Examining the Role of Governors in Correctional System Reform

Having served as both a Marine and a correctional leader, I learned that truly loving your country involves defending it when needed and repairing it when something is broken. As America marks its 250th birthday, candidates will discuss themes like freedom, safety, accountability, and responsible government. These discussions should indeed occur. However, the issue of corrections does not easily fit on a campaign slogan and is often ignored. It should not be dismissed. Corrections is a governmental responsibility. Governors cannot shift the blame to other entities.

The U.S. had over 1.25 million people in state and federal prisons by the end of 2023. This is not solely a federal concern. It is a significant issue for state leadership. Governors manage systems that consume large amounts of public funds, employ numerous correctional professionals, and influence whether individuals are rehabilitated or further damaged upon release.

Policies often tighten in response to issues in corrections. A suicide leads to stricter guidelines. The discovery of contraband restricts family contacts. Incidents of violence lead to reduced programming. Lawsuits increase oversight. Each decision might seem correct at the moment. Yet after years of tightening controls, the outcomes have been predictable: exhausted officers, overpopulated facilities, and leaders avoiding embarrassment instead of striving for results.

Corrections teaches government to avert its gaze. This is not a strategy for public safety. It is a method merely for surviving. Corrections professionals are embedded in this culture and must acknowledge it. Some treat people with respect despite challenges. Others harden with time, acting in ways that compromise safety and humanity.

I have worked with dedicated officers, wardens, nurses, counselors, chaplains, and administrators who have given more than most will comprehend. Yet I have also seen an unhealthy culture that wears people down, permits poor treatment, and teaches good individuals to accept conditions they once challenged. Instead of asking, “Who runs the prison?” it is more effective to ask, “What outcomes are governors demanding from this system?” Paying only for custody results in mere custodial care. If success is measured by inspections passed and avoidance of negative headlines, the system will focus only on these goals. Rewarding silence yields silence.

Governors should demand more than problem reports. Many institutions already monitor vacancies, assaults, use of force, program participation, and reentry needs. The crucial task is ensuring accountability. An outcomes-based culture must be cultivated, supporting leaders and staff such that reducing violence, improving retention, expanding treatment, enhancing family connections, and preparing individuals for release are prioritized. Cultural measurement is essential too. Culture affects whether officers feel appreciated, whether rules are equitable, and whether facilities are orderly.

I experienced this firsthand when managing a facility with four diverse populations. The old methods were insufficient. By listening to staff and incarcerated individuals, adapting routines, and valuing safety alongside humanity, retention improved. We went three years without needing a new academy. This was not miraculous—it was sound management. The lesson was straightforward: Humanity is not a security risk. Lacking humanity often increases danger within correctional contexts. Although secure custody and consequences remain critical, custody without positive outcomes merely delays future crimes.

Governors do not need to campaign on “prison reform” as a slogan. Instead, they can take practical actions by launching outcomes-based pilot programs within government facilities or via public-private partnerships. Such pilots should be evaluated through independent research, real-time data, and publicly shared results. Effective models that reduce violence and foster reintegration should be expanded. Ineffective models need improvement or discontinuation.

Approximately 600,000 people are released from state and federal prisons annually. We must consider whether they emerge more isolated and dangerous or prepared to live responsibly, reducing the chance of new victims. This is not about being lenient on crime; it’s a question of public safety. As voters evaluate candidates’ views on freedom and safety, they should inquire about plans for existing correctional systems. Repeating past methods will yield similar results. It’s time for governors to explore and develop better strategies.

Brian Koehn is CEO of Social Purpose Corrections and a former warden and security expert.