We need to demand a publicly accessible audit. The fact prisons don't even have to accurately report the number of inmate deaths they have to anyone with decision making power highlights how crazy the situation currently is.
Federal prisons are starting the process of leaving private contracts which is great. We need to force all states to do the same. Personal freedom needs to be free from market pressures and money. In az there was recently an inmate management software update which was rushed for financial reasons. A whistleblower recently revealed the software is unable to handle certain laws causing people to stay imprisoned possibly 2x longer than the law requires.
Are the prisons in the article private prisons? I cannot find a definite answer, but it doesn't look like it.
If anything, it might be good to outsource these to private businesses to get costs under control from $500K/inmate.
Wouldn't an audit just increase costs even more? It usually goes like: let's audit the cost, then let's create a committee to explore why the audit we just did cost so much.
Spending that kind of money per prisoner is absolutely staggering. It is equivalent to:
Each prisoner has their own $400 per night hotel room
Each prisoner has all their meals in the hotel restaurant with a $50 budget for each of their three meals per day
Each prisoner has $50 per day for sundries (toothpaste, uniforms etc)
Each prisoner has their own 100% dedicated guard, assuming four shifts on a 7-day fortnight rotation whose payroll costs are 50% above USA median wage
At the end of every single day, every prisoner celebrates by drinking a whole $100 bottle of champagne
I suspect the first thing that's needed is a publicly accessible breakdown of public spending. Really quickly I imagine it would be clear what needs to be explained or not.
You can see a department of corrections cost which is roughly the first document divided by incarcerated individuals, as well as an additional cost which is almost double the Department of Corrections cost, which is stated as: Fringe Benefits, Pensions, and Medical Services
If I had to make a guess Pensions seem pretty suspicious.
So working staff from the original document is 9,714, 600mil is pensions for 13.5k people, leaving something like 1.8 bil for those 9,714 employees, facilities, programs, training, etc. Which is roughly 185k per person.
That doesn't seem too terribly outrageous to me. Why are there so many staff despite decreasing jail population seems like the most pressing question, but nothing I've read so far shouts outrageous corruption.
1) Open and easily assessible accounting and tendering.
2) Auditors having ability to remove procurement staff that show they miss obviously 'better pricing'.
3) Spend less. I've pondered why prisons dont set up colonial type towns in remote locations for less than maximum security prisoners.
Make people work to provide their food and improve infrastructure. I imagine it would help develop many skills + better ready people to return to a world where they have to interact with people vs those high tension overcrowded prisons you see on TV. There'd still obviously be costs but you suspect something like this could be a massive per-prisoner cost.
Yes it does seem way off the mark. Seems better to give the money to the individuals on promise of turning around their lives .. in non-violent cases. (I'm not totally serious here, just expressing that some/most criminals may choose to turn around their lives given funds like that.)
Admittedly I have a bias prompting these two questions, and I'm going to be upfront: I think incarceration in the US is intentionally punitive for profit and control, not responsive to any particular crime problem. That said...
I'm not good at finance, and I mean these questions sincerely:
1. What do you think would be an appropriate per-inmate budget?
2. What parts of the existing budget do you think are corrupt and could be reformed?
- - -
Third question, because well, I already laid my bias cards on the table:
Why is cost the concern? If there's rampant corruption in incarceration, why are you focused on the money spent and not the human toll of a corrupt prison system housing millions of human beings?
Burn it to the ground and start over? In a world designed to divide us, everyone agrees that US politics is broken, ans massive corruption is the reason why.
It paints a very different picture than the headline as we have all read it.
One might interpret the headline as out of control spending. The break down of cost per inmate seems outrageous and supports that idea... but what really seems to have happened is a reduction of inmate population without a corresponding reduction in employees. I would guess things are most explained by not wanting to take away people's livelihoods and increase unemployment.
Is "prison population reduced by 50% while employees remain constant" anywhere near as outrageous of an interpretation?"
Should we fire 10% of the DOC workforce every year?
> Should we fire 10% of the DOC workforce every year?
If the inmate population is declining by that amount, then absolutely yes we should. We didn't hire them in the first place to "give jobs" or "reduce unemployment". We (ostensibly!) hired them to guard prisoners.
When there are fewer prisoners to guard, you need fewer guards. It would be much cheaper to cover their education costs for a different line of work if you're worried about taking people's livelihoods away. (Which is a totally reasonable concern)
It reminds me of the quote about giving ditch diggers spoons instead of shovels to create more jobs:
250k/inmate/year still seems high and that would be worst case putting 100% of expense to there wages so yes it'd still be outrageous (outside of the outrage of a constant level of workforce for that long).
