Summary
Criminal justice policy should be judged like any large public investment: by what it buys. States spend tens of thousands of dollars per prisoner each year, yet most people released are rearrested within five years. The strongest evidence favors certain, swift accountability plus education, job training and reentry planning that reduce repeat crime.
Why should a business-minded citizen care about criminal justice?
Because the goal is public safety and taxpayers are paying for it. Every repeat offense means a new victim, a new investigation, a new court case and often another prison stay. The key question is not whether a policy sounds tough or lenient, but whether each dollar leads to fewer victims. That standard fits both conservative and progressive priorities.
What does incarceration cost taxpayers?
The Vera Institute of Justice surveyed 45 states and found that prisons cost them just under $43 billion in fiscal 2015. The average annual cost per incarcerated person was $33,274, ranging from $14,780 in Alabama to $69,355 in New York (Vera Institute of Justice, The Price of Prisons, fiscal 2015 data).
| System | Average annual cost per person | Source |
|---|---|---|
| 45-state average (FY2015) | $33,274 | Vera Institute of Justice |
| Federal Bureau of Prisons (FY2024) | $47,162 ($129.21 per day) | Federal Register, 2025 |
| California state prisons (2025-26 budget) | $127,800 | California Legislative Analyst’s Office |
How often do people return to the system?
The Bureau of Justice Statistics followed people released from state prisons in 34 states in 2012. It found that 62% were arrested again within three years and 71% within five years, and 46% went back to prison within five years for a new sentence or a supervision violation (BJS, 2021). Age mattered a great deal: 81% of people released at 24 or younger were rearrested within five years, compared with 61% of those 40 or older.
Do education and job training in prison reduce crime?
The best-known evidence is a RAND Corporation meta-analysis funded by the U.S. Departments of Justice and Education. According to RAND (2013), people who took part in correctional education had 43% lower odds of returning to prison than those who did not. Employment after release was 13% higher among participants, and people in vocational training were 28% more likely to be employed. On cost, RAND estimated that education cost $1,400 to $1,744 per person, while re-incarceration costs were $8,700 to $9,700 lower for each participant. That works out to $4 to $5 saved for every $1 spent over the first three years after release. RAND noted that more research is needed on which programs work best, so I would expand only those that show measured results.
What have red and blue states learned?
Texas
In 2007, state budget analysts projected that Texas would need about 17,000 more prison beds, which would cost at least $2 billion to build. The legislature turned down a $523 million request for new prisons and operations. It spent $241 million instead on more capacity for substance abuse treatment, mental health treatment and intermediate sanctions. The Council of State Governments Justice Center (2009) reported net savings of $443.9 million for the 2008-09 budget period, and parole revocations to prison fell 25% between 2006 and 2008.
Georgia
Georgia had the highest probation rate in the country, with 1 in 17 adults under supervision. In 2017 it passed a law that focuses probation officers on the first two to three years of a sentence, when people are most likely to reoffend. People on probation for a first offense can have their term cut from an average of five years to no more than three, but only if they follow every condition, have no new arrests and have paid all restitution (CSG Justice Center, 2017). It is a clear example of an early-release incentive tied to accountability to victims.
California
California’s prison population rose to a peak of more than 173,000 in 2006. After the 2011 “realignment” law and a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on overcrowding, it fell to about 90,600 by December 2025, and several prisons have closed (Public Policy Institute of California, 2026). Even so, the cost per person is still the highest in the table above. Shrinking the population does not save money on its own; facilities must be consolidated and spending focused on the most dangerous people.
What has the First Step Act shown so far?
The First Step Act passed the Senate 87-12 and the House 358-36 and was signed on December 21, 2018. It created a risk-and-needs assessment for federal prisoners and lets eligible people earn time credits by completing programs shown to reduce recidivism. The Justice Department’s June 2024 annual report counted 44,671 people released under the Act’s various provisions as of January 2024. It said their recidivism rates were lower than national averages, but it warned that the figures are not directly comparable to standard recidivism studies. For people whose main conviction was a drug offense, 10.2% had recidivated. The early results are promising, and I think an independent evaluation with a proper comparison group should come next.
