> The recidivism rate is even worse. In 2005 almost a half a million inmates were tracked after their release, more than 75% were rearrested within 5 years.

We have an electorate and politicians who want to put a lot of people in prison but a) don't want to "waste" money on prisoners and b) want prison to be as punitive as possible. We do very little education, counseling, vocational training, etc. Someone who goes to a US prison comes out less able to function in society than they were when they went in. They have no new job skills and any they had haven't been exercised and are out of date, they have the black mark of a conviction, they've been ground down by the experience. Honestly 75% sounds about right.

We have to accept that the people we put in prison will come out one day, and it's better for everyone if they rejoin society with the skills they need to succeed. It's in nobody's interest for them to re-offend, but we do so little to prevent it.

There was at least one notable incident of a for-profit detention center outright bribing judges to impose harsher sentences: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal

> Do you have any sources for this?

Actually the second link you provided mentions how private prisons take steps to keep inmates 'in' longer. So that's on incentive.

I haven't taken the time to look into it in detail (so shouldn't make sweeping statement of course), but I do remember hearing in other submissions on this site that prisons lobby and fund elected representatives who are 'tough on crime' and who might send convictions their way, so a truer 'incentive' to incarcerate initially not just keep them there.

I'll see if I can dig those up.

Thank you. I was wonder if it was actual kickbacks or something indirect like campaign funding.

I can't find the specific submissions I saw previously but did find a plethora of articles like those below with example of lobbying:

http://www.salon.com/2014/04/15/america_on_lockdown_why_the_...

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/issues/prisons/

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/08/03/627471/private-p...

There are a lot more out there across the years. The general impression is one of an 'industry' seeking to expand its operations and that just doesn't sit right to me as an outsider.

Thanks, very interesting stats!

>> financial incentives to incarcerate...

> Do you have any sources for this?

For private prisons, the Corrections Corporation of America reportedly spends over $1 million each year on lobbying. [1][2]

Beyond private prisons, there's lobbying from prison guards' unions. For example, the California union appears to have substantial political influence, and in 2008 successfully spent $1.8 million to defeat a ballot initiative that would have reduced the prison population.[3]

Further, in some municipalities, cities use fines as revenue-raising tools, and arrest and jail people who fail to pay. See e.g. the Ferguson DOJ report.[4]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corrections_Corporation_of_Ame...

[2] http://www.diversityinc.com/diversity-management/who-profits...

[3] http://criminology.fsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/volume-10-issu... p. 750 (PDF page 274)

[4] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/03/0...

None of what you cited is actual evidence that private prisons have had an impact on incarceration rates.

I will also point out that lobbying is something every industry and interest group does in the United States, including many groups who support drug and sentencing reform. $1 million isn't even really that much.

What measure of proof do you require?

$1 million isn't even really that much.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tullock_paradox

Any measure would be a good start.

>For private prisons, the Corrections Corporation of America reportedly spends over $1 million each year on lobbying. [1][2]

Why lobbying -- buying influence with money -- is legal in the US, I will never understand...

It's because the money isn't given to the politicians or their campaigns. The money is spent hiring the lobbyists, and their teams to dedicate manpower to finding convincing arguments which can then be presented to the politicians.

Yes lobbying is usually associated with evil corporations, but the fact of the matter is that in order to fix it you would need to remove the power for citizens to speak to their representatives.

Lobbying is, as far as I know, legal in every functional democracy.

I think you are confusing this with campaign contributions, which is a different but related activity.

I'm not aware of lobbies, established for a specific purpose, with offices and personel, and getting donations, in any functional democracy I know of.

Lobbying in the UK sure sounds like lobbying in the US to me.[1] So does Volkswagen's lobbying of the EU parliament.[2] Do you have an example of a functional democracy that doesn't have lobbying like this?

[1] http://www.lobbyingtransparency.org/

[2] https://uk.news.yahoo.com/volkswagen-scandal-puts-eu-lobbyin...

> Do you have any sources for this?

"A new report by In the Public Interest finds that private prison contracts that include “occupancy requirements” — effectively inmate quotas — are alarmingly common. Among the 62 contracts that they were able to obtain, 65 percent contained occupancy provisions that required prisons to remain between 80 and 100 percent full, and can last for as long as 20 years. If beds sit empty, states still have to pay, which the report dubbed a “no-crime tax.” And even when the abuses and violations for which these private firms are notorious cause the state to remove prisoners, contractual deals compel the state to keep paying."

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/09/20/2658701/private-...

> The prison system was not privatized in the US. Some places do have private prison but it is by no means the norm.

It doesn't have to be the norm, one is too many; private prisons should not be allowed at all and the introduction of business to the prison system is privatization of the prison system.

Most prisons may not be 100% private, but how many private sector companies provide very important services that create nearly the same problems as private prisons? Does it matter if Guards-R-Us are supplying guards to Private-Prisons-R-Us or to New York's own prisons?