehing municpal senvces (such as water and sewsr
Services) tha cos axpaper maney.”In 201, repor b one advocacy group stated that nearly
hree quartrs ofarge privats prisons eceiad devepmentsubsidies rom the gomrnment

Meanwit, the benefit 1o counties where privats prisons re bt and operaed can be quite
Scant—some receve les than $2 per prisone per da from th prvate prison opaato” The
prite prison companies themseives receie 3 ar greate payol from the govermment enily
Isuch a5 tate corections department|whose prisonersth companyincarcerates. For exampe,
priate prison operators in Arizona were paid $43.52 per medium securiyprisoner por day in
2000 and a3 early a5 2000, the fodoral goveriment agred t pay CCA irmost 90 pr day or
eochdutined immigrant st San Diga fcity™

Furthermere, in some cases, loca communiies eager o buld prvate prisons hav set p
fnancal arrangements that utimately damage their fiscl standing." The ollowing case study
exempifes ths problem.
15

s et T o0 Sk bty o ok e b
g s

redicnd et st
it e bt et b wih 8

ot b e o e b o
Anmsiagsbaron Wl

imaioed ot e 53 o varth of e asd by o canric’
oy manatrfy coated b et lckd slicn g o back s T
-tk dunod e Rl 1 peie hod swem ol o o

Ly
i

: e ptesmiiy
i el et s e
7 R

s v . o, ko cadog e A, e

;8 loast 17 alasgsand ) bistery ot fraud and thet - Ho spent thrae years in pisen i

i-.-.—mi-i-.—-inuunu—ummu.nm
s CorpanGorctne

Limit

Incentives to Curb Recldivism and Prison Violence 16

Leading private prison companies assertthat fo-proft facltes protect the saftyof prisoners.
Management & Training Corporaiontates on s webst: Our stal aining peratona poicie,
0 systems of accountabilty emphasiza ot ol sale and secur aperaton, but rehabltation
and protectionof human rights.” Siilarty, OEO asserts, We ae commited i esablishing and
mainaining s workplace hat s sae, securs and humane. ot ol o ur rined and xperenced.

i masns being 3nambsssadr of ety and secury o inmaes, e surroundig cammuniy
a0 elow stafL

s detled below, hawever, certain research suggests tha for-proft prisons may b associaled
with heighiened levels o vilence toward prisonrs. Th perverse ncenives o maximize prts
308 cu comars—even o the expense of ety and decen condiions—may conirbue 10 3n
macceptablelevel of dangerin pivateprisons.

Vilence n Private Prsons

Alihough thee is some evidence 1o the conrary,* sevaral studies suggest that prisonrs in
rivatefacilties e fce reater hreas o sfety than thoe n overnmartally operatediiscns.
e study concluded tht “theprvte sector i 8 more dangerous place t b Incarcerated.”
reported, based upon an analysi of nationa data, that “the priae seclor experenced more
than twice the number o assauts against inmates than did the public sectoc™ Simlary, a
Urited Stats Department f Jusice tudy, based on 3 natonal suvey o prvte prsons, eporied
tha the privately oprated faciltes have a much igher rate ofinmate-on-iamate and inmate-
an-stat assaults and ther disturbances” than publcy operated facilie, when Insttuions of
similar secuity levels are compared.™ Anothe stuy eported: TTThe survey dta presenied
nthis paper show that pivatelyaperated pisons_had much igher escape ate from secure
Insttutions,and much highe random drug N rates than the Bureny of Prisons.™

‘Another Department o Justice sudy,which compared pivat ederst pison, Tah Corrctionsl
Instttion "I, with cortain other insiuions aperated by the federal Bureau of Prisons
B0 reported ower evea of violent inmae misconduct a he privat prison but also stated
hatthe pivateprison “contibuted o highr probabily thtinales would beinvoved novrall
misconduct for much ofthe time peiod than any of the [povernmental comparison pisons.™
The study lso st

TCI consistenty damonsirated lower levels of parformance on the parformance.
measures examined her, primarly Inmae misconduct and Hlega drug use, This
eiationship hokds both when TCHis compared 1 th thee BOP comparisan risons
25 wel a when TCI s compared 15 other BOP low-securly rison, T experinced
three significant incident hat 6id not occur a the BOP comparison prisons TCI
experienced two escapes _ and one arge-scale disturbance in which at least 1000
Inmates refused 1o return to thei cols, These intances endangered both publlc
safety and instuton safey ™

Recent examples of unsate condions i private pisonsinclude thefllowing:

@ Just thre weeks befor U elease oftis repot.prisoner fights nseveral ocations.
hrougheut a private prison in Oklahoma et 6 prisoners njred 3nd requied 16
vmates 1o be sent 1 the hosptl. some of them ncriticalconditon. ™

= InSeptember 201, Donald Dunn aprivate prisonempleyeerespansiblforransporting
imimigration detainees pleaded guily, sccarding to » Department of Juste press
reease. 1o two feders depration o ihts charges: Wil ransportngth females
betwmen th correctionsl cante and sith Austn Bergtrom nternatonal Aprt o
he Greyhound Bus Terminal in Austin, Dunn admitedl wouldsto the vhicl,arder

th fmales o exit he vehil,then mistead each o thevictma to beiee tht e was
conducting legiimatesearch o theirbodies,when i lact the defendant ouched
Vit i seaual manner and for the purposesofselgratifcation ™ Dunn sarier
pld gulty o statechargesof official appression and unwl esrant n connection
th he molesaton o e immigraton detanees. ™ On Ocaber 19, 2011, e AGLU o
Texssbrought uit aganst deendants incuding D th privle prison company,and

immigration apd Custams Enfocement on babal of mniration detiness atging
sexinl sbuse
[

1 August 2011, according o3 Department o Jutice press reiase: “former Cantract
SecuriyOfficer Edin Rodrigue, 0. pleadd guily I angaging. sexol abuse of

. fomale detainee undor issuperison and contre. The sarual ctoccured mide he
Wilacy Detenton Contr whis Rdriguas was an duty -

