To Free the Truth

The death penalty is wrong for 3 reasons. First, it is bad philosophy. Killing a killer to prove killing is wrong does not make sense.  Second, it is bad politics. America’s standing in the International community is hampered because most civilized nations no longer permit the death penalty. And it is not practical. It costs more to execute defendants than to imprison them. The death penalty is bad morals, politics, and economics.

-Kenneth Michael White, attorney

In every uninformed capital punishment discussion I’ve ever read, heard, or jumped into, at least one person has made statements regarding the financial aspect of executing offenders. Most of the time it’s about not wanting to waste tax dollars housing inmates in jail for life. This is exactly how you know that it’s an uninformed discussion.

Anyone who has looked at the research regarding the death penalty can tell you that it costs hundreds of thousands more dollars at the least to prosecute a death row offender, have a separate trial for sentencing, go through the appeals process, and to house a death row offender than it does to put him in prison for life without the possibility of parole. This is why several states have recently begun to look at abolishment from an economic standpoint. With the latest financial catastrophe, many states are facing serious revenue problems and see abolishment as a possible answer. It’s an issue that every state should consider (and not just for economic benefit). Here are some examples:

The California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice estimated the annual costs of their death penalty system to exceed $130 million annually. To abolish capital punishment and replace death with life without parole, the annual cost projection is only $11.5 million. California could be saving over $100 million each and every year. Yet, this state refuses to fund community policing systems which are proven to reduce crime rates. Why? Government officials claim they have no money for it. 

The initial cost of a Federal capital trial is over $600,000 which is 8 times as much as a trial which avoids death and uses life without parole instead. This is only the trial and does not include cost projections for appeals and housing. Currently there are 44 inmates on Federal death row. Just considering those 44 people, the amount of money which could have been saved exceeds $23 million dollars. The fact of the matter is that there have been 162 Federal capital trials. The math here brings an astounding amount of money spent which could have been used elsewhere if life without were the punishment sought–over $85 million dollars on the trial alone. 

In Maryland, which just put strict limitations on imposing capital punishment, the costs to taxpayers for utilizing the sentence since 1978 will be $186 million more than life sentences would have cost. In cases seeking death, the average cost is 2 or 3 million more dollars than a non capital case. Just considering the 5 who have been executed and the 5 still waiting execution, that’s a savings, on the low end, of $20 million dollars. There were 106 cases in which death was sought but not used which have cost more than $70 million. 

New Jersey, which abolished last year, has spent more than $253 million since 1983, according to a Policy Perspectives report. No one was executed in the state during that time. That’s roughly $11 million annually that could have been spent elsewhere especially considering the sentence was never carried out. 

Tennessee death penalty trials cost taxpayers an average of 48% more than non capital cases. There are 102 people on death row in that state. 

A Kansas study found huge differences in costs. Investigation costs for death cases were 3 times as much. Capital trials cost 16 times non capital ones. Appeals in death penalty cases are 21 times greater. On the whole, capital cases are 70% more expensive averaging roughly $1.6 million while non capitals cost only $740,000. There are currently 9 on the row there.

Florida could save $51 million annually by eliminating capital punishment. Studies have shown that capital cases cost an average of 6 times the cost of non capital cases. 

Texas spends over $2 million on each capital case which is about 3 times as much as cases seeking life. With over 300 inmates on death row, the projected savings of a quarter billion dollars or so just on the cases which have ended in a death sentence translate into a lot of state revenue which could have been spent to more deserving programs such as those which attempt to protect citizens.

In each state utilizing capital punishment, the story remains the same. Millions of tax dollars are spent each and every year to kill inmates rather than put them in prison for life. Funds are pulled from education, crime prevention, other areas of corrections, and more. In Texas, other offenders only serve 20% of their sentences to pay for death. Florida has done the same; thousands of prisoners are released early every year. Inmates which rob, steal, injure, and even sexually assault others. Yet, we still believe political rhetoric. Each year, we hear about politicians who are taking a tough stance on crime. In doing so, they advocate death, death, and more death. And with this, they fool us. Advocating death as a measure of toughness is a ploy. The death penalty has yet to prove any sort of deterrence at all whatsoever. Study after study fails to show it as do statistics. Dollars are taken from programs that prevent crimes from ever occurring and are used in arbitrarily killing those offenders deemed worthy of receiving the needle–which can hardly be called fair, accurate, or balanced. There is no cost benefit. Instead, the dollars used to kill could be used to prevent victimization from the start. As Richard Dieter stated in his article, What Politicians Don’t Say About the High Costs of the Death Penalty, “In today’s depressed economy, the criminal justice system is breaking down for lack of funds while states pour money into the black hole of capital punishment expense.”

What we ultimately have is an extremely flawed system which focuses on punishment instead of prevention because death makes us seem tough. Politicians equate prevention with a soft on crime stance that is equivalent to political death. They would rather have, at the end of the day, our citizens be victimized so they may prove their intolerance of crime rather than propose our funds be used in alternative programs which protect us. And, people constantly fall for it. 

Unemployment rates are on the rise as we continue to see cutbacks–law enforcement and correctional guards are included in that. Criminals are back on the streets earlier and earlier. Taxes in local jurisdictions rise to meet the financial demands of a death trial. In order for our society to fuel it’s desire to kill in the name of, we end up with a great deal of unemployed, uneducated members who have no where to turn for help. Do I see a cycle being created here? Oh, yes. Yet, there is no benefit that counterweights this growing list of negatives. Not one–unless you count exacting a state sponsored revenge, an act of violence intended to counteract violence, as a benefit. 

Personally, I’m dumbfounded by the logic and I’d also much rather see my “tax dollars” being used to support someone in prison than to the drain that is capital punishment.