Trend Against Death Penalty Grows

posted Josh Goodman

There is new momentum against the death penalty in state government. Death sentences are declining, the New Jersey legislature passed a death penalty moratorium yesterday and a group of prosecutors is pushing a similar bill in California.

Most of the arguments about the death penalty haven't changed (Is it ethical?  Is it a deterrent?  Is it discriminatory?) So it is telling that legislative action in New Jersey came only after a report highlighted the financial costs of sentencing convicts to die.

The report, published by New Jersey Policy Perspective, said that the state, since 1982, has spent $253 million more on its death penalty system than it would have by sentencing prisoners to life in prison without parole. During that time, New Jersey didn't actually execute anyone, but the state's justice system piled up bills nonetheless.

No lawmaker would be so cynical as to say that an ethical decision as weighty as whether to put convicts to death should be based primarily on dollars and cents. It stands to reason, however, that if the death penalty is costing states money, the operative question ceases to be, "Is there a moral imperative against it?" and becomes, "Is there a moral imperative for it?" That shift in the burden of proof may be turning some policymakers against the death penalty.

Of course, if states wanted to save money, they could streamline their death penalty systems, cutting down on oversight and appeals. But, considering that more than 100 death row prisoners have been exonerated since 1973, and that Texas appears to have executed an innocent man in 1993, almost no one is willing to contemplate that option.

Comments

[Michael in Arlington]

California and New Jersey constitute a trend? I can't think of any American states that are less representative of mainstream American public opinion and governance. Maybe Hawaii. Until public support for the death penalty slips below 50%, I can't see this trend spreading. Gallup has been polling on public support for the death penalty since the 1930s and that support is now around 66% of Americans. In polling done in late-2004, even 54% of self-identified liberals were in favor! See this site for more detail - http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=23&did=1266.

When you have a "beltway sniper" and a "BTK killer" committing heinous crimes, and those crimes are covered in gory detail every night on every cable network, there will always be strong public sentiment in favor of the death sentence. Politicians may be finding novel arguments to justify their pre-existing opposition in states Josh identifies, but pols in middle America have never prospered by being considered "soft" on crime or criminals.

[Josh]

You are correct to note that most Americans support the death penalty and that California and New Jersey are not representative of the country as a whole. The development that seems to show a more national shift is that death sentences have dropped dramatically, going from 296 in 1999 to 96 in 2005.

To me, that shows that although jurors and prosecutors continue to support the death penalty in certain cases (in theory, every juror in a death penalty case is supposed to be open to ordering a death sentence), increasingly they are opting for life in prison without parole for convicted killers. Last year, Texas approved a law to allow juries to render verdicts of life without the possibility of parole, so that trend seems likely to continue.

[Michael Again]

Josh - Thanks for the response. One of the 2 legs supporting your argument just fell away. Not to toot my own horn, but I sounded fairly prescient in my first post, eh? Now, if California Dems fear how the issue might play in that leftish state, how far do you think such proposals would go in other states?

"SACRAMENTO — An effort to temporarily halt executions in California died in the Legislature on Thursday when majority Democrats grew concerned that the issue could tag the party's candidates as soft on crime in the fall elections"

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-death20jan20,0,555292.story?coll=la-headlines-california

On your point relating to courts and the number of sentences, I suspect there will always be judges and prosecutors who will have leeway to choose the punishment. Congress, of course, has tried to limit that discretion with mandatory death sentences for some crimes. But I'm not sure that explains the decrease you point to. Look at the drop in homicides from the early 90s through 2005. The number of US homicides has fallen from nearly 25,000 in 1991 (with a smaller population base) to 16,000 in 2002...probably less in recent years.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/totalstab.htm

It would be logical to conclude that this trend has a close correlation with the drop in death sentences. And, to take it a step further, I think the drop in crime and death sentences most likely has a good deal to do with the deterrent effect of the death penalty, don't you?