| With the popularity of imprisonment as a form of legal sanction, prisons are increasingly overcrowded and unable to meet the demand for space. This inability to house large numbers of offenders has prompted the entry of the private sector into the field of prison operations. By operating prisons, the private sector is able to reap financial rewards through incarceration. While prison privatization is increasingly popular, it has attracted little academic examination to determine any similarities and differences existing between it and the public prison system. Similarly, little literature exists about the ideologies that drive private operations. Also lacking in the literature is information pertaining to the manner by which the judiciary and the print media both perceive and portray privatization. This lack of literature on privatization may be due to an inadequate supply of readily available data, the fact that not enough time has elapsed for the consequences of inmate and staff commodification to emerge, or because the public sector is engaged in activities similar to those of the private sector, making it difficult to fully isolate differences in the manner by which each approaches its prisoners.; Two specific ideologies serve to guide this project and are related to both prison operations and inmate treatment. These are the principles of "normalization" and "less eligibility". Under normalization, inmate treatment and civil rights are valued with the intent being the production of a reformed offender. In an opposite fashion, under the principle of less eligibility, inmates are viewed as possessing a reduced citizenship along with a corresponding reduction in the rights and protections that citizenship affords. Inmates incarcerated under this ideology are more likely to be deprived of a wide variety of amenities and treatment options since such offerings may be viewed as impediments to institutional efficiency. These ideologies provide a continuum upon which the private and public sectors can be situated. By placing normalization at one end of this continuum, and by placing less eligibility at the opposite end, analysis can reveal toward which end private and public prisons fall in relation to each other. It is these ideologies that can help reveal the degree to which the private sector may be commodifying both its inmate population as well as its staff.; Findings based upon the analyses of existing data suggests that both the private and the public sectors exhibit characteristics indicative of both ideologies. However, direct evidence was found with regard to the private sector that reveal the extent to which they are commodifying their staff and inmate populations. Furthermore, a review of judicial statements and the presentation of privatization within the print media suggest that each portray the private sector as closely adhering to the principle of less eligibility. While evidence was found indicating that the private sector has made significant cutbacks in certain areas of prison operations as a means to increase profit, the degree of the relationship that exists between a profit rationale and civil rights violations remain unclear. |
