American Prison System, Research Paper Example

As the American prison system has become overloaded, debates have broken out over whether or not incarceration is the best and most cost-effective correctional procedure.  Indeed, Judge Nancy Gertner called the nation’s experience with imprisonment, an “unprecedented and failed experiment in mass incarceration.” Incarceration has been popular in America, not only because the government has urged law enforcement to “get tough on crime,” (Gertner 261) but also because incarceration has often been portrayed as more humane than capital punishment. Yet, now, some are beginning to object to the overwhelming amount of money that taxpayers must pay to secure, clothe and care for criminals. Recent and historic data suggest that capital punishment is both less expensive than incarceration and an effective deterrent of violent crimes. Yet, the death penalty is controversial and only warranted in a small percentage of cases. Therefore, other alternatives to incarceration are essential to an effective reform of the prison system.

Incarceration and the threat of incarceration have been enormously helpful in maintaining order in the United States. Indeed, according to Daniel S. Nagin of Carnegie Mellon University, “That the threat of incarceration is a powerful incentive to pay court-ordered fines cannot be disputed seriously.” (Nagin) Indeed, it would be hard for the government to collect fines if it could not enforce these threats. Additionally, incarceration generally keeps dangerous criminals away from the general population. It can protect children from pedophiles, adults from abusive spouses and minorities from repeat hate crimes. Furthermore, the prison system employs many guards and creates jobs for those who manufacture security equipment and those who help in the day to day business prison security. Incarceration, then, clearly provides society with many benefits.

But are the benefits worth the cost? Some say they are not. Incarcerating even one criminal can be tremendously expensive. According to The Washington Post’s N.C.  Aizenman, incarceration costs state governments almost $50 billion and the federal government $5 billion each year (Aizenman). The average annual cost of incarcerating one person is between $20,000 and $40,000. In some facilities the cost is even higher – sometimes reaching over $90,000 per criminal.

What makes this disturbing is that currently, one in every hundred Americans over the age of eighteen is incarcerated annually. According to Aizenmann, this means that 2.3 million Americans are imprisoned each year (Aizenman). What is, perhaps, startling is that the United States leads the world in incarceration. It imprisons a greater percentage of people than even China (Aizenman). Therefore, the expenses racked up by the prison system have become overwhelming to taxpayers. The Pew Center on the States reports that in 2010 there were 1,404,053 people in the custody of the states. If the cost of incarceration is $20,000 for each individual, the cost of incarcerating every prisoner adds up to over $28 trillion dollars a year. Because this is the lowest estimate of the cost of incarceration per person, the actual number is probably much higher (See Figure 1). There is worse news for minorities. According to Aizenmann, a ninth of young black men are imprisoned annually. Meanwhile, black women are more than twice as likely to be imprisoned as white women.

Incarceration, then, is tremendously expensive and it is affecting massive numbers of people. Indeed, according to Marie Gottschalk, while The United States has imprisoned higher numbers of people than most of the west for some time, it was not until recently that the country’s rate of incarceration began to “radically exceed” (Gottshalk 4) that of European nations. Because incarceration is so expensive and affects so many Americans, it might be prudent to consider the alternatives.

One of the alternatives to incarceration is capital punishment. Capital punishment is controversial, because many see it as “cruel and unusual” or at least inhumane. On the other hand, proponents of capital punishment can argue that releasing certain violent criminals into the general population is also inhumane. Furthermore, according to Robert Tanner of The Associated Press, a series of studies over the past decade have shown that the use of capital punishment would have prevented between three and eight murders per execution.

One of the most convincing arguments for Capital Punishment comes from Naci Mocan, Professor of Economics at the University of Colorado Denver. Mocan has been an opponent of capital punishment, however, in 2003 he co-authored a study that showed that for every execution, five lives were saved and that for every death penalty sentence that was commuted, five lives were lost. Indeed, Mocan said the following, “I oppose the death penalty. But my results show that the death penalty (deters) _ what am I going to do, hide them?”  (Tanner 1) Mocan re-examined his study in 2006 and found that the results were the same. According to Tanner, Mocan’s study is just one in a dozen that show that the death penalty does, indeed, save lives and deter crime. Of these studies, the most notable is an Emory University study that claims that a single execution prevents an average of eighteen murders (Tanner).

On the other hand, some have argued that, rather than deterring homicides, the death penalty might indirectly increase the chances of it by “brutalizing” society. (Donohue and Wolfers) Meanwhile, many studies from those who oppose the death penalty have been strangely worded. For instance, a 2009 study by three University of Dallas professors stated “our results provide no empirical support for the argument that the existence or application of the death penalty deters prospective offenders from committing homicide.” (Tomislav, Veiraitis and Boots 1) But the study did not show that there was not a link, nor did it state that the implementation of the death penalty made crime more likely. Science, then, seems to support the use of capital punishment as a deterrent. Some opponents of capital punishment have disagreed with the study’s findings, but in response, Emory University’s Paul Rubin said the following:

Instead of people sitting down and saying ‘let’s see what the data shows,’ it’s people sitting down and saying ‘let’s show this is wrong, Some scientists are out seeking the truth, and some of them have a position they would like to defend (Tanner).