It’s a shame the article doesn’t offer any hints as to why. I’m sure that we can point the finger at lobbyists and grift, but a big spike in 2020 probably is COVID related?
The conditions? America has great conditions. The standard of living is high, life expectancy has gone up over time, we have numerous safety nets like SNAP, and our innovations have vastly improved quality of life for all income levels.
The conditions are not good enough for those who are grossly irresponsible, or desire luxuries they can’t afford. That includes people wanting to live in expensive and desirable locations that don’t match their ability to generate income. But people aren’t entitled to every luxury they desire. I feel like this basic personal responsibility has been ignored in our recent political discourse.
Because a substantial portion of crimes aren’t desperate attempts at survival, I’m not convinced that abolishing prisons or police will do anything except expose the rest of us to a chaotic and unsafe life. If we want to explore that direction we have to vote to fund small contained experiments that we can expand if they work, without jumping straight to defunding or abolishing services that keep us safe.
As an aside - we may disagree about the effectiveness or level of safety nets, and that’s a fair conversation to hold on its own. However immigrants from humble beginnings regularly manage to make it here without resorting to criminality. I feel like it’s not the conditions at play, but other factors, such as individual choices and behaviors and culture.
Every reasonable person understands the need to reform the entire "justice system", from the police officer to the prosecutor's office to the legislature, but its not useful to ignore reality and pretend we live in a fantasy world where there aren't murderers, rapists and child molesters roaming around. A country of hundreds of millions of people is never going to be a utopian place without the need for laws, people who enforce the laws or places to put people who break the laws. Those who say we should abolish prisons and/or police either don't really mean "abolish", or aren't serious people with a grasp of objective reality. Those in the former category should drop the "abolish" rhetoric and say what they mean (whether that's reform, restructure, downsize). Those in the latter category are not mentally fit to be included in the debate.
At face value I agree, but any time the answer seems easy or obvious, its worth pondering complexities. The following questions are not meant to prove a point or be answered, the purpose is to showcase complexity:
What if corrections costs are not due to malfeasance or inefficiency, but due to it being a jobs program for relatively unskilled labor? If we applied skilled labor to the problem, how would we deal with the displaced unskilled labor? What is the opportunity cost of training people for rehabilitating criminals rather than improving our professionals mental health/productivity or STEM training? Is the rehabilitation cost worth more than paying teachers more?
It doesn't take long living in San Francisco to have your window bashed in or bike stolen. What would you do with those people? What would you do with unrepentant murderers and rapists? What would you do for people who derive social standing through violence? Clearly police and prison is useful to society. Clearly it would be ideal to turn criminals into tax paying, law abiding citizens.
There is a cold blooded cost/benefit analysis that can be made. There is probably a rehabilitation cost that can be measured. If cost_of_rehabilitation > total_estimated_future_tax_revenues is it worth it? If we added several more factors to the equation, maybe good_will_cost, cost_of_incarceration, opportunity_cost, etc, I think everyone will agree there is a potential model that can be applied to the problem, even if it doesn't feel good to be so objective.
I don't think we have a recipe for what rehabilitation looks like. Is it ethical to perform "rehabilitation" experiments on prisoners? What is the plan for training and the labor cost increase for skilled labor? What is the plan for creating a rehabilitation program?
> Now you see what abolish prisons and police is.
This phrase is meant to be provocative and energize a certain set of ideals (specifically being anti-authority). It doesn't appeal to moderates at all. The fact NPR and every other news source had to break it down for begrudging acceptance really hurts it's message. The message is justice for all, and if police are above the law, then there is no justice. If the color of your skin puts you at a higher chance of persecution, then there is no justice. If the culture someone grows up in is too poor or disadvantaged to meet basic needs for money or respect, and crime is the only or easiest way to fulfill them, then there is no justice.
Our implementations of prison and police are poor. There is a very clear cultural problem. They need reform, not abolition. This phrase hinders reform because it's literal meaning is far from what it means when someone says it.
One of the chief takeaways of the 19th century (not just in the United States, but around the world) seems to be lost on us today: slavery is expensive.
What we have here is a system wherein cheap labor is provided to the war machine, but the accoutrements of the bondage are exorbitant, so these costs are spread across society. It's the economics of the fugitive slave laws all over again.
