The Role of Governors in Correctional Reform

14 Views
admin
August 2, 2026
Law Enforcement

I served this country as both a Marine and a correctional leader. Though these roles differ, they share a common lesson: patriotism involves defending and mending the nation when necessary. As America marks its 250th birthday this year, discussions around freedom, security, accountability, and responsible governance will dominate the political scene. However, corrections often remain overlooked in these conversations because they don’t fit neatly on a bumper sticker.

Nonetheless, corrections are a governmental duty that cannot be ignored. At the end of 2023, over 1.25 million individuals were held in state and federal prisons across the U.S. This issue is not solely a federal one. It is an issue of state leadership, as governors manage systems that consume significant public resources, employ numerous correctional staff, and ultimately determine whether individuals leave prison prepared for society or more troubled.

In corrections, each incident, such as a suicide or escape, prompts policy tightening. This defensive approach results in stressed staff, warehoused inmates, and leaders who prioritize avoiding scrutiny over achieving measurable results. Such a culture teaches the government to ignore deeper issues. This is no strategy for public safety.

Corrections professionals are part of this culture, some treating inmates with dignity while others become desensitized or detrimental to safe facility environments.

During my time working alongside officers, wardens, nurses, counselors, chaplains, and administrators, I’ve seen dedicated individuals provide more than many recognize. Yet, the pervasive broken culture often wears people down, excusing poor treatment and altering their original beliefs.

The fundamental question is not about who manages prisons but rather what outcomes governors should require from these systems? Paying only for custody results in mere custody, while evaluating success based on inspections and media absence guides the system toward these limited goals. Silence becomes the norm if it is rewarded.

Governors should mandate outcomes that go beyond addressing problems conceptually. Many systems monitor essential measures like vacancies, assaults, and program participation. However, accountability remains essential. Governors should foster an outcomes-focused culture, supporting leaders and staff who reduce violence, improve retention, enhance treatment and education, fortify family connections, and prepare inmates for societal reintegration.

Besides logistical metrics, culture within corrections holds tangible weight. Culture defines whether staff feel valued, whether facility regulations seem fair, and whether the environment is calm or chaotic. I grasped this understanding when I managed a facility with diverse inmate populations. Listening to both staff and inmates led to redefined routines where safety and humanity coexist, resulting in staff retention and operational consistency without new academy inductions.

The lesson was straightforward: humanity is not a security threat. Its absence worsens conditions, and custody alone without improved outcomes merely delays potential future crimes. Governors do not need to campaign using slogans like “prison reform.” They can take meaningful action by launching pilot programs centered on outcomes in government facilities, partnering with nonprofits or private entities, or developing hybrid models ensuring government oversight remains intact.

Pilot projects should undergo evaluation through independent research, real-time data, and transparent results. Successful models that mitigate violence, promote staff retention, and facilitate inmate reintegration should be expanded. Conversely, underperforming models should be amended or ceased entirely.

Approximately 600,000 individuals exit state and federal prisons annually. The critical concern is whether they emerge more isolated and dangerous or poised to contribute responsibly and stop victimizing others. This is a matter of public safety, not leniency.

As voters consider candidates’ pledges on freedom and security, they should inquire about their plans for the correctional systems they already oversee. Continuation of existing methods yields unchanged outcomes. It is time for governors to explore and implement improved options.