@ISIDEWITHQuestionsCriminal IssuesStarted 6yrs agoActive 10mos ago

Should the government hire private companies to run prisons?

Private prisons are incarceration centers that are run by a for-profit company instead of a government agency. The companies that operate private prisons are paid a per-diem or monthly rate for each prisoner they keep in their facilities. There are currently no private prisons in Italy. Opponents of private prisons argue that incarceration is a social responsibility and that entrusting it to for-profit companies is inhumane. Proponents argue that prisons run by private companies are consistently more cost effective than those run by government agencies.

+
Expand
+ Settings

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 44.2k Italy voters.

34%
Yes
66%
No
22%
Yes
59%
No
11%
Yes, but they should be strictly regulated to prevent mismanagement and corruption
7%
No, private prisons will sacrifice quality of care and rehabilitation services for profit
0%
Yes, but eliminate contractual occupancy quotas

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 44.2k Italy voters.

Chart
Line chart with 7 lines.
The chart has 1 X axis displaying values. Range: to .
The chart has 2 Y axes displaying values and values.
End of interactive chart.

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 44.2k Italy voters.

Chart
Line chart with 8 lines.
The chart has 1 X axis displaying values. Range: to .
The chart has 2 Y axes displaying values and values.
End of interactive chart.

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from Italy voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @9MSNGWTanswered…10mos10MO

Yes, but in a way that requires key performance metrics to align with profits. KPMs such as recidivism rate.

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3mos3MO

Defense Bill Blocks Transgender Care To Minors

The Senate on Wednesday gave final approval to a defense policy bill directing $895 billion toward the Pentagon and other military activities, moving over the objections of some Democrats who opposed a provision added late in the negotiations that would deny coverage for transgender health procedures for minors.The 85-to-14 vote, coming a week after a divided House passed the same measure, cleared the bill for President Biden’s signature.Most Republicans and many Democrats supported the measure, which provides a 14.5 percent pay raise to junior enlisted service members and a 4.5 percent pay raise for all other service members. It also expands access to meal assistance, housing and child care programs that benefit those in uniform.But several Democrats withheld their backing in protest of a provision preventing TRICARE, the military’s health care plan for service members, from covering “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization” for children under 18.The language, which would affect the gender-transitioning children of service members, was recently added to the measure at the insistence of Speaker Mike Johnson, Republican of Louisiana, who refused to bring a defense bill to the House floor without it, according to aides familiar with the negotiations.Twenty-one Democrats, led by Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, proposed an amendment to strip the provision from the bill, but the matter was never brought to a vote. Several of them took to the floor on Tuesday to lodge their objections.“It’s flat-out wrong to put this provision in this bill and take away a service member’s freedom to make that decision for their families,” Ms. Baldwin said, estimating that the provision could negatively affect as many as 6,000 to 7,000 military families.

▲  2019 replies5 agree1 disagree6