= 102009, tate of Haval investigators sent 10 Oter .rwek Caractionat Canter, private
risen o women n Ktucky hat held Hawsil prisones, fond, accariing i - oo
0L, tha “at e v corrctons officitsat the pissn, ockudig o chapian, had
been charged with [angaging in senual Inlercourse] with et n e oot hrae
years, and our wars comctud "

= Evidnce rcenty cbainad by the ACLUthrough s Freedom of nermation Acrequest,
submitedin 2011 tothe Department of Homeland Securiy, provides et window
int assauit i pivat pisons. Thase documants suggest that the Dapartmencs Ofce
tinspecor General whichmestigates sexual abuse ofndhidusts hldin rmeipraton
detanton aciiis, recaived nmarous sexual sbuse complaiats botween 2004 and
2010 regarding the Wilacy Detention Cente n Raymandiile, Texas—a privele ity
aperated by Managament & Trining Corporation. Excapts fram these documents,
Whichwere hesuiy rdacted by the govarnmen, appoar baiow.

The fllwing case studies furthe lstate unacceptabl evsof ilenceand unsal conitions
in private prisons.

XTI Aopating Condiions ata Fo-Proit Youtn Facilty

e ki 4 v
Aot ore Youlh CamasaedFcily. ol riso n M operved by GE0
vesigaion

"
sl b the ACLLand e Southen Poverty Lam Cirtern 2010 logs 3 pattrnof
Norrendousphysicat nd semin ahuse by sucirty i of prlsmgad sllrycanramart;

Shuse andmegect f mnialy Ryt and a1 rovide el mia et care 4 Wil
uventes allegedy sufe I rocouscondfon, rvate compariesIcading the OED Orep

hov, acarding o one eport, extraced more tan 100 il evnce ot the cy )
operatn

[IXTTSIENN The Death of Jesus Minual Oalinds
S L A S :
A soanding 3 i i slry cnfement Teas et rson, 2-erild.Jss.
Manoet Gatnd,scarin o the oot ld 4 pnding el was foud e i
ol I Decembar 000 Actodng o apers ld i h v OED Dreup oprved .
rivon: sacand pvte ett, Py Rk Asscaton (PAL provied el ars o

ot prson i i discover i st e e . Acsodig th campdi fad
nhe vl Gaindo did o e plapicacre i efary confnermnt ol Wi
#broen tercom that preveted i o calligfor bl et
e o b e o7 o

't by e sy e A R
Dienof the Unked SaesDepartmentat Juscs hd o tht s corectona .
voug PAA, ol nedequnte mediaservice th llowing reas ke, seerin.
S el vt caes sergen cae, o nd rerta cae rd mediatah st
2 management A el mats 3 th Dscl] Wi sevious medica neds e s i
o har. ™ D hes nings of sereus et the il Bvau of Prson revarsd the
Company by anering i cotract 5 house ndara flsners t h Teas oty whare A
roites il cre,and whare Galnd' esth wodd e oot

ancthr e, whleguadsreprtdyolad e nervne p

=
.._....m..,..........,.....fl&.........
=

sty it e et
v oyl ard .....M._.......‘.-.msgfl

mprovements I fcly condlons,Incudig 3 fgulremen that e coporto prtrm
imveaigatonf i sl and nreesesfogevls™
Flawed incentives and Prvte Prsen Vilence 19

Dangersin prvate prisons may rflec,a laastn part, inancial incenines 1o minmize costs 3na
hereby matiniz profs. Indaed, sccording to one scholar, “there is 3 much sronger ncenive
{orprivate prison] companies tasav cots, ot o the public's benefl, but o their own prof "™
I paricular,Low pay o prvate prison staf may resul in 3 higha level of saf urnover, AS
Sated I e sl “piale opersirs are runig prisons wilh werkers who are generaly
o (5 tha their public-secor counlarpats” and -privalaly oparaed prisons . had much
Ngher seporation ates fo correctional afcers. ™ Silary, according o another study, private
Feans, as compared o public facilies, oy correctiona fficerslos and face a higher ate of
St lover™

Thess shorcuts patetally creae gave ks, a pay and urmover may “contribute o the higher
evel f viance seen n th prate sector* More specficaly:

Priatly operaed prisons appeat 1 have systemic problems in mainaining secure
aciles — Adrucates of prison prvaization have argued that pate prisons can
oy workersLss ofr fewer benais, d st dever 3 product tht is 36 go0d or
ke tan i provided by th public sctor. The avidnce o date contradicts uchan
ancompassing assation

The same sty continued: e daa presented har ndicate that s costy workers n privaie
risans hove nl produced sn accaptabe el o publc salty o inmate care 1o date.”*

Private Prison Incentives:

The more things change.

the more they stay the same.

Th fllwing case study shows that an Arzana prate prison was siafed wilh inexperinced
Suards, and that betar management of the aclly might have avoided 3 horrc escape

SIS o Escapefrom an Arizom P Prisen

‘The s sacape o three prscner, g cocid ardarr TacyProvc,rom »
e s i Higman, Anana an 30, D1, pevdo rage usiraion ofhe dongers
Crvtadin oo e s and e sne o Iecpriancadcoreconl ofcrs. The (st
fine sscapevaryhrric, ed scapees war hargd with lndy urdeig wh oo e
T, s ldry Chahoma coupl vacaloniog nNow Mo, ad et s ot campac
o fth prseners was recapred oy hr » chaas n which o fre bl a3 polc ar,
aneerad caught vl Mg wih o, The Direcor of he Ariora Department o
Correctons desrised teprisen broak s th ' wors scap 3 e
o e 0 o e B sty ams ey e e e
Aoy a0 s e s B
e i e o, sy o Wt et e e
o At D o Gt e
T iy ey n e et oo
o b ey e s, P e e
i oy e O s s

e Lo et e o R e

e o e . S
o st et st e b e b5

s ey et e i T

ot s o o i e . e e,

aor i o e S s S e ™

o b T LR y

® Staftare ity gresn across sl shR. Mary atlf have under o year faervice. Finding

2o e e e >

= s timatd ht“en i of secury s et
obori thelr prometed pstion™ e e

= St are v procion ik wempons
= Weapens aesored onded and dhl ar ek bt condocid e

