Inmates’ defective work

By: Pat Nolan
Originally published on Washington Times

A scathing report of a joint investigation by the Justice Department’s Inspector General and the Defense Criminal Investigative Service found that the Bureau of Prisons’ Federal Prison Industries (FPI) produced more than 100,000 combat helmets that were defective and would “likely cause serious injury or death to the wearer.”

As the Financial Times wrote, “Few pieces of equipment are as important to ground troops as helmets, which provide ballistic and impact protection and can be used as platforms for mounting sophisticated electronic devices. But as a new Justice Department Inspector General summary report documents, [FPI] cut corners, used degraded or unauthorized materials, and cheated on inspections as they produced next-generation combat helmets.”

The prison officials pre-selected helmets for inspection, switched and altered serial numbers, and filed fraudulent documents to hide the defects. Worse, the prison staff instructed inmates to forge manufacturing documents falsely claiming that all the helmets had passed inspection and met contract specifications. They threatened to punish the inmates if they did not comply.

This shocking example of fraud and shoddy workmanship on equipment intended for U.S. armed forces is not an isolated incident. For years military leaders have complained that FPI delivers products that are defective and far behind schedule.

In 1998 I testified before the House Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee about the FPI facility at Nellis Air Force Base (since closed) at which 130 inmates worked rebuilding and refurbishing government vehicles, mostly for the military. Much of the work was rebuilding forklifts, and mechanical and electrical components for them, such as starters, alternators, motors and hydraulic systems.

Instead of rebuilding the tow motors, the prisoners were instructed to simply give a new coat of paint to the worn-out parts, reinstall them as new, and invoice the buyer as if the vehicles had been refurbished. The military test-operated a large number of forklifts that had been “totally rebuilt” by FPI at Nellis Air Force Base. The forklifts were intended for a large military contingent that was to be quickly deployed to war zones or other emergency purposes. Virtually every machine failed within hours.

The military raised the roof. They were left without much-needed forklifts for their emergency force. The prison immediately sent a busload of inmates to the city where the equipment was located with tools and parts to try to put the Humpty Dumpty back together again. Needless to say, the inmates loved every minute of it since they got out of prison for a while and ate real food for a change.

However, cheating, faking tests and falsifying reports are not the lessons our prisons should be teaching inmates.

Congress supports FPI because they like the idea of inmates working and learning marketable skills. They are right. Those are laudable purposes, but our representatives need to look beyond the good intentions of FPI, and examine the actual practices of the program. They will find that FPI is the wrong entity to oversee the work program.There are several reasons that FPI is doomed to failure. First, the FPI managers have no private-sector experience supervising employees. They are correctional officers, not business executives, and this scandal is an example of their inept supervision.

A second reason is that FPI is protected from competition. It pays the inmates far below real-world wages, giving FPI a large advantage over private-sector manufacturers. And FPI does not have to please their customers because “mandatory source” regulations require government agencies to buy their products. With guaranteed customers, they have no incentive to provide quality products and deliver them on time.

Most important, FPI is a Stalinist-era government-run enterprise, and we know how successful the Soviet industries were. Because there is no bottom line to evaluate the success of FPI, it is judged by whether it meets artificial goals set by the bureaucracy in their “plan.” The temptation for the inexperienced managers of FPI is to cover up their failure to meet the goals of their plan by falsifying their reports — which is exactly what they did in the situations I have described here. And it was our brave GIs who were put at risk.

It is important that prisoners are given productive work to teach them skills that will make them more employable upon their release. But the current FPI program doesn’t accomplish those important goals. It is time to reform our federal prison work programs so they actually do what they are supposed to. Our armed forces deserve that. And so do the taxpayers.

• Pat Nolan is the director of the Center for Criminal Justice Reform at the American Conservative Union Foundation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Policy Center Switcher

Search This Site

Stay Up To Date

Get the latest news and research in criminal justice.
* indicates required

On Twitter

Helpful Links

Pew Public Safety Performance Project - Excellent source for data-driven, fiscally sound policies and practices in the criminal and juvenile justice systems that protect public safety, hold offenders accountable, and control corrections costs.

Right on Crime - Prominent Conservative leaders working to make sensible and proven reforms to our criminal justice system - policies that will cut prison costs while keeping the public safe.

Heritage Foundation, Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies - Excellent source for Information about overcriminalization and its impact on American society.

American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) - Advocates solutions that refocus criminal justice resources on dangerous offenders and put the right programs in place to hold non-violent offenders accountable while providing them with the resources they need to become contributing members of society. The Justice Performance Project focuses on three key areas: Corrections and Reentry, Pretrial Release and Overcriminalization.

CATO Institute - Libertarian perspective on criminal laws and their impact on a free society

Justice Fellowship - The criminal justice reform arm of Prison Fellowship. JF works to reform the justice system to reflect traditional principles of restorative justice.

National Reentry Resource Center - Provides education, training, and technical assistance to states, tribes, territories, local governments, service providers, non-profit organizations, and corrections institutions working on prisoner reentry.

Vera Institute of Justice - Advocates criminal justice policies that promote fairness, protect public safety, and ensure that resources are used efficiently.

Families Against Mandatory Minimums - Advocates criminal sentences that are individualized, humane, and sufficient to impose fair punishment and protect public safety.

Sentencing Project - Works for a fair and effective U.S. criminal justice system by promoting reforms in sentencing policy, addressing unjust racial disparities and practices, and advocating for alternatives to incarceration.

The ACU Foundation seeks to educate the next generation of conservative leaders by providing them the intellectual tools necessary to learn about the conservative movement, its leaders, its leading organization and especially its principles.

1331 H St NW Suite 500
Washington, DC 20005
Ph: (202) 347-9388 | Fx: (202) 347-9389