MANDATORY MINIMUMS HAVE PRISON SYSTEM IN FINANCIAL LOCKDOWN

Employees of private companies should not be given police powers, but
that's the sort of situation that arises when a nation tries to solve crime
problems by locking up millions of people.

More than 2 million people are behind bars in the United States, more than
150,000 of them in federal institutions, and the feds are kept scurrying to
find places to put them. One way to ease the crush is to contract with
private companies to build and/or operate prisons.

This supposedly saves money and avoids red tape. Wackenhut Corrections
Corp., the largest private prison firm, recently completed a 1,200-bed
federal prison in Hertford County, on the coastal plain near the Virginia
border.

But how does a private citizen keep a prisoner from escaping? Wackenhut's
solution is to have North Carolina give the guards police powers, including
the use of deadly force. The company assured concerned legislators the
power will be used only against escapees, though the bills pending in the
House contain no restrictions other than arrests must be "consistent with
North Carolina law."

The solution is to stop allowing private companies to guard prisoners.
Police power is perhaps the most fundamental power of government, one that
should be exercised only by public employees answerable to the people.
Nevertheless, the U.S. Bureau of Prisons has 6,254 inmates in six private
prisons and 16,630 others in various contract facilities or programs.

Why is there such a prison crush? Because we insist on locking up drug
addicts instead of treating them in the community. Nearly 60 percent of
federal prisoners were sentenced for drug offenses. In North Carolina,
about one-third of the state's 31,500 inmates receive treatment for drug or
alcohol problems.

"Mandatory sentencing laws for drug offenses are ... filling prisons with
nonviolent offenders who are often addicts, low-level dealers or
conspirators," said Monica Pratt of the group Families Against Mandatory
Minimums.

A side effect of this policy is that a disproportionate percentage of
prisoners are African-Americans: 39 percent in the federal system and
nearly two-thirds in North Carolina. Many

African-Americans suspect this is the real goal of the get-tough-on-drugs
policy, a belief that erodes their trust in government. The fact that
African-Americans make up fewer than half of North Carolina's probationers
reinforces that belief.

Locking up addicts is not working, and it is costly. North Carolina spends
an average of $27,843 a year to keep an inmate in prison, whereas the most
intensive probation costs $4,464.

Despite the best efforts of prison officials, incarceration accomplishes
little except to keep violent people out of society and for the most part
that is how it should be used.

Some states are making progress. Ohio has reduced its prison population by
4.5 percent with probation reform and treatment for low-level drug offenders.

North Carolina has kept its prison population relatively stable since 1996
while increasing the number of probationers by 3,000.

North Carolina also ended its experiment with privatization last year by
taking over operation of the two facilities owned by Corrections
Corporation of America.

If the feds would wise up, there wouldn't be any need to give public power
to private employees.