Dot o agic xcae e bt ey Dot g
Corprtan cortron oy b A g e

Private Prisons and Rehabittation

Privte prison operalos have imited incentives to reduce futurs crime. As one schola notes,
T very wel may be tht comparies opeating pivate prisons - wil be 30 concerned wih
cost cutting, proic making. and catisfying theic stockholders that some majr ol of the
institation wi be negected or overooked. For Instance, some aspects o rehabltatin - may
e alfected.™™ Numerous rligious graups have condemned the pererse ncentives nherent
for-pruft ncarceration—incuding the absence o incentives 1o devte resources ta rehabliaion,
According o he Private Crrections Working Oroup, tataments by eigious groups ineppostion
riate prisons Include the llowing:

Presyteran ChurchUSA12003:Since the gost offor-prfit privae rison s sarning. ;
2 profit fo thei sharwholders, thae is a basic and fundamental conflct with the

concept ofrhabillaion a5 th utimategosl of th prison syster. We beleve hat s

153 glaring and ignificant Nawn our stice system and that for-proft pivatepisons

should beabolished.”

United Meihodit Church 20001, The United Methdist Church dectares s oppeston
1a the priatization o pisons and jats and to roft making from the punishment o
human beings.”

Episcopa Diocese o Newar (2002): “The industry of warehausingprisoners i pivate
Brisons has presented lemptation 19 those who would ro rom the puishrment o
human bengs.” ™

Wit the armpiical videnceis mixe, Indiduals reeased from private prisons may be more
kelyto commtfuturecrmes han peolereleased rom publcyaperated prisons. According .
2008 study o Oiahoma prisons, “prvte prison inmate groups had greate hatarof rcidsm
than i pubic inmte groups.

o nly i ther Ut ncentv 0 spand money o rehabittion,bu crma,at aas inane sense
iagood for prvateprsons: the mara crimestht arecommited,and themoreindiiduats who s
Sent o prison. the ore money pivate prisons sand 1o make. ncreased eckiiam gves priv
risons steadyclietele buthas negatve consequences fo th publc-—more crime, ang more
money spent e-incarcaratingfrmer prisoners.

LT el s s slesed e seing s setence ot vt risen

Although supportes of fr-profit
bloaied state corect

v these snormous potenial drowbacks,
in persusding plicymakers to buld mre

PART lll: N zz
THE PRIVATE PRISON PITCH

I order 1 ncrease reverue and masimize profi, pivate peison companies mst obtain e
d mors conracts 1 lock up increaeing urbers of paopla. o prae pison comparies, o
{ncivdals associted wih hese comparies, emplo 3 range of aggessivetactics 1o expand he
Feat of for-pro imprisonmant. This chaplr sxamines such tactics, which ncude:

= Guestionabe financia incentives

= Banatiting from the“revaing door”between public nd pivats corrections

= Extensie lobbying ‘

= Lavish campaig contributons
= Contol ot infermation L

Notveryprivate prison company has been found o engage i ach actcdiscussedn s chpl
Bt he tactics eed by some companies may pose an especially grave concern at present, a5
iate governmant sirugge 1 reduce incarcaration costs. Such tacics Ureaten o undermine
Fas seltions 1 overincarceration by ancouraging cash-siragped sate Governmenis 1o trn o
Bratization ather tha ssiouscrminaljusticerelor. Th highly questionableview hat pivate
Drisons provide adantages nancal o therwise]ovr governmentl fciltes, discussed inthe
Drevous chapter, may become all tha more dangarous when couped wth e nflence-pedding
Siategies discussed n this chapter.

Questionable Financial Incentives

Theprvae prison indusry has managed o expand s reach i part because some rivae rison
companie, o indidunls sssocated with hose companies, have provided questonable inancial
ocamives 1o egiiaors or other government aficials. Two case sudies of recent events
eansyiania 3nd Alaska Hlustratath use of questonabl inancialincentvs n connection with
private prisons.

PR —

I Febrary 2011,y covicad ormae Liarve Couny, Pl g WarkGiarlia
o rackatsring, maneyLaudering. 5d ooy I cornacon s accapanceof ey
el dolarsrm e dveapr o it el = Presscrs poriedy

Sccouted o 2% of daciiors el hLdre Iy Poonoyaia—av hough Lirre -

R

ccarting oailas withchkdron viedby o, th g vould hod sty it
ang Ho alinged srtarnd s arysr-old ncararsad and e ghschol g fc
s monihsbacavs she mockad chokffcl o wabahe I anster repurtad s,
e year-oid oy ook s mathars carand g aqachant ™ Th motha flad olce
Tepor, ancermd that Ineuranc thrwis would el cone the daage. Coolaepataly
eted o by or Al s yare b sraherntan, Ciarnlaalogody basod s ket
Senience on e rumber of b prched sl acourroom windw
“To pmants recevd by Clvrel o hepriaeprison developar imately e ct oty 1o
Clnaras crin ot ot st th dissal, by he Supram Court o Pennabarin,
14000 jovenlcass handid by Ciomra T Curt st 23

Cimmreliaimited undrcuth tat o d ecled pajmata o Rober Powel

Coneircid th ot acon:drigth o o thatCiovral was presking
‘s vl matars Iy Lraro Couny s Ciral's adision htho e tese
Foymarts o hat h e o sk francl et arang ot devlopmant
lon e, hrsughyundermins gy of e prceocings
o Clvarl <. T Cout carnt vy coidence ol Clorrel dhciod

kbl i rpio

St iy e of o v I AR g 5 Dpeaton Polr P —an
Tttt S carptanconnactee 4 it o bl et e Al T
ol et o chage oty st et sy gl
e it 81 Wt oo sty pod gy o e s g
oraprcy i snge s serdc e I opecion Wi s
gt g ot o e e oo it s Secins o
et ot i homn o o .
Sukrs b seartl Vi nth e
1590 e v a2 i g f 1 il e ot iy bcses i Akt Corel
Compaion ™ e s avd t ortan ndscqrd 3 parsna camped ht worndly
et oo b oA e it st s ey
vy cqnnan coir, e ar b ey, s i oL, et and s
e e hapd, o S

