Proponents of prison privatization believe it is more cost-effective than State-owned and operated prisons, provides speedier facility construction, and operates under more flexible and innovative management. Although the cost savings of private prisons compared to public prisons cannot yet be documented, evidence of time and cost savings for prison construction is persuasive. Opponents of prison privatization argue that prison conditions will suffer as profiteers try to cut costs, but the States have not shown that they are capable of maintaining humane prisons. Also, private prison contracts can require the maintenance of a standard of high quality care and conditions. Opponents argue that it is immoral to profit from the imprisonment of others, but it is no more immoral than paying police to capture criminals or physicians to treat sick persons. Opponents also argue that private prison companies will develop powerful lobbies that will produce the expanded use of prisons and other correctional facilities. It is unlikely, however, that any lobbying group can prevail against strong public opinion. Privatization holds promise so long as the respective roles of the public agency and private contractor are clearly defined, quality standards are developed, and the privatization effort is carefully monitored by the State. 38 footnotes.