Introduction

Six years after President Clinton signed legislation ending welfare as we know it, which replaced the unconditional entitlement to cash aid with temporary cash aid conditioned on work, it is ironic that there is one major group in society that still gets public support without a work requirement-prisoners. While our nation has made great strides in the last few years to move welfare recipients from dependency to work, surprisingly, we're moving in the other direction when it comes to transitioning prisoners to paid work. Fearing competition from prison labor, union and business interests have mounted an aggressive lobbying campaign to roll back paid prison labor, in spite of the fact that it can provide convicts with useful skills they can use upon release while at the same time helping to offset some of the cost of housing prisoners.

While the number of prison workers has increased over the years, only a modest share of state and federal inmates work at jobs for pay. There are approximately two million prison and jail inmates in the United States. The Federal Prison Industries (an arm of the Federal Bureau of Prisons) employs approximately 23,000 inmates out of a total of 157,000 prisoners. Approximately 65,000 inmates work in state prisons, but only 3,700 prisoners (in 36 states) are employed by private-sector companies.

Even though the number of prison inmate workers is relatively small (less than one-fiftieth of 1 percent of the civilian workforce), opposition to prison labor has been growing from affected industries and unions. Both groups not only actively oppose expansion of prison labor, but have supported legislation to dramatically restrict the programs run by Federal Prison Industries (FPI). Both argue that the current situation provides unfair competition. This view has gained increased credibility among policymakers, in part based on the inaccurate view that prison labor versus civilian labor is a zero-sum game and that growth in one comes at the expense of the other. Applying a growth economics framework, it is clear that expansion of prison labor can be good for the U.S. economy, increasing total employment and Gross Domestic Product (GDP), while not reducing private sector employment levels.

Just as Congress should not give in to protectionists on trade, they should not give in to protectionists on prison labor. There are three main reasons why Congress should expand, not reduce, prison labor. First, there is clear evidence that prisoner work requirements lead to lower recidivism. Second, the revenue from prison work can and should pay for the costs of housing them in prisons as well as victim restitution, child support, and the like. Finally, because it leads to increased production of goods and services, prison labor helps spur the U.S. economy. Notwithstanding the fact that prison labor can be good for both prisoners and the economy, the current FPI program is in need of significant reform. A new prison policy should:

• allow private sector companies to employ prisoners in state and federal prisons at least at the minimum wage to make virtually whatever product or service they want to and sell it to whomever they choose;
• lift federal restrictions on the interstate transportation of goods and services produced in state prisons;
• subject federal and state prison workplaces to Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) inspections;
• institute an FPI ombudsman program to investigate complaints by workers about unfair working conditions;
• extend the Trade Adjustment Assistance Act to cover workers displaced by prison labor; and
• mandate that all federal prisoners who can work do work, provided that work is available.