Andrew Yang made a related point about the $1k/month Freedom Dividend (UBI). if you're in prison, you don't get it. more incentive to stay out and easier given the guaranteed income of at least $1k/mo.
[+] [-] fitblipper|5 years ago|reply
Federal prisons are starting the process of leaving private contracts which is great. We need to force all states to do the same. Personal freedom needs to be free from market pressures and money. In az there was recently an inmate management software update which was rushed for financial reasons. A whistleblower recently revealed the software is unable to handle certain laws causing people to stay imprisoned possibly 2x longer than the law requires.
[+] [-] sershe|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aeternum|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] abhinai|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] iamthemonster|5 years ago|reply
Each prisoner has their own $400 per night hotel room Each prisoner has all their meals in the hotel restaurant with a $50 budget for each of their three meals per day Each prisoner has $50 per day for sundries (toothpaste, uniforms etc) Each prisoner has their own 100% dedicated guard, assuming four shifts on a 7-day fortnight rotation whose payroll costs are 50% above USA median wage At the end of every single day, every prisoner celebrates by drinking a whole $100 bottle of champagne
[+] [-] hayst4ck|5 years ago|reply
https://council.nyc.gov/budget/wp-content/uploads/sites/54/2...
This looks like a good place to start
After spending a while with wikipedia going through citations and some other things I arrived at: https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/nyc-department-of-correc...You can see a department of corrections cost which is roughly the first document divided by incarcerated individuals, as well as an additional cost which is almost double the Department of Corrections cost, which is stated as: Fringe Benefits, Pensions, and Medical Services
If I had to make a guess Pensions seem pretty suspicious.
On this website:
https://www.seethroughny.net/pensions/126507913
2019 DOC pensions results in: 13,619 Results Total: $582,352,875
Here we can see "fringe" benefits:
https://www1.nyc.gov/site/jointheboldest/officer/salary-bene...
So working staff from the original document is 9,714, 600mil is pensions for 13.5k people, leaving something like 1.8 bil for those 9,714 employees, facilities, programs, training, etc. Which is roughly 185k per person.
That doesn't seem too terribly outrageous to me. Why are there so many staff despite decreasing jail population seems like the most pressing question, but nothing I've read so far shouts outrageous corruption.
[+] [-] Gustomaximus|5 years ago|reply
2) Auditors having ability to remove procurement staff that show they miss obviously 'better pricing'.
3) Spend less. I've pondered why prisons dont set up colonial type towns in remote locations for less than maximum security prisoners.
Make people work to provide their food and improve infrastructure. I imagine it would help develop many skills + better ready people to return to a world where they have to interact with people vs those high tension overcrowded prisons you see on TV. There'd still obviously be costs but you suspect something like this could be a massive per-prisoner cost.
[+] [-] sriku|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] eyelidlessness|5 years ago|reply
I'm not good at finance, and I mean these questions sincerely:
1. What do you think would be an appropriate per-inmate budget?
2. What parts of the existing budget do you think are corrupt and could be reformed?
- - -
Third question, because well, I already laid my bias cards on the table:
Why is cost the concern? If there's rampant corruption in incarceration, why are you focused on the money spent and not the human toll of a corrupt prison system housing millions of human beings?
[+] [-] mbg721|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dyeje|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TrackerFF|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TearsInTheRain|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hayst4ck|5 years ago|reply
https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/nyc-department-of-correc...
It paints a very different picture than the headline as we have all read it.
One might interpret the headline as out of control spending. The break down of cost per inmate seems outrageous and supports that idea... but what really seems to have happened is a reduction of inmate population without a corresponding reduction in employees. I would guess things are most explained by not wanting to take away people's livelihoods and increase unemployment.
Is "prison population reduced by 50% while employees remain constant" anywhere near as outrageous of an interpretation?"
Should we fire 10% of the DOC workforce every year?
[+] [-] function_seven|5 years ago|reply
If the inmate population is declining by that amount, then absolutely yes we should. We didn't hire them in the first place to "give jobs" or "reduce unemployment". We (ostensibly!) hired them to guard prisoners.
When there are fewer prisoners to guard, you need fewer guards. It would be much cheaper to cover their education costs for a different line of work if you're worried about taking people's livelihoods away. (Which is a totally reasonable concern)
It reminds me of the quote about giving ditch diggers spoons instead of shovels to create more jobs:
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/10/10/spoons-shovels/
[+] [-] zamadatix|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mxcrossb|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] potiuper|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] conchy|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aaomidi|5 years ago|reply
Now you see what abolish prisons and police is.
