Don't rush to private prisons

A lot of services traditionally offered by governments lend themselves to private-market competition. A prison system does not.

State lawmakers are likely to confront again soon the issue of whether to solve overcrowding by sending some Utah inmates to private prisons. At least one lawmaker has said he will sponsor a bill that allows this to happen.

A lot of states already have gone down this path, with varying results. Not all private prisons are bad. While the common criticism is that a private contractor can cut costs only by compromising either the comfort of prisoners or the amount of security provided, it is true that large prison companies can save money through economies of scale, as well. They buy in bulk. They have efficient operating models and they have the ability to make money-saving deals with various providers.

But the cost-saving advantages must be weighed against public control and accountability, and that is where the most serious objections materialize.

Holding a human being captive is among the most important duties any government can assume. It comes with liabilities and with the need for complete transparency.

If Utah were to allow private prisons, its laws would have to be changed to allow the same public access currently associated with state-run prisons. Reporters and the public would need access to prisoners and to all matters relating to the prison's budget. Escapes or disturbances would have to be reported promptly, as well as the details of how they are being handled.

In a hearing this week, Utah Corrections director Scott Carver recounted how several Utah inmates escaped from a private Texas facility in the mid-1990s. The other side of that story was that Texas officials weren't sure how to pursue those inmates, seeing as how the state at that time had no specific law against escaping from a private prison.

There are other reasons for caution. Four years ago, the Wall Street Journal reported on how Mississippi's declining crime rate was causing problems with its private contractors, who had trouble making ends meet. As a result, the state legislature agreed to pay a private prison company for housing about 900 inmates regardless of whether those inmates actually existed. In other words, the state was paying full price for empty cells.

Once the state allows private prisons, it will have set in motion a new set of special interests. The companies themselves employ lobbyists. Lawmakers who happen to have the prisons in their district join with local officials from those areas to form another group. To them, the prison means jobs and money for the local economy. Once it sets off down the path, a state would have difficulty ever pulling back.

The only way Utah should ever turn its prison obligations over to private business is if it has the strictest of laws in place to protect its own liability and all of the public's interests.