By In 1978, California voters chose to reinstate capital punishment. Since then, only 13 inmates have been executed, costing the state a massive $4 billion, or $308 million per inmate. Enforcing capital punishment is a messy, complicated issue with constant delays in the form of appeals, dwindling finances and unmotivated, underpaid lawyers. The last California execution took place in 2006 and lags have taken up to 17 years — nearly twice the national rate.
Recently, objections have been raised concerning the method in which lethal injections have been administered within our state. So, with no executions scheduled anytime in the near future, it’s time for California to reevaluate the system altogether. Whether we sharpen the focus on what makes a capital crime, delegate more money for capital lawyers or abolish capital punishment altogether, changes need to be made in order to stop the system from being such a drain on the California budget.
United States 9th Circuit Judge Arthur L. Alarcon and Loyola Law School professor Paula M. Mitchell — who studied local, state and federal costs of capital punishment over the course of three years — found that capital trials — including enhanced security and legal representation for death row inmates — added an additional $184 million to the budget every year. That’s nearly $200 million a year toward a system that essentially keeps inmates in a waiting room for an indeterminate amount of time while they argue — unsuccessfully — for their freedom.
If the capital punishment system were more efficient, perhaps the ends would justify the means. But, capital punishment is anything but efficient, and in order to save some money, we should consider tweaking the system to encourage maximum effectiveness.
In their study, Alarcon and Mitchell discussed three options for amending the capital punishment system. The first option would continue funding capital punishment, allotting an additional $85 million to fund courts and capital lawyers. Considering we’re already deep in the hole in California and wasting money on slow-moving trials, this seems like the least effective way of fixing the problem.
A second option would reduce and revise what constitutes a capital crime. In California, crimes that are eligible for capital punishment are perjury, treason, first degree murder with special circumstances (poisoning, use of explosives, gang affiliation and 36 other offenses) and train wrecking resulting in a person’s death. According to Alarcon and Mitchell, reducing the amount of crimes punishable by death would save the state $55 million a year.
All in all, it’s a reasonable effort to fix the system. Reducing the amount of death penalty-eligible crimes obviously means less money spent on trials, but the appeals guaranteed to the convicted would still be a monetary drain. The final option outlined would abolish the death penalty completely, saving California $1 billion every five to six years. Speaking solely in terms of saving money, this is the best option, but it doesn’t hold for those who are in favor of capital punishment. In the study, Alarcon and Mitchell contend that capital punishment, in its current form, only exists “in theory” and without proper reform will continue to hurt us financially.
It’s a complicated issue, with people feeling passionately on either side of the debate. Clearly, though, leaving the capital punishment system as it is will lead to more unnecessary and wasteful spending.
Back in the 70s, Californians voted for a system that would effectively punish those convicted of capital crimes. Instead, they’ve had to watch billions go to waste as we leave inmates sitting on death row for years.
Failing to reform the capital punishment is hurtful to the California economy and insulting to those who have had to watch billions go to waste over the past three decades.
Simply put, California can’t afford to not make changes.
Disclaimer: The Daily 49er is not responsible for Postings made on www.daily49er.wpengine.com. Persons commenting are solely responsible for Postings made on this website. Persons commenting agree to the Terms of Use of the website. If Postings do not abide by the Rules of Conduct or Posting Regulations as listed in the Postings Policy, the Daily 49er has all rights to delete Postings as it deems necessary. The Daily 49er strongly advises individuals to not abuse their First Amendment rights, and to avoid language suggestive of hate speech. This site also encourages users to make Postings relevant to the article or other Postings.