[+] [-] BuyMyBitcoins|5 years ago|reply
I don’t want to live in a society that has abolished police and prisons.
I don’t even know how people end up with this view - unless you want to shuffle around the definitions of “abolish”, “police”, and “prison”.
[+] [-] throwawaysea|5 years ago|reply
The conditions are not good enough for those who are grossly irresponsible, or desire luxuries they can’t afford. That includes people wanting to live in expensive and desirable locations that don’t match their ability to generate income. But people aren’t entitled to every luxury they desire. I feel like this basic personal responsibility has been ignored in our recent political discourse.
Because a substantial portion of crimes aren’t desperate attempts at survival, I’m not convinced that abolishing prisons or police will do anything except expose the rest of us to a chaotic and unsafe life. If we want to explore that direction we have to vote to fund small contained experiments that we can expand if they work, without jumping straight to defunding or abolishing services that keep us safe.
As an aside - we may disagree about the effectiveness or level of safety nets, and that’s a fair conversation to hold on its own. However immigrants from humble beginnings regularly manage to make it here without resorting to criminality. I feel like it’s not the conditions at play, but other factors, such as individual choices and behaviors and culture.
[+] [-] StanislavPetrov|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hayst4ck|5 years ago|reply
What if corrections costs are not due to malfeasance or inefficiency, but due to it being a jobs program for relatively unskilled labor? If we applied skilled labor to the problem, how would we deal with the displaced unskilled labor? What is the opportunity cost of training people for rehabilitating criminals rather than improving our professionals mental health/productivity or STEM training? Is the rehabilitation cost worth more than paying teachers more?
It doesn't take long living in San Francisco to have your window bashed in or bike stolen. What would you do with those people? What would you do with unrepentant murderers and rapists? What would you do for people who derive social standing through violence? Clearly police and prison is useful to society. Clearly it would be ideal to turn criminals into tax paying, law abiding citizens.
There is a cold blooded cost/benefit analysis that can be made. There is probably a rehabilitation cost that can be measured. If cost_of_rehabilitation > total_estimated_future_tax_revenues is it worth it? If we added several more factors to the equation, maybe good_will_cost, cost_of_incarceration, opportunity_cost, etc, I think everyone will agree there is a potential model that can be applied to the problem, even if it doesn't feel good to be so objective.
I don't think we have a recipe for what rehabilitation looks like. Is it ethical to perform "rehabilitation" experiments on prisoners? What is the plan for training and the labor cost increase for skilled labor? What is the plan for creating a rehabilitation program?
> Now you see what abolish prisons and police is.
This phrase is meant to be provocative and energize a certain set of ideals (specifically being anti-authority). It doesn't appeal to moderates at all. The fact NPR and every other news source had to break it down for begrudging acceptance really hurts it's message. The message is justice for all, and if police are above the law, then there is no justice. If the color of your skin puts you at a higher chance of persecution, then there is no justice. If the culture someone grows up in is too poor or disadvantaged to meet basic needs for money or respect, and crime is the only or easiest way to fulfill them, then there is no justice.
Our implementations of prison and police are poor. There is a very clear cultural problem. They need reform, not abolition. This phrase hinders reform because it's literal meaning is far from what it means when someone says it.
[+] [-] jMyles|5 years ago|reply
What we have here is a system wherein cheap labor is provided to the war machine, but the accoutrements of the bondage are exorbitant, so these costs are spread across society. It's the economics of the fugitive slave laws all over again.
[+] [-] aaron695|5 years ago|reply
Isn't this going to cause the price per inmate to go up?
[+] [-] systematical|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pitaj|5 years ago|reply
Split that across the NYC population of 8+ million, that's about $500 a year per resident.
[+] [-] mrbadideas|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dragonwriter|5 years ago|reply
Doing this preemptively in at-risk-of-offense groups has been a serious thing. [0]
Specifically targeting convicted offenders is problematic since it creates an incentive to commit a first offense to qualify.
[0] https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/should-we-pay-people-not-...
[+] [-] undefined1|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pxeboot|5 years ago|reply
Wouldn't that just encourage more people to commit crimes so they could get a large check themselves?
[+] [-] nashalo_nighly|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fctorial|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] LouisSayers|5 years ago|reply