¥ st W compan vt B oy s e compary 001
Hivar o contartar i "Gl e o s seokig 1o scturs
51 Silion, 25year cotract o b s oprat auch prison. Welmar etind an itrestin
e ol e nathr 5.8l i e ot
ot i, Wearocusd . bl ntd 2 CANOIOATE A°
o g i s B S

e et b
e e imlonb bt e

pprtmite e campalgn o
TCANDIOATE A" and Weiar;aéading i Gk ls;-underoed snd belieed il
. CMDATE Al sk e o il sl St e psse

ard i ol giton b 3rotay.aparatndprison. Knwing thtH such
ogiatan essed end rivatty.apaated prde conractwas mearded o Campany A WEMAR

bt persoraty. .

harkstoreitancefrom aal cormunie,corrctonal offcr urions, ndcthr Al

vk Vit Kimael arved M sasence i gevrmmentaly opeate aderat prison
itom
D T ——
e
e et o 0 T et e
e R ———
D ———— t

The Revolving Door Between Public and Private Corrections 2

Prvate prson companies make their maney through contracts for prison consruction and
operaton negotistd with public oficiss. Many n the peivate prison indusiry, however, once

Servedin state corractionsdepariments,and umarous tae ortections oficals ormerlyworked
forprvte prson companies. n some cases, this revhing doorbatween public corrctions and
privte prisons may conribute 1o the bllty o some comparies 1o wi conlracts or lo 3vid
Suficent scruty romthecorectons departments charged wth avereeing thir aperatons. A
ol sxaminationofthe numerous instances in which pivate prisoncontraclors have boen hired
ntoandoutfgovernment posts coud il an ente repor.Seectexamples nclude the fllowing:

= Prior tobecaming the New Mexico Secraaryof Corractions, Joe Willams worked for
the GED Group o & warden. 1 2010, the New Mesica Legisatve Finance Comitee
raported that athough privateprisons, includingGED, failedtomalntainprson stafing
aves rquired by contract he state correetions depariment—headed by Willams—
dectine tocollctcontraciua ines, The Comimite found hat the state might have
colected anestimated$ 18 millon o the privte prison companies f he corrections
departmenthad enorced the conractual ruls applicale (o priate prisons ™

‘govarnment servic i sarly 2011 Lappin clealy remained vlusbl t the private
prison industy, and soon began work fo CCA. 43 th company’s Chie Correctons
Officr As thecorporaion's CEQstated,‘Hariey valuescorractional partnership ..
amvery xcited 1o have N aspar ofaur ladership eam. ™ The company’s payrll

MichselQuilan serves 253 Seior Vice

= According 10 lttr from the American Federtion of Government Employees to
‘Senaor Patrick Leahy,during Sacia A Hylton's tenur a5 Fedaal Detetion Trusee,
'GED abtained conracts to house federalprisoners,including US. Marshals Service
datsnues, that generatsmors than $80 million in annual revewe o the company.
The lter asserts that oven beore s retired a5 Federal Detention Trustee, Hylln
formed a private consuting company Shrty afterreiring, the ater continues, Hylton
accepted $112.500 from the GED Group. ha only client = In 201, Hyton reentered
he federa government, a5 head o the U S, Marshals Service ™

The falowing case study furher llusrats the problen craated by the revobing door betweer,
publc and privae corections.

Jvene oy by GED bucaue h vploree ol o reparthrid condhions t e

rison= 1 fct th oy ool el o rpert ibsandufd conlers bt prased the
Cparton.Inth oo méstrcent e e risonwas awarded a cerll complince
3t st i G s it

empiopmert
e T Sl oot ndpendans s 1 he youth iy, the wors rsortdy g 56
michivcamattranthee s thybad 1 wpe s e on the gris utsde = Findings n
e ndepandent reprtnclodd l of he bl =

8 “Th GED Group does o ansur thtthe ot re provded with cleanand adery i
amionment
= "ol war ity smelled offecs nd rin,anwer n nod of i Ed

= They"hadboen aced o urinse o dfecat i o cosines lber hn it

States Lobbied by CCA and GEO, 2003-2011

KEY: [ Statesobbied by CCA ~ EAStates lobbied by both
B3 states obbied y GEO [ States obbied by nether

‘The Private Prison Lobt

by 27
Certan private prison companies, ccording to a recent repot by Detenton Watch Network,
spend argesums ofmaney 1o obby th House o Representaives, the Senale,and several ederal
‘sgence, including he Federl Bureau of Prisons Iwbichncarceraes ovr 200,000 prsonars at
arygiven e and the Department ofHomeland ecurityfuhichdeaineaver 30,000 immigrante
S an ghven timel = Accoding o nonproft 3roups, CCA slone spent over $18 millon on fedaral
{obbying btween 1999 and 209, “oflan rploying fve or i firn a the same time,”™ and in
2010, CCA spentanother $170.000lbiying th fedaal government

Thase figures captre only fedaral government abbying—but pevate prison companies also
obby heavly instatehouses across the county. Whl tolal sxpenditures on state lobbying are
mpossibleocaculte bcause abbyingdsclosure requirementsvryIrom tate o state * what
iscaar s that lobbyist o priateprsan hov faned out o cose o cosst. For exampl,the
ustce Polc Instituterecenty rearted tha “Tin Floidaalone,he thre lrgestprivte prison
companies] utlzed 30 Lbbyisi f aiecate fo private pison cantracts and policies o promote
the useo riate) prisons. ™

Betumen 2003 and 201, accoring o the Naional Inttte on Money n Stae Polics, CCA hired
199 lbbyits I 32 sates: Albarma, Alska, Aizon, Caforni, Gelorado, Connectict, Forida.
asrgia, Hawal, Kaho, Indana, Kansas, Kentucky. Lovisiana, Main, Minnesots, Mssisipp,
Wisourl, Montana, Nevada, New Hampsfire, New Meco, Olahama, Pennsybvania, Tennessee.
Texse, Uiah, Varmont, Vi, Washington, West Virginis, and Wisconsin During the same
peiod,GED hired 2 lobyita n 1 staes

