CORRECTION OVERCROWDING

Correction Overcrowding

Correction Overcrowding

Introduction

In 2002, the U.S. Justice Department announced that the nation's prison population surpassed two million for the first time. That figure, which included those being held in federal and state prisons as well as local jails, was largely the result of a national political climate over the past 25 years that has favored a "get tough" approach curbing crime. The situation has been worse since then. Now, The federal prison system is 37% over-capacity, while budget-strapped states are housing prisoners in tents, hallways and gymnasiums -- or releasing them early. Conservatives cite government's duty to protect the public and argue that investing in new prison construction will pay off in long-range crime reduction.

Discussion

As the federal inmate population continues to surge, prison overcrowding is emerging as a major problem on both the state and federal levels. Many lawmakers have described the overcrowding as a "time bomb" that threatens to explode if immediate action is not taken to relieve it. Some states have favored short-term fixes to deal with the record number of inmates being held in their prisons. Exporting prisoners to less-populous states has been favored by some as a quick fix. Other states favor early release programs for nonviolent inmates who have exhibited good behavior in prison. Yet others have sought to hasten the release of prisoners by cutting down the length of time inmates must spend in mandatory drug-treatment programs. However, Despite those measures, the overcrowding crisis continues unabated. Many correctional facilities are currently forced to put two inmates in cells designed for one to meet demands for bed space. (Burton, 2008)

While conservatives and liberals continue to hotly debate those questions, prisons continue to operate at a significant cost to society. The cost of holding one inmate in a federal or state prison is roughly $20,000 a year. The construction of new prisons, advocated by those who believe more incarceration means less crime, is often very expensive. The Bush administration currently spends $46 billion annually on prisons and their inmates, a cost largely passed on to taxpayers. While some believe that jailing more people directly reduces the crime rate, others believe that the more than two million U.S. citizens currently behind bars are a testimony to 30 years of misguided attempts by the federal government to ease the public's concerns about crime. (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2010)

Should states and the federal government continue to build more prisons, adhering to the current "get tough" stance on crime? Or should the federal government reexamine the process through which so many Americans end up incarcerated? Supporters of "get tough" approaches to curbing crime believe that the prison overcrowding crisis should be resolved by constructing more facilities to hold inmates, rather than by granting them early release or early parole. Some proponents have advocated the privatization of the prison system if states or the federal government are unable to fund new prison construction. Opponents of tough sentencing, on the other hand, believe that prison overcrowding should be relieved by saving prison space for only the most violent inmates. Alternatives to incarceration, such as drug-treatment programs, should ...