Privatized
Parts (with apologies to Mr. Stern)
By Noel Shank
Privatization is basically taking what are traditionally governmental
services and contracting them out to private companies. This
has proved a bonanza to politicians who, wanted to reward their
big business contributors, portray themselves to voters as "cutters
of wasteful government." Overall expenditures will probably
remain the same or rise, but the slight of hand involved in taking
people payroll works politically. For decades, government assistance
programs and government employees in general have been derided-so
public outcry is often muted even when services and local economies
decline.
Probably the best known privatizer of public services in Halliburton.
For the first time in American history, private contractors are
providing a great amount of food, supply, and other services
for the armed forces, including armed mercenaries who fight (and
die) providing security for those missions. All at vast cost
overruns, but hey, the military looks lean and mean to the public.
My guess is that millions are diverted "off the books," and
who will know the difference?
In Kansas, as in many states, private prisons are a growth industry.
With the crackdown on crime in the last few decades, and mandatory
sentencing, inmate populations have soared. The prison contractors
locate in small towns with stagnant economies, promising new
jobs and community growth. And, the jobs probably WILL pay more
than is usual in those areas. $10 per hr. is not bad wages in
some parts of Kansas. Private prisons are not bound by civil
service rules governing state employees' pay, benefits, and hiring
practices. They hire as few people as possible, pay as little
as possible, as they can get away with. Safety of the guards,
the townspeople,
and the inmates themselves is of secondary importance. Thus,
another characteristic of privatization-human needs are disregarded
in order to have a good financial bottom line. I have a relative,
a young woman, who works as a prison guard to support her young
children. She had worked in a state prison, but changed to a
private prison for slightly higher wages. She is now concerned
about the lack of safety stemming from understaffing, but she
needs the job. She says they are now hiring, when they do hire,
people off the street for $10 per hr, with little training to
deal with all types of convicts, violent and non-violent.
I don't know about you, but if I lived in a prison town, I would
prefer professional, well-trained guards!
Also in Kansas, an outfit called Maximus took over a great deal
of the Medicaid program. They are in a lot of states, providing
various services that once were done by government employees.
In Kansas, they took over a program that was covered very well
by local states offices, and centralized it in Topeka, at enormous
additional costs. A whole new bureaucracy was created, privately
run but with government money. Services to the actual customers
fell off, and are still not at the same level. People once called
their local caseworker if they had a problem-now they call a
voice mail system, pick a menu option, and often never speak
to a real person. The problem is still so bad that when people
who have given up trying to get Medicaid through the centralized
office come in to a local state welfare office, workers at the
local office are mandated to process the application, then transfer
the case to the Maximus office, where credit for the work is
received, and payment made, to Maximus. Pretty good trick, getting
a contract to do government work, then getting what is left of
the government staff actually do the work. A state caseworker
I know in Topeka gave a customer the phone number of the Maximus
worker who was supposed to handle her case. The caseworker got
a blistering e-mail from the Maximus worker, saying she was not
to give his number to the public. Meanwhile, the local state
welfare office takes in and processes applications, even though
the Maximus office is right there in Topeka-because the Maximus
office is not open to the public they are supposed to serve!
Of course, I realize that public sector workers are not always
the best, and private companies are not inherently costly and
inefficient. In the real world, however, the process of privatization
is drearily familiar-private business treats government funding
as slush money, to be used however they see fit. I think this
stems from 2 factors: the first, a lack of accountability on
the part of the private contractors. Unlike owners and stockholders,
who demand a return on their investments, taxpayers have no way
to hold private companies accountable for their expenditures.
Secondly, the inherent conflict of interest of having state politicians
and officials awarding contracts to companies that may in the
future be able to reward those same officials with lucrative
jobs creates a reluctance and inability to properly supervise
those contracts. When a state employee makes a mistake, a legislator
or official can hold him accountable. When that same employee
works for a private company, there is not the same direct command
and control.
So, what can we as citizens do? Well, unlike the national level,
I believe that state politicians are still more reachable, and
sensitive to, the voters. We the public need to pay attention,
demand good service from our state and local governments, and
question them when our friends and neighbors who are government
employees are let go and replaced by a private company. It's
up to us, I guess. No white knights, no superstar heroes, just
us.
|