The Negative Impacts of Private Prisons on Georgia

Ninety five thousand Georgia residents are currently incarcerated. Roughly 15% of them reside in one of Georgia’s four private prison facilities. Third-party companies own and operate private prisons for profit under government contracts to house inmates. ‘Tough on crime’ policies, like enacting mandatory minimum sentences and three-strike laws, drove the rise of these facilities. These non-governmental correctional institutions prioritize profit over rehabilitation and justice.

Why are private prisons harmful?

Because private prisons operate as businesses, they must maintain a high occupancy rate to remain profitable. This structure encourages practices that increase incarceration rates rather than reduce them. Studies show that private prisons correlate with higher incarceration rates and longer sentences for certain offenses, including property, fraud, drug, and weapons crimes. Researchers theorize that private prison companies contribute to this trend by lobbying for harsher sentencing laws. The three largest private prison companies—CCA, GEO, and CoreCivic—have donated over $6,000,000 to state-level campaigns in last five election cycles. These companies make strategic donations; for example, CCA, the largest private prison provider in Hawaii, contributed the maximum amount to a governor’s campaign during an off-election year. This widespread and calculated donation strategy attempts to influence policies that benefit these companies, such as mass incarceration and weakened prison standards.

Additionally, private prisons correlate with higher rates of recidivism. Recidivism refers to the likelihood that a convicted individual will reoffend and face re-conviction within three to five years of release. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, about half of prisoners return to prison within three years. In contrast, studies of private prisons show that inmates in these facilities are 22% more likely to be re-convicted than those in federal or state-run prisons. Higher recidivism rates financially benefit private prison companies by keeping beds filled. Evidence suggests that policies within these facilities contribute to this pattern. These companies have lobbied against legislation that would allow prisoners access to private cell phones and have imposed high fees for phone calls. Research consistently shows that maintaining family connections reduces recidivism, which raises concerns that limiting communication undermines rehabilitation efforts.

Why is this important now?

This issue is especially timely because private prisons also serve as immigration detention facilities. The Folkston ICE Processing Center, located in Charlton County and operated by GEO, has faced significant problems, including unsanitary conditions and deaths of inmates. An Office of the Inspector General report found that “Folkston did not meet standards for facility conditions, medical care, grievances, segregation, staff-detainee communications, and handling of detainee property…We identified violations that compromised the health, safety, and rights of detainees.” Other private detention centers and prisons experience similar problems with poor facilities and inadequate upkeep. These issues stem from the profit-driven structure of these institutions. This system prioritizes financial gain over the well-being of detainees. Over time, cost-cutting measures create systemic neglect, worsen living conditions, and increase risks to both physical and mental health. When profit becomes the primary motive, accountability and humane treatment become secondary concerns, reinforcing the broader harms of privatized detention.

What can Georgia do?

In 2021, President Biden signed an executive order directing the Justice Department not to renew contracts with privately operated criminal detention facilities. This order would have effectively ended all privately operated federal prisons. However, the Trump administration later revoked this policy. While states like California have moved to ban private prisons, Georgia is unlikely to follow that path in the near term. A more realistic solution would require private prisons to comply with the Freedom of Information Act. Because the law classifies private prisons as private entities rather than government agencies, they do not currently have to comply with FOIA, even though they receive federal and state funding. Requiring compliance would increase transparency and accountability. The public could request records and information about these facilities, hold them accountable for their actions, and advocate for necessary reforms. While private prisons involve complex issues, improving accountability and visibility offers a practical step toward better conditions for incarcerated individuals in Georgia.

Aubrey is a third-year at the University of Georgia studying political science and public relations. She is a Communications Fellow.