Punishment is purple: The political economy of prison building
Open accessAbstract
The United States is unique among rich countries in the world in its level of contemporary mass incarceration, a massive social change that has reshaped the nature of inequality and social mobility. We have more than tripled the number of prison facilities since 1970. Despite employing nearly 450,000 corrections officers, occupying a land mass of roughly 600 square miles, and costing conservatively $30 billion to build, this massive public works project has transformed the American countryside virtually unnoticed, with nearly 70% of U.S. facilities being built in rural communities. We suggest that mass incarceration—more than 2 million locked up annually—was not possible without the transformation of the American countryside through the prison boom—the increase from roughly 500 to nearly 1700 carceral facilities. There is a longstanding belief that the rural town leaders and politicians responsible for the prison boom are almost exclusively white, male, Republicans. We explore the political, social, and economic influences of prison building across states, regions, and cities/towns. Using multilevel modeling, we find that racial and economic disadvantage predicts prison building in towns, and party affiliation of state legislatures predicts prison building across different periods of the prison boom. While others find a link between Republican Party strength in state legislatures and mass incarceration, our findings suggest that prison building, like other types of punishment…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The political economy of prison building is associated with racial and economic disadvantage but is broadly bipartisan, reflecting the expansion of carceral state politics across the political spectrum.
“John Eason and colleagues (2024) find that the political economy of prison building is associated with racial and economic disadvantage but is broadly bipartisan, reflecting the expansion of carceral state politics across the political spectrum.”
From The Rise of the Carceral State: Foundations and Contours of a Rapidly Changing Criminal Legal System (2025) · cites this paper as Eason et al. 2024
There is widespread evidence that racialized political frames of crime and punishment are entrenched today.
“there is widespread evidence that these political frames are entrenched today.”
From The Rise of the Carceral State: Foundations and Contours of a Rapidly Changing Criminal Legal System (2025) · cites this paper as Eason et al. 2024
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Rise of the Carceral State: Foundations and Contours of a Rapidly Changing Criminal Legal System
Wakefield, S., & Turney, K. (2025) · RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences · doi:10.7758/rsf.2025.11.3.04 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Eason, J. M., Campbell, M. E., Ghasemi, B., & Huey, E.
- Affiliations
- Brown University (US)
- Texas A&M University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Eason, John M
- Venue
- Punishment & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2024-01-02
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 967-983
- ISSN
- 1462-4745 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-3095
- OpenAlex
- W4390541773
- Cited by
- 10
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 7.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- Punishment & Society (publishedVersion)
- SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
- Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
- Social Sciences › Education › Education Discipline and Inequality
- Keywords
- prison buildings, mass incarceration, political economy of punishment, rural communities, state legislatures, political affiliation, racial disadvantage, economic disadvantage
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review