But how does the death penalty compare to incarceration in terms of cost? According to The Texas Department of Criminal Justice, lethal injection costs $86.08 per execution (Texas Department of Criminal Justice). If every prisoner in the system were executed rather than incarcerated, the total cost would be under $129 million. It would literally save the taxpayers trillions of dollars. But this does not work for many reasons. The foremost reason is that most criminals have not committed crimes that would warrant such a harsh punishment. Indeed, only 60% of criminals have committed violent crimes and of these, an even smaller percentage has committed murder. Indeed, Useem and Piehl say the following:

America’s jails and prisons are overflowing with convicts who would not have been thrown behind bars 30 years ago and who, moreover, would not be rotting if the public were better informed about the realities of the country’s penal policy (Useem and Piel).

Still, making use of capital punishment would save the taxpayers well over $19 thousand dollars per execution.

Capital Punishment saves the taxpayers from other, less noticeable costs as well. Career criminals, who reoffend after being released, cost their victims and society thousands of dollars worth of damage. Indeed, according to Professor Mark Cohen of Vanderbilt University, in 1997, “165,000 in victim costs per year of a criminal’s career (about 35% attributable to tangible costs such as lost wages and medical bills and 65% attributable to the value of lost quality of life to victims.” (Reinhart)  According to Cohen, a career criminal will also cost the justice system an additional $40,000 in expenses related to investigations, defense, parole, probation and incarceration. Meanwhile, while a prisoner is incarcerated, says Cohen, a criminal will earn up to $60,000 less than he would have outside of prison. He will not, therefore, contribute as much to society.

Furthermore, violent criminals who are released often resort to violence again, and murderers sometimes kill again. It is hard to place a value on human life, but its value must be very high. Incarceration, according to Useem and Piehl, sometimes deters rehabilitation. Indeed, argue Useem and Piehl, prisoners who are incarcerated often regress and reoffend once they are released (Useem and Piel). Capital punishment does not have this negative consequence. Indeed, it eliminates these extra burdens on society.

On the other hand, it is hard to separate the financial aspects of crime from its legal and ethical context. In some states, public sentiment is very much against giving the death penalty and in others the use of capital punishment is forbidden.  Therefore, capital punishment cannot be the only solution to the problem of mass incarceration – nor is it the only alternative. Another alternative is to rely on hefty fines and community service for non-violent crimes. If non-violent offenders were penalized financially, rather than through prison time, taxpayers would save money, not only by refraining from incarcerating individuals, but also by receiving funds from the hefty fines placed on criminals. This would reduce the problem of prison overcrowding and decrease public spending on prisons.

Other alternatives include mandatory drug counseling and community supervision, which, according to Aizenmann, are far less expensive than incarceration (Aizenman). Indeed, Adam Gelb of the Pew Center’s Public Safety Performance Project said the following:

There are large numbers of people behind bars who could be supervised in the community safely and effectively at a much lower cost — while also paying taxes, paying restitution to their victims and paying child support (Aizenman).

Incarceration does provide society with many benefits – and, indeed, in some cases, it is indispensable. But the United States has incarcerated so many non-violent offenders that its prison system is becoming unsustainable. In order to protect society and, indeed, to preserve America’s prison system, the country must begin considering alternatives to mass incarceration. The use of capital punishment for America’s most violent offenders, coupled with higher fines for the country’s non-violent offenders can save the American taxpayer trillions of dollars each year, while reducing the problem of overcrowding in America’s prisons.

Works Cited

Aizenman, N.C. “The high cost of incarceration.” The Washington Post (2008).

Donohue, John and Justin Wolfers. “Does the Death Penalty Deter?” Wilson Quarterly 30.2 (2006).

Gertner, Nancy. “confronting the costs of incarceration: Supporting Advisory Guidelines.” Harvard Law & Policy Review 3.2 (2009).

Gottshalk, Marie. The Prison and The Gallows:the politics of mass incarceration in America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Nagin, Daniel S. “Thoughts On The Broader Implications Of The “Miracle Of The Cells”.” Criminology & Public Policy7.1 (2008): 37-42.

Reinhart, Christopher. Cost of incarceration and cost of a career criminal. 13 February 2008. 2 October 2010 <http://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/rpt/2008-R-0099.htm>.

Tanner, Robert. “Studies Say Death Penalty Deters Crime.” The Washington Post (2007).

Texas Department of Criminal Justice. “Death Row Facts.” 6 March 2007. Texas Department of Criminal Justice. 1 October 2010 <http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/drowfacts.htm>.

Tomislav, Kovandzic, Lynne M Veiraitis and Denise Paquette Boots. “Does the death penalty save lives?” Criminology & Public Policy 8.4 (2009): 803-843.

Useem, Bert and Anne Morrison Piel. Prison state: the challenge of mass incarceration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.