Campaign Contributions

1naddition o lobbying. o-profprisen companies ol spend vat sums f maney on campaign
‘contributions. ince 2000 theeacingprivate prison companies-—CCA, GED,and Corell lwhichhas
sinc beenabsorbed by GEOin mrgrl—have contibuted over six miliondolars o canddates
forsate ofice and over $800,00 to candidtesfor federal afic,according t the Justcs Potcy
Institute The orgaizatonfurthr eports tha in 2010 alone, these companies contributed over
wo rion dollars 1 state oltial campalgns, with 8 arge fracion of the money funneled 1o
sateparty commitees

ot maitained by the Natonal Instute on Maney in State Polics also reve the fallowing
about private prison campaign contributions: Between 2003 ad 2011 CCA contributed to over
400 state candidats, and OED contributed 1o ver 400 Both corparaions have estabished
thee own Poltical Acton Commitees [PACs) These comparies backed 3 high proporton of
candidates who wlimately won lection, which may indicte 8 stategy of focusing contributions.
‘on candidaes kelytowield power ED,for exampl. made 506 carmpaign donations toncumbents
and oy 12 donatons tochallengers between 2003 and 20115

The follwing case sty iustrates the combined ffect that campaign contibutions and the
revolingdoor may hav had o the expansion of privatized incarcecation n Arizona.

sl
Focel

sk 4 Toand Seth Crena: ove bore o rduceEarcions spondin.™ Bl s
Depimat o Corractions iy g 440ttt b aidect 1o gt cut o
faca yat 201t h Daparimats b rcrdead by e il dlas Desite

et sttamen by e At o enera it fr g mpriscnmantn Az my
Con e cararsion npubcty-spaaad acibie = Al has annaunced s 1o
it ot ansddior 00 prisn . P

N et o e
o 498 ot i st Ao O o Br’ 310
esecutiebudget. ™ CCA amleyes nd vocutves rporiedty conirlbuted sver $1.00 1

T S—
TConrbctd soohar 4L 1 roar o e i Prepcion 0, o
el e gt i bl 35 o e e Gk
‘Coughlin, Brawsc's campaign.chairman-and pelcy adviser, workedas

Brars commnicate S, Fal Sy

wite continued o lobby for the. corporation. ™ ©- =

Control of Information

For-prfit prison companies 0 1o grea lngths, and apparenty spend significant funds o put
fort a positive publc image. Crtai prvta prison companiesafe th public well-manicured
‘websites with xtensive press relaases andvideo fotage tauting theiraccomplishments,andthe
indusry praises sl n publications such as Sevice, Security and Sluions published by CCAI
1 GEOworld published by GEOL. Pl ieceson priva prisan websiescover such topics a the

Paws in Prison pogram lwhich pais prisoners with dogsl, awards ghen 1o the ndustry, and
eharitygol tourmament hested by CCAS chaeman. "

Private prison companies also funnel money [which, of course, indially comes largely from
taxpayer) nto communicaions departments, which churn oul posite Sories about prvate
prisons. CCA employs Vice President for Commuricatins, whase dutes include ‘strtegic
marketing communications, media management, and) brand posiioning ™ Management &
Trining Corporaion Ukewise has 2 Vce President o Communicatons ™

Meamwhie, private prison wbsites raely repot negative information: o ons would know from
CCA' websit that ne o s smployees sexually abused maliple omal immigration detanees.

othot oeof s i atiegely ovilnt that s beo
Gubbed e “gladotar schooL " GED unabashedlycaniions
heigh o us s macia mateils 3 reporer's sgeement ~The following photographs:
1o wrie posiie staries shot the company: The flowing have been pre-approved
shatographs have boon pra-approed for med polcaion ("

Use. A lcense 1o rproduceand publah such photograpne 107 Media publication use.
hareby granied rovide the se wil o dsparage G20, A license to reproduce and
Meanai, acordng 13 joumatet ad poley s Tom

Borry: "A near-otal sbssnce of commited oversight has ai- PUDLISh such photographs is
owed h rison vty o fluris n o shdows Requess Nereby granted, provided, the
o he mas basc nermtion sbout he nctonng ol hese e il GE0.
prisons and delention centars routinely lesd nowhere. 2 U>¢ not disparage GEO.

0 Group webste
X privae prison oophole incpen rocords Laws conributes o

o
i Lac ofaccountably. Undor the Freadom ofiformalion
Act FOIAL, members of the public can request documents from A near-total absence of
It prons s o et kSt commited versigh has

e federal government sends prisonrs 1 & pivate prison.
the priae prison is exampl from FOA raqueste® Under llowed the prison industry
many state open records aws, he same ssymmetr apples 1o flourish in the shadows.
1o sate prisoners in stte nsitutions and sa prdoners

e rsone Requests for the most
basic information about the

functioning of these prisons

CCA has also blocked ffors by some o s own sharsholders
specifical. 2 coaiion o raligious sroups that own siock,
includingth Sstes of Charityof the Blssed Vigin Mary nd
the Mercyinvestment Program o brioggreater transparency routinely lead nowhere.”
1othe corporation’s polticalconributions. A 2007 tackholder

proposal put forard by these roups would have required —Jourralis Tam Barry

“an accounting of our Company's funds that are used for

politcal contibutionsor expenditures” and disclosure o ‘the

[ —
e e e R ot crs ol et
that stockholders reject the proposal™ and the measure was voted down.™ More recently,
e s e e o o
Wransparancy brough by religous roups that own sock nthe company

29

A range o aggrassve and shrewd acics driveth expansionofprivat incarcaration. Th private

prisan ndustry thives in prt by employing efecive marketing strateges,rather than offering
efectie sautons.

CCONCLUSION

I America, urcrmint justcssystem should kaep U sfe, opeate iy, and be cost-sfecte.
Masa incarcartion, howevr, deprives record numbers ofindiidulsofther Uberty. has atbesta
minimat effectonpubi alty. and crppls st budgets. Maanwhie, theprvate prison indusry
rakesinprfit b blaining overnment moneyncreasing amauns, by depriing Americans of
berty never reatar numbers,and potentally by cultngcormrs a the xpense of public safey
and pisonsacury.

