Introduction
Most American states are struggling economically in the post-COVID-19 era. Such struggles are not new, given that the recession has been seriously undermining economic development. Pro-development groups insist that government projects can be used to revive the economy in selected areas. The idea was applied in Pocatello city in Bannock County, Idaho state. Following the rising insecurity, the government wanted to build a new women’s prison. The new facility was proposed to be built in Pocatello to pump additional money into the community by creating jobs, buying supplies, construction, and maintenance. Pocatello was in a dire economic situation since major employing companies had relocated from the town (“The Pocatello Prison Siting Story,” n.d.). The city’s population decreased by approximately six thousand in less than ten years. However, a dilemma was encountered in deciding the location due to competing economic and political interests that necessitated political compromise to solve the situation. The construction of a new female prison in Pocatello City indicates an intricate interplay of political formations, interest groups, and economic benefits in policy making and implementation.
Key Issues in the Case Study
An in-depth analysis of the case study reveals several vital issues. The first one is the attempt to address the challenges facing the criminal system in the U.S. Overcrowding is a serious problem that compels the government to find ways to address it. In the quest for solutions, the government usually toys between building a new facility and expanding existing ones, another critical issue (Visher & Eason, 2021). Both options require analyzing their cost and benefits and choosing the most appropriate. Usually, the focus is on the facility’s economic benefit to the area and how much it would cost the taxpayers’ money. The second key issue noted from the case study is the politics that influence the choice of the site to develop the facility. Since politics is the main driver of public policy rather than rationality, it can derail the process or stop it completely. The various political entities usually leverage public policy to advance their interests.
Humanitarian issues tend to influence the implementation process of public policy. The welfare of the people living around the facility, the prisoners, and the environment are vital areas of concern to particular interest groups. For instance, in the case study, the first decision to construct the prison at Philbin Road did not succeed because of the air quality problem. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) objected to its establishment on the proposed site claiming it was listed as a non-attainment zone by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (“The Pocatello Prison Siting Story,” n.d.). Areas under such classification do not attain the minimum air quality standards recommended for good health.
Likely Root Causes of the Issues or Problems
Firstly, the root cause of overcrowding is the rise in the number of law offenders being sentenced. As a result, the prisons are getting more inmates than they can hold due to various reasons. In addition to the increased number of criminals, over-policing in specific areas marred with crime results in arrests and sentencing, which increases prison populations (Vanden Bosch, 2020). Longer sentencing is also a serious issue as more prisoners spend more time, leading to overcrowding. Numerous restrictions after release from prison increase the chances of an ex-offender going back to prison.
Secondly, the political and economic value and interests of setting up a government-funded facility are another major cause of the issue. Conflict of interest tends to arise from various competing parties. Political and economic interests compete for attention resulting in the derailment of the implementation. Each party attempts to support the idea that leads to attaining its political or economic objective. A politician or political group can gain political mileage by influencing the decision to choose a location.
Finally, the root causes of humanitarian issues are the concern for prisoners’ health and the impacts of the facility on people living around it. Inmates, too, have a right to live in humane conditions. Air quality, sufficient space, and how they are treated are key humanitarian concerns that need to be considered. When ignored, prison can be a breeding point for various dangers and miseries to prisoners (Visher & Eason, 2021). If the location of a prison facility can lead to undermining some prisoners’ rights, then it fails to meet the requirements based on humanitarian concerns.
Viable Solutions to Address or Resolve the Issues
Finding a solution that satisfies every issue is almost impossible. That means, in the implementation process, there must be a form of compromise. The main issue here is to address the problem of overcrowding in prisons in Idaho. In that case, the options to consider are expanding the existing prisons or building a new one. Upgrading the existing prisons is the most viable solution based on cost-effective analysis (Vanden Bosch, 2020). Through this approach, the prison system would not incur the most expenses on building materials, paying workers, and recruiting new staff compared to building a new facility. Hence, the state government does not spend colossal taxpayer money, which would otherwise directly impact the residents. As much as the proponents of building a new prison argue that it can boost the local economy, the same population has to contribute the money through taxes. Thus, expanding the existing prison facilities is the most feasible solution.
Nevertheless, the supporters of building a new prison may argue that it helps revive the economy by offering job opportunities and injecting money into the local community. Such an argument is partly valid but works well for the political class trying to advance their political mileage through public policies. A superficial look at the proposition can be convincing, but a critical examination reveals its flaws. Building a new prison facility puts immense financial pressure on the state government (Vanden Bosch, 2020). As a result, it can be forced to revise its tax policies to collect more funds from the taxpayers, adversely affecting the residents’ economic situation. In that case, the cost would outweigh the project’s expected benefits.
Another crucial solution would be bringing harmony among all the competing interest groups through a consensus or compromise. Although making different parties agree can be difficult, a senior and influential political person in the county or state can lead the negotiations. The differing factions can be urged to consider the benefits and urgency of the project. These groups can also agree on the issues of most concern to be addressed while the negligible ones can be ignored. Through such a rational arraignment where each party can have some of its objectives addressed, the implementation of the project can be smooth.
Ramifications of the Suggested Solutions
The proposed solution is not all glamorous as it is expected to have various complex unwelcomed effects. Firstly, choosing to expand the existing prison facilities means the government cannot create as many jobs as expected. Few people are needed to work on upgrading the facilities. In addition, few supplies, materials, and funds are required for the project. Hence, people would not get employment, and very little money would be injected into the economy of the region where the facility is built. That is a significant negative effect of the solution on the economy. However, the impact is less compared to the consequences of building a new prison. More land is needed meaning the natural environment would be destroyed. That is the effect EPA is trying to protect by limiting new government projects in classified areas (“The Pocatello Prison Siting Story,” n.d.). In that case, the welfare of the citizens would be at risk from environmental destruction. Secondly, upgrading existing facilities saves the state’s government from financial pressure. The government can balance its expenditure, eliminating the need to tax the citizens more. Therefore, the residents can miss out on jobs but are shielded from higher taxes.
The major ramification of a compromise among differing groups is the amount of time and persuasion required for consensus. Given that each party roots its objectives, they tend to require much convincing to change their stance. That means lots of resources will be wasted in the process. However, the benefit of the solution is immense as it eliminates opposition. Once the agreement is reached, the implementation of the project can run smoothly without any interruption.
Recommendations and Conclusion
Overall, constructing new prisons is not a viable solution based on cost-benefit analysis. Upgrading the existing one is the most appropriate solution to the problem. Although it does not address the location’s economic aspect, it effectively addresses the humanitarian issues. The idea of offering local jobs is not the primary goal for constructing the facility. That means upgrading the facilities meets the main objective of improving the welfare of the inmates. In addition, it is cost-friendly and cannot interfere with the state’s expenditure. Starting a new project from scratch requires a lot of funding that can compel the state to reduce the budget and expenditure on other crucial services, remove incentives, or raise taxes. Building a new project harms the state and the citizens more economically. Thus, the case study perfectly shows how political interest, humanitarian issues, and economic concerns influence public policies.
References
The Pocatello prison Siting story: A case of politics. (n.d.). [screenshot].
Vanden Bosch, M. D. (2020). Rural prison siting: Problems and promises. The Mid-Southern Journal of Criminal Justice, 19(1), 5. Web.
Visher, C., & Eason, J. M. (2021). Changing prisons to help people change. Contexts, 20(4), 22-27. Web.