Why does employment after release matter to employers?
A steady job is one of the strongest protections against reoffending, and many employers need workers. The Prison Policy Initiative (2018) estimated that formerly incarcerated people had an unemployment rate of 27.3% in 2008, compared with 5.8% for the general public. The federal Work Opportunity Tax Credit lets an employer claim up to $2,400 for hiring a qualified person within a year of a felony conviction or release from prison (IRS). But Congress has typically extended the credit a few years at a time, and the IRS guidance covers workers who start by December 31, 2025. That uncertainty makes it hard for employers to plan. Fair-chance hiring, which considers a record later in the process and asks whether it is relevant to the job, leaves the final decision with the employer.
How do we keep victims and policing at the center?
Reform that forgets victims will not last, and it should not. In 2024 there were 23.3 violent victimizations per 1,000 people age 12 or older, but only 11.2 per 1,000 were reported to police. Victims got help from a victim service provider in just 8% of violent victimizations (BJS, 2025). The research on deterrence is clear: the certainty of being caught is a far stronger deterrent than the length of the punishment, and focused strategies such as hot-spots policing work (National Institute of Justice, 2016). Solving more crimes and supporting the people harmed by them are core parts of reform, not side issues.
What I’d prioritize
- Fund investigations, crime labs and victim services so more crimes are solved and more victims are made whole, including through restitution.
- Expand correctional education and job training that has been evaluated, and publish the results each year.
- Make early release depend on completing programs, following the rules and paying restitution.
- Require independent, comparable evaluations of First Step Act outcomes.
- Give the Work Opportunity Tax Credit multi-year certainty and encourage fair-chance hiring practices.
- Put the money saved by avoiding prison construction into treatment, policing and reentry, as Texas did with treatment in 2007.
Frequently asked questions
Is criminal justice reform soft on crime?
It shouldn’t be. The best-supported reforms increase the chance that offenders are caught, tie early release to earned progress and restitution, and cut repeat offending. The goal is fewer victims.
Does prison education really save money?
RAND’s 2013 meta-analysis estimated that every $1 spent on correctional education saves $4 to $5 in re-incarceration costs over three years. Participants were also more likely to find jobs.
Is this a partisan issue?
No. Texas and Georgia pursued major reforms, California cut its prison population sharply, and the First Step Act passed the Senate 87-12 and the House 358-36.
Sources
- Vera Institute of Justice, “The Price of Prisons: Examining State Spending Trends, 2010-2015” (fiscal 2015 data): vera.org
- Federal Bureau of Prisons, “Annual Determination of Average Cost of Incarceration Fee (COIF),” Federal Register (2025): federalregister.gov
- California Legislative Analyst’s Office, “How much does it cost to incarcerate an inmate?”: lao.ca.gov
- Bureau of Justice Statistics, “Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 34 States in 2012: A 5-Year Follow-Up Period (2012-2017)” (2021): bjs.ojp.gov
- RAND Corporation, “Evaluating the Effectiveness of Correctional Education” (2013): rand.org; press release: rand.org
- CSG Justice Center, “Justice Reinvestment in Texas” (2009): csgjusticecenter.org
- CSG Justice Center, “Georgia Governor Signs Bill to Strengthen Probation and Increase Public Safety” (2017): csgjusticecenter.org
- Public Policy Institute of California, “California’s Prison Population” (2026): ppic.org
- U.S. Department of Justice, “First Step Act Annual Report” (June 2024): bop.gov
- U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote 271, 115th Congress (2018): senate.gov; House Roll Call 448 (2018): clerk.house.gov
- Prison Policy Initiative, “Out of Prison & Out of Work” (2018): prisonpolicy.org
- Internal Revenue Service, “Work Opportunity Tax Credit”: irs.gov
- Bureau of Justice Statistics, “Criminal Victimization, 2024” (2025): bjs.ojp.gov
- National Institute of Justice, “Five Things About Deterrence” (2016): nij.ojp.gov