Forproftprisans ae 2 majo conrbuta o blostd stte budgets ard mass ncarceration—nol
ot of any vible solution o these urgent problama. In oder to reduce corrections spending
and mitigae mass ncarceraton, goveroments mustfocus o the hard wark of criminal justce
Fform, ad o he flsepramise ffor-prfit imprisonment.
ENDNOTES 30

1ot e ety O 19 B o 0535t e Ty
e e T,y 7 A e 1 o A B e B
M

B p—
S e o 3 e s o o e

3 Mot K, o Mo o M e o o G 116 o PGt .
S T B B i 08 G5 T ... Lt s o s i
e N o

B e T ————
s e T S o, Do e L o o S 3 B
e S R e S o e G kP e ‘

D T v ———
B e o b s e st et ko ey e
LGyt et o 40 10 o e e

it 785 s, U S o © A, B S o S
s e LA e s o ot S
e S P 3 T

7o oo o g et i g b 18 o, -1,
e g, s o opnd it s, A e, 301,

e e O e e e e
o S e o b R

T2 B0, T Epnd ot ren, A e, 301

3 Morn e B Lt i s o B i, K.
B e i et

14 S et b Pt e, s T e 33010 e o e .y, s
L ey X o, o . 01 e e s B B it

15 e, vt i s s v st s e A 2. 21 o O

14 50t s Byt rsg P, O S 22 01
17 P and i s ., Bk T .51 CA VB 3 .S 3 01

L e ettt G S gty o 1t et e gyt
i G Sy o b v o ok o B3 7P

1l S, et P Oh 1 U5l i ot 0 S 11
e AT O Do T S o O o s P
S o et - s
teuwsy

sren

S, O & 311,y e e B Pt Cra L ST 1

L T ———
P S P s s o Wk e G S 1 T

B ——S— —————
S e e G 5 5 £ e G, 8 o g Y
B ———————
ey i s G S e ot S e e R
ety

S, Do 1 Mo S, US b o e S Gt P o 911

o . o o s S o Do i o
S

By ———
s o e s o o s e G390 S B e . O
e i 1o, 1 11 ok Pl GGt
g o e o gt o et S i, e e, o 10

Sam DA Cos, s o ey GO 84 o O, Y o, 5,81
p—

Sucuty et AP et - 101 Maarst e T S, St Oprioes
e o o e A eprn e . .o e
o

R ————

Wy X, o, Collr G Bt i O, S P o, 0.1, 1,

it o DG .20 348 0 2910 o ren 31534l 1, 311 . 0101

e Dt e . o .11 P b, US. e O e s O
Pt P et ey e St 1 St ot kG oo s

P Ay 1 2510 o e e ot e s ot Bos b St

e s i, o e, L.

U —

. W U S Gon s e, B S, e 9,34, o 30
e e e s ot b 4

T ————
S

ot Covro e 21 L St | 2011151 i 210G vl T GED
T b P 20N 5127 o 500 O el

Mo o, o Mt o T P b s, 758158, 1978
Py

M A, T o o s s At e 31 810 i B S .
B W PP W S G, 4 o e, 4k P Pt P
ety

R TR ——————
M

.

SV A ———

e et o oo S s i
L ettt ot s s

e T e e T T
e S R

Sorg ot £ .

USSR S

PSPt P S, s S o s P o 12011, 1 i
S

et e S P P o M 1 31 it e
3z
P SN S ————

(s e s B e, e S Gt .
e e e o gt s bl e o !
B
T e G e B B S P 7 0

o ot 01 o 112 1 et st
R e s et
e b e e o 1 g e
e s ot e & Tt Pt
e e s oS P, s P b ot i
S

M . T Mo o M bt 4 o s s 210 T o Com o -
G T e B A 3 B T . s e o o b

o s s We .10, g Dt Ascid Prc S Bty Cres s
i e, B e 5 1 G e b, S o, b e
B T3 K oo St Aok P S s

T ———"
P R T T

o G A, 10 e S 2111517l i 518 CCA el Tt 660
T e e .70 937 e 0 60 e

i i, ot r ol Bt e sl s o N T

The sty e s o cm o e b CEA ot prst
e G S 62 s e s e o i bt .
e bk s a1 U St Comrae oo et GO o .
e e A & 1 5 G, D o, M P
o ey

o, GG 1 A, o ot M e
ey e O Mo, 008 G L oo oo
R et el e e e G
g iy N ————]
ey ot ol AR

LSt Sapg e Lo Wt Lot S, o i 20,318 Voo ik ot

e A et s St 83
e i e s et
T o i O Ghsetg e L £ s Cupe Loty 538 B sl B
o el Ao o Gy e S LT

Do B, A Lgsiv Cxcharg o Y, oo Do W e s
B e oot s T s S o S B B o kG b

T T
R

e P T O oo Ot Bt S 4,111, Ko Ol Ot i Lo
Tt oGt oy & ey bt e e S g e oy e,
oS o b e, Gt G b ot e s o S b
T o e 1 St P et B S o 2

L B ke ot P o
P e et 00 3 o, o e e Ao o
SRR o e e E &, o ST ey AL 1 e Lo T W,
e

ot S o B, Woro oo o S, PPt T B P
Pome e b s b 0

O P
[ty
3

N

3

s 32

TS P, o P e e st 4 bescnn 201 33
o g, Pt TG g G A R, S8

T R T———
gt e e Comr o o SO 8

[ ——

e —————
g oo 0 et ores e

LBt .Vt St A S s 15,0 1 1S g

S S o B W PP A S oo T e o Tt R o
P i o O

[T p——— R ———"

Ot e . T fce o Prn Prion oy gt i, o G 7
[ttt ettt

[ U A Sr—
S

P —r—————
U et gt e A e St 1A gt o
e Btk oy e e e s 4 ot ket b
S 1 e grd o £ et b B it e .Sl
St T b T el g+ o et s o . s ot
e e e 1 e b ot 4 s P b oper
s o o 1o o ik
o o S Coom, Rt S, bt s D o L b 1
B
Aein O s U W o n e S i, st appn aons
a1 01T s D oS O O oLt - o, .
VT Nt e o 6 ko 5 148 mort e et et
im0 e Gk e o iy e O L e Pt Ao S« ot
oy i
iR e At it

50 Frvd Ve, D e e A’ 5870 e TSm0

B o S ———
T N 5 o Gl Gor. S 7ot o e P A 5

e o oy Nt S, sl P 58 970 Sy 4 s Ao, 020,818,

L Slhn, PG ik, gt Lo o P e, 82010 o R s
eyt Rt o B & 1. 6 s B R & o e S il
RSV Sy n e e 0 B 0.

