Prison spending is not too high

I saw this going viral from Forbes, The High Price Of Minimum Security Federal Prisoners:

Of the BOP’s nearly 160,000 prisoners, 24,000 of them are minimum security. The BOP’s statement was that the average cost of housing a minimum security prisoner in 2024 is $151.02. The cost of housing someone in a U.S. Penitentiary is $164.87 (Lows were $129.72 and Mediums are $122.50). Since there are more minimum security prisoners than high, the total costs of housing minimum security prisoners far exceeds the costs of housing those in high security.

In the above article, if we’re operating under the assumption that the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) budget cannot be increased, then yes, it may make more sense to prioritize violent criminals over the less violent ones, or to find other ways to reduce costs.

But quibbling over prison costs comes off as completely irrational in terms of policy. For two reasons: prison spending is tiny relative to other spending, and the ROI of prison spending is very high. I will expound on both of these.

There is a common narrative that prison spending is too high, which is often invoked as an argument for either releasing prisoners early or transferring them to lower-security facilities. This argument is used by prison-reform types, typically on the left, to appeal to fiscal conservatives, who generally are averse to government spending but also are tough on crime.

However, prison spending is minuscule compared to other types of federal spending. Defense and healthcare are in the trillions of dollars, yet we’re arguing over an extra billion dollars or so for prison spending.

To get an idea of how small this is, in 2023 the U.S. government spent $6.13 trillion. Just $8 billion was allocated to the BOP, or about 0.0013 of the total budget.

It’s so small, doesn’t even show up on the pie chart below. For some perspective, prison spending amounts to about 1/5-1/10 of the 1% which is allocated for “science”:

From the article, the proposed solution to save costs is to transfer low-risk, minimum security prisoners to halfway homes:

The cost of halfway house placement is still high at $126.17/day. Halfway houses provide beds for some prisoners and home confinement supervision for others. However, halfway house placement represents a 20% cost savings over institutional living.

If cost is the criterion for prematurely releasing prisoners, defeating the deterrence factor of prisons and risking public safety, by this logic it would imply that services such as healthcare or social security should be downsized first, as those are obviously much bigger targets that presumably have more total waste than the already meager BOP budget. It does not seem intellectualy honest to use prison overspending or waste as justification for cutting those programs while overlooking far bigger expenses and other areas to cut, if cost is the issue.

Regarding healthcare, to save costs, for example, rely more on nurses instead of overpaid specialists. Or use outpatient clinics instead of hospitals. Or raising the age of Social Security.

I have argued that prison spending has among the highest ROI of any federal spending in terms of indirect societal and economic benefit. This is because the damage inflicted on society by criminals can be massive relative to the cost of incarcerating them. A shoplifting ring, for example, can amount to millions of dollars of theft:

A California mom led an $8 million retail theft ring:

California mom alleged ringleader of $8 million retail theft. A California mom is accused of orchestrating a nationwide shoplifting scheme that stole millions of dollars’ worth of makeup and clothing from hundreds of stores for more than a decade, according to the California Department of Justice.Mar 14, 2024

But sure, let’s quibble over $160/day vs. $120/day when thieves are stealing thousands of dollars/day undeterred. Even a small-time thief can easily steal that much everyday. $160 is just four cans of baby formula, a frequently stolen item due to high resell value and concealability.

Gang activity can render entire neighborhoods unsafe, depress property values, and hurt businesses too, which can have a ripple effect on local economies. A very small percentage of shoplifters account for most of the repeat arrests and stolen merchandise (shrink) in the NYC area; you definitely want these people locked up for a long time.

If anything, this is an argument for more prison spending, including expanding the budget of the BOP, not less. The solution to prison overcrowding is not releasing prisoners early, but rather building more prisons. This seemed to work for El Salvador: crime has plunged after Bukele’s controversial but seemingly effective reforms.

I would have more respect for prison reform types if they were more intellectually honest with their arguments by opposing long sentences and mass incarceration on humanitarian grounds or that it squanders human capital, instead of cost or framing it as opposing government waste, which is a red herring.

Overall, yes, there is a high price in nominal terms of incarcerating a lot of people, but it’s still small relative to the cost of the damage inflicted on society, and very small relative to the overall federal budget.