Moore cited studies indicating cost savings. He also reported that 58 percent of the private settings that are 3 years old or older are accredited under American Correctional Association standards, compared to 8 percent of government facilities. He also noted that court rulings declaring that private corrections officers lack limited liability, as in the case of sheriff's correctional deputies, create a positive situation of more accountability. Moore conceded that private companies have made some errors, but that the privatized approach offers quicker and better solutions when problems occur. He concluded that the issues of quality, accountability, cost savings, and employment security are all resolved with positive results under the continuing trend of privatization. Dawe expressed concern about the financial incentive that private providers have in holding prisoners longer and cutting back on the numbers and training of staff. He agreed that the government could be more efficient in certain areas. He emphasized the dangerousness of the corrections officer occupation, the areas in which technology cannot replace personnel, and the risks resulting from turnover among private officers. Other concerns included inadequate background checks, brief training periods, legal issues related to private facility authority and immunity, and flaws in cost studies cited by proponents of privatization. Another concern was the relationship formed between private corporations, lobbyists, and government leaders. Photographs