. Oppe . s et e i o, Y. oMo .81 T it it
e e s ey ied v e 0 et 1 s Rk e Dy A
e o e by b gt .ot s 4 S T B
e s A o o B e pok

Coparien

o S Hese G Rttt R G ok o s A
L0 i b e et i ' e S . e 3 S
et it $23 o e 1 o e h )

RGP S A -

e g s ottt et 1

et s

e e e o e e ey e
T ey

e e 2y
T

e L e

o e G S, G o e tr
e e o e eprr ey by i et b vl e

T4 o g e Ot & Mo Mo, Do o i s Pt S 12 016 vt o Ll
S R P, s P e A B s P

7 o Gt A, 916 Rt o o 08,101, et e,
s rpd s e o,

S Ot A G, R 08, e oo P e
o

68 St Mo o s G, Rt s 101 Mot A e G o A s G
Cy

o P i s e, ARt G e o
152 M o 0 Lo o Com e o Facty Gt T P b .01 oot

O Gt e O, 008t P s P o B D s A
R e

105 B ima 14 UG Aot Coo, P Pt A o s o O
R

YOk Oyt s . G Tk, 81 A . et 30,00

W s

8 K rad Ay s Pt P et b, 0.5, 21 o bthr s
e o o e R e e b e o ot o
e g ries o raon rkcaon - s o, Mohs - iy ettt 1+

e e e i o Sk Sy o oo

e e & Lo s S B o

o A

111 ot W, T o 121, e, i Comm, .1, 19wt ke s e,

18 1080 Qb Comnr s, epeogin oyt b .

petstry

ot s e, B Dt o B G N i,
oo g ok et BT

IE G Mo . vt B et O et G, et G|
e o e s L

5 Clrn Mo, Grsgr e Pt - Wosd, o B e e bRty f i .
et e P o ot o ek s 11 s et

R

38
M. o e o, o St P B P, s T PG s e
ey

P s o, G o, Bt Dt e TP P
0L e T B4 st e eyt oG B v o .

i o, o i, e e St o o P,
=t

i By Aot . it Ay Gy, B e o O, 9, S
e b o, e s O 1

-
e

s i Ot Ot b st Low o e A P e et i s R
ety

it Pt s o Tt o ke, s, i . 3,311 T pches
e i o i e b 1 s S 0 i S
o e ey e et i T e oo kP e .
e e e o ey g e o ot Emsos g s

o e e G &, P o e S e i T G
e P, et P e o e et B Tt o P
W i, T, e Rt i oG B s b s ot
vl i e . 0 1,59 WS B o B G, o, g1

b S, e Fcty ot e e 15 b, S G, 1, 50, Pl e, bkl
o e e e o, O .8,

S ek Engy e s o Orcr g . T s . 1380,
i S, ety ot e 159, B 5,5 5

U P, Bk DG o P Pt B G, O 0,257,
i ek gy ot et o D b o 5. ot oo, . 1, 01
e S P

D DA - ———
s P, RO e o 0.0

i ek, iy e Jk s e Orcr g S, Tt ot o, 1,188
S Shy, At Bcrs ey B Commny, Bt SO 1207

Dt Hckw L et B, Nk ey g Pos .k Bt S, v 2810,
L Tk, ety ey Shm, B .o, 1,101,

e
e g Ao P o

i ek, oyt Pt o O o St Tt o, 1,290
Lo Tk s e Gy i e Rt TS BB, o 1,1,

S Shy.Hart ey ot 0 v, Bt B, S, 1,297,

St ko Engy it o O g 50T i, 1,08

e o Compny o D ot o o, St T, 0., 150,

ot o, Sty D Pl oy Mo oo Ot O Mo, e, 1367,

aar T Vs sty i b o Gt B, s N A, 1.5, ot Al G
[etrieyiie

i e, o s o ot Moy o o o, B G, 0,058,

L Tty s 5w Gty M o ey Y Sh, B .. 13,1,

i S, Dty Mo e 15, B i, iy 1,15

o o, et ot et 2,01,

ot g Corpaion, T K S, M- i cmlcrcis -
=it bety
R

P T A R ———
500005, Ca B b G, o o o o e i T
e et e 2 5 G ot P i e ek e
D s comprn s b s st Fr oo et D P e e
s ot et s S et i ot s
i ey o e o e D P & o0 o Comreg
iy ot ot s e e vt N o e o oy e ot o

oV G € P 301300 53 rear s oo v ok
Sraremen o A e T e ot o o
o . Bt £ i W, s, e o e S P - Compron Sl Gt W e
Pt

B ———
e s oy b e et s e it e
e e merart i e by 1 e ket S ok
oo oy e b s o o o e .

D o G o B PG . PP et

e o B0 07,48 081 -

ol ot ot e o o o .13 3¢

e LT r—————T—
et ey

S Wl G Cary, Frmas G e s oo b, AN o 1 8.
ool 1.0 M, . 1-0- 07 WD, 1,1

e Rlue . Dl At Frma Wy et Coract ety O Pt Gy S s
e e e e .

oo, o e et O A Cos, WY oA, 1,361
Pty . B, WG o Th epe /il Mo o oy 1. 281

St o Ao n b st P P M o W 3,81
Camplin§2,CA« Wt G Crcon Aty o185, . Mo, 111
[

e Cumphl O o’ Sk s Ml P s, Moo st 115 o

e Amardd Gt 1, Gl s Gy o318 BUS4 W o Ao 911 .

