LOCAL VIEW: CRIME BENEFITS THE CRIME CONTROL INDUSTRY

The number of people in American prisons and jails passed 2 million last
year. That figure reflects the results of the "get tough,"
ultra-conservative crime polices that began in the early 1970s. The effect
of these policies is that the crime rate today is about the same as it was
in the early '70s. Yet during this same period the incarceration rate has
increased by more than 400 percent, while annual expenditures on the
criminal justice system went up by 1,500 percent (approaching $200 billion).

The incarceration rate is now more than 700 per 100,000 population, higher
than any other country in the world. (Nevada ranks 10th in the country,
while the county detention center had a daily population average of 2,538
in 2001, with the dubious distinction of having the highest rate of
overcrowding in the nation at 171 percent above rated capacity.) The rising
incarceration rate has done considerable damage to the black population, as
blacks are about eight times more likely than whites to be locked up. The
incarceration rate for women (with minorities leading the way) has
increased the most, going up by more than 700 percent over the past 25 years.

While many researchers have blamed the drug war for this sorry state of
affairs, there is another reason for the growth in imprisonment rates,
which is less obvious.

I am referring to what has been called the crime control industry.

In recent years controlling crime has become a big business, an "industry"
like other industries such as manufacturing and retail trade.

Literally thousands of companies are seeking profits in this booming industry.

The criminal justice system alone provides a steady supply of career
possibilities for police officers, prison guards, probation officers and
many more. Most of these jobs offer not only good starting pay, but
excellent benefits and a promise of future wage increases and job security.

The police, the courts and the prison system have become huge, self-serving
and self-perpetuating bureaucracies with a vested interest in keeping crime
at a certain level.

They need victims, they need criminals, they need customers, even if they
have to invent them. (Prison construction is a booming business too. An ad
by an investment group states: "While arrests and convictions are steadily
on the rise, profits are to be made--profits from crime.

Get in on the ground floor of this booming industry now!")

In a sense, private industry and the criminal justice system cannot afford
to put a large dent in the crime problem, because it would have such a
negative impact on the industry.

Two words sum it up: politics and economics.

Politics in the sense that elected officials want to be re-elected, and
sounding "tough on crime" gets votes; economics in the sense of not only
the money to be made by businesses but the number of jobs created.

Part of the problem can be summed up by way of a parable.

Imagine a large river with a high waterfall.

At the bottom of this waterfall hundreds of people are working frantically
trying to save those who have fallen into the river and have fallen down
the waterfall, many of them drowning.

As the people along the shore are trying to rescue as many as possible, one
individual looks up and sees a seemingly never-ending stream of people
falling down the waterfall, and he begins to run upstream.

One of his fellow rescuers hollers "Where are you going?

There are so many people who need help here." To which the man replies,
"I'm going upstream to find out why so many people are falling into the river."

Now imagine the scene at the bottom of the waterfall represents the
criminal justice system, responding to crimes that have been committed and
dealing with both victims and offenders.

If you look more closely, you will begin to notice there are more people at
the bottom of the stream, that they work in relatively new buildings with
all sorts of modern technology and that those working here get paid rather
well, with excellent benefits.

The money keeps flowing into this area, with all sorts of businesses lined
up to provide various services and technical assistance. If you look
upstream, you will find something far different.

There are not too many people, the buildings are not as modern, nor is the
technology. The people working there do not get paid very much and their
benefits are not as good as those provided down below.

Nor do they find businesses coming their way with assistance. They are
constantly having to beg for money.

A researcher, writing about our health care system, observed that
capitalism "finds it more profitable to treat illness rather than prevent
it." He notes that "preventive care measures, such as decent sewage and
water systems, draining swamps near cities, education, regulated food
handling, and universal vaccinations bring little in terms of profit for
pharmaceutical companies or the larger capitalist system." The American
medical industry has a financial stake in treating rather than preventing
diseases.

If we pretend for a moment that crime is a disease (in a way it is), then
this analogy makes perfect sense.

Simply put, reacting to crime is far more profitable for business and other
interests than preventing crime.

Our criminal justice system is designed to fail to reduce crime, because,
although citizens would be greatly benefited from less crime (just as
citizens would greatly benefit from fewer health problems), the crime
control industry would not benefit.

If you want a lower crime rate, you must spend more money upstream.

In order to do this, however, the interests that now control the criminal
justice system would have to be convinced that there is a larger profit to
be made from investing upstream, rather than downstream.