B TR —
LY 3 Gt « e o e 3105 S5 . o T

Pt Amtndd Compa 11,136, 11, Gt R oy o 310054 DT, o, 1L
e i, T Pt ot e Pt i o G 5.1
Lt R Bt At Ay B Sl CortyComsionChasr .
iy

o ur o At Lo o ldtr et e St
s e o P o, e e o B
Lt oy B, W, o et f oo, iy e, oo, b Crcins
o Ty o i s

st s chn Gt Doty o o el T -2 A i o 1012010800

b B, b Ve A bt St v G, Lo T G 18,81 h o
T S g e o TS e S 5 S 3.

St e 12 . oy« CO . 11015 . 1 01 oo by st
O T ey
e

120 e b e

e, P P Pt e e 0115 s s A G,
e e e e e 1 g s et o
s v oo st i ey

507 e O .G e Bt o, G o U5t e s s
[t

i e W S e S A o et i,

wnn
TIYRAPAEE B2

™

S .

37

Moot A P R Rt o, . e A, 1,80 o, Ao Pr
e 3 T 180

et e o X A, 1310, ey G .
PRSI T 0 B A DLk e e
Rt ot e e Coprt, Y o 12818,

b, e R A rs A G, US A T, Ao 08,

S ey O ey inan o S ko St A, R, 1,3, 88O, ey
e Aoy e, o, o

Mot o s g o, .o, i, 2,50

Sucty e A g et -4, 11 s o s e, ety Opcstrs.
e hste e G A epren o G o, . 2018 o o 2h .

b o 7 1.

[ S ———

Sttt P Carlr ek ey Mo, o i et
ST s oo o o 3o

e L Sk oSt i e of Pt P PS4 Gt
e 3ot s o e e som ey Sy b 3 e
e e i e e 1

oDt . s e ot eyd Yo o Cchm, B o, 1,201, Ty
e T R T e

T e oy o Gt i W St Pt s

o ot vt vt T T, e, 1,1,

ooy Bt . P e Gt oo G chn, ABE e, o, 212001

v b Oy P A, 11,385
Untoy O L P e o led o o S AR o, . 217801

e gt o e At e e Gy e G o D A
e S e 1 50 4 G B T e i

L Ovmr. ol oo Csrc Ot e i, A i o . 16201
B SR sT e s ot . o S o o 5301

P Apament 34, Ui St s .08 801, A1, L.
Pt e e P 3, e St i M. 305501 . Al . 1, 208,

Lo o, B Wi kot T e A B .

U Oomr, Wt s i ot et Sk ot s o, . 257
St ot P Mo ol B N . 1,358,

Fct s e P 1, U S it .08 508, Aok A 1. L.
5D Rt Mar, B Wt P o o P o Priso Ao G o, .
1220 L arr WG Mot e e e b eSS M
oo Sty ot g i op5og S s, B o

1 Lo O, W e S Mo, A Ons o o 13258 38
2 e & Rt . R e oot P o o A S e .

13 Tl B P .t e W, o, 0G50, Al A 1. 0L

5. SeCahrham,PrenCst e o, s D o 1,07

I3 e g i S, e, 101,

B S —
St o e Wi oG8 ot ot o et o e,
Py

7T et Ao ettt s f P At 3 A, 04, . 3, 3

8. arcioms Crprton s i, CCA ks o . it Lo, ol et o
e i e e

B L A A —————

9. Letr o o Gap. o Pt i i G Erc, bl P
e L T e

1 8 ottt .o, D s S i s s
St M, I ks o ok sty G, Do Mo o, .12 7.

et S Sk e, S Y W A s Fd g .G e e,

BE

e MG, e I s o W e Fchy s et O o o, 0. 1,280,
0o .St I vt Sl 1 8 Ott, s s Mo, & 2087
Tt T ComminionCote Cuny e St ot A, 907,

B e e eran—
i e LU S
S P . 3T e Do s e s Pt
P e i b BV e e g
[ty

9 oo W . To b s ot P e s Ot o 211
Pty

EEE

g

40 orte o Rspngn Pl At ik b G Cotprton o marcs,wmspescs o
e S B G 1O Ve et ot 0

[T ———————

e —
o R st voed S0 e o
s s et s o i b s

R e e e ——
e 05t o o 1,591t i o B e
e e s et

[ e ———y

e e ——

Tk b et o e S B
e o e 50 .
o

S
e
P S
S TR
S
e e
e e e
o

wE OB ¥y ¥

]

EEE

et e e G, P ot 1.3 e et s ot
sl e

e g, o bt o, o, M1 51 - 39
S, e st e s B e KV . g 3, 08 S

. Comctos Gt A, CCA 15 e G Carty S i ., 81, M-
e ommerines es T g S 30 o Pl Ao e
e ey scodCop o o i, 360 o .4 5,01 i o o Fr S
ety

TR ——————
[er=tevieat

S TGt e, e et s et by e S

B ——
oAt L R
ey

o 050 o G, ad e e ot v St 21811
Tom By, S e sty Gt s, o e 15

e

[ —
g ey
P

Cammcon aprton A Fre 001 Gy Pt Eded 3, 57,0 118 st
o omatrn Pt S o G o s Pt 109

o0 ambre, Pt St S A o, o P, ., 20,
The imprisonment of human beings at record levels s both a mral fallure and
n economic one—especialy at a time when more and more Americans are
strugalng to make ends meet and when stats governments confront enarmeus

L crises. This report finds, however, that mass Incarceration provides a
sigantic windllfor one special interest group—the private prison industry—
even as current incarceration levls harm the country as a whols. Whils the
nation's unprecedented rate of imprisanmant deprives Individuals o freedom,
‘Wrests loved anes from their families, and drains theresources of governments,
communities, and taxpayers, the pivate prison indusiry reape ucrative rewards.
s the public good suffers from mass Incarceration, private prison companies
abtain more and more government doliars, and private prison executives at the
teading companias rake In snormeus compensation packages, in some cases.
totaling millons of delars.

South Chicago ABC
Zine Distro
P.0. Box 721
Homewood, IL 60430