OPINION & EDITORIAL
Senator schemes for death penalty
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Robert Phansalkar:
- 'Think, Respect' does neither, preempts rational action (November 14, 2007)
- 'Taser this' editorial tame compared to past (October 2, 2007)
- Lawmakers' plan bigger problem than baggy pants (September 18, 2007)
- Right-wing judicial activism fault of liberal tactics (August 31, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Lawmakers twist Avery case for political, personal ends (November 29, 2005)
- Death penalty ineffective, expensive (September 4, 2006)
- Advise fairness in justice system (October 6, 2006)
- Death penalty demands certainty (December 2, 2005)
by Robert Phansalkar
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
State Sen. Alan Lasee, R-De Pere, has made it his annual contribution to the legislative docket, but this year's planned introduction of death penalty legislation is decidedly more ceremonious than in the past.
In the wake of one of Wisconsin's most publicized trials to date and just months after the state of Wisconsin voiced its support for the introduction of the death penalty into the state's retributive arsenal, Sen. Lasee is hoping to capitalize off the state's fear and apparent thirst for tougher punishment.
Despite the fact that most legislative minds, including Mr. Lasee, believe the measure is likely doomed to fail, according to the Wisconsin Radio Network, Lasee's introduction still plays politics with justice — a game that is as unethical as it is impossible to win.
When word came out that Steven Avery had been charged with murder, I, along with the rest of the state, was admittedly shocked. Avery, who was once released from prison after the Wisconsin Innocence Project helped to show he was falsely convicted of rape, was suddenly fingered for the death of a woman just a few short years later.
The setback for the UW-based Innocence Project has been significant, if only in public perception, most notably because of the heinousness of the crime and because of Avery's character and demeanor, which led many to question Avery's innocence of both this and the previous crime. Avery's gruff appearance and crass demeanor won him few allies in the Fox River Valley where he is from and was charged, and Sen. Lasee just so happens to represent part of that region. Knowing the trial's verdict was imminent and hoping to realize a lifelong ambition to execute Wisconsin's criminals, Mr. Lasee successfully placed the death penalty advisory referendum on this past November's ballot.
By playing politics with the fears of Wisconsin's citizens, Lasee's referendum passed with 55 percent of the vote, giving democratic weight to Lasee's annual call. However, by doing this, he has contributed to a greater problem in politics, where people are convinced not through reason, but fear and anger.
Steven Avery is an easy person to dislike. He comes off in a manner that screams "criminal," and given the recent trial verdict, perhaps that assessment of Avery's character rings true. However, even though Avery has been the subject of much scorn in the media, the real purpose of Lasee introducing the death penalty is not to target Avery and protect Wisconsinites — rather, it is to realize his lifelong ambition and punish future criminals in an incredibly severe fashion.
While many politicians play the game of using big events to help fuel legislation, few bills are as significant as the institution of the death penalty. In the balance is not simple dollars and cents, but rather the lives of people who, as the Innocence Project has shown, are sometimes innocent of these crimes.
However, Sen. Lasee sings a different tune, claiming his purpose in proposing this legislation is out of "duty," according to the Wisconsin Radio Network. Whom exactly this duty is to is unknown, but Lasee's introduction of this bill hardly looks like the actions of a principled man, rather a desperate one. Lasee's actions are fundamentally no different from introducing constitutionally threatening legislation in the wake of a terrorist attack, as he is playing with the emotions of Wisconsinites to further his own version of justice.
Simply put, the actions of our politicians must rely upon greater forms of logic and reasoning, congruent with our social, political and legal traditions or else the legislation and societal change that these actors so desire to see to fruition will be bankrupted by emotions that prove fleeting in the eyes of actual reason.
Lasee's introduction of the death penalty falls short of this standard, which will give credence to a different call from Wisconsinites: for reason.
Robert Phansalkar (rphansalkar@badgerherald.com) is a senior majoring in languages and cultures of Asia and political science.
Anonymous (March 27, 2007 @ 7:28am):
The death penalty is not the only item of our justice system that needs reviewed. We have to learn why we have the largest incarcerated population per capita in the world. Is the "war on drugs" just another imperialist scheme?
Anonymous (March 27, 2007 @ 7:29am):
There are more than enough people in the world and I do believe that criminals once shied away from killing because they didn't want to risk the death penalty. Now of course they're more likely to die of old age waiting for the penalty to be applied and death cells are far nicer than genpop.
The Avery case certainly shows how effective capital punishment COULD be in preventing recidivism.
Anonymous (March 27, 2007 @ 8:09am):
Except for the fact he was innocent the first time.
Anonymous (March 27, 2007 @ 9:40am):
Wow, Mr. Phansalkar. I hope that you bombed the LSAT that you were whining and complaining about back in September. Clearly you do not understand that correlation does not equal causation. Just because Wisconsinites are scared and infuriated at the failure of the Innocence Project does not mean that Senator Lasee wants to prey off of the emotions of the good people of the Badger State. Have you noticed that outside of Dane county and a few other outlying liberal outposts Wisconsin is a very CONSERVATIVE state? Perhaps this initiative is something that the "reasonable" citizens of this state actually want. Get your head out of your ass!
Anonymous (March 27, 2007 @ 10:30am):
So he's "scheming" because he's introducing legislation that reflects the wishes of his constituents, and of the majority of the state for that matter? And he tricked 55% of the stupid plebes into voting for the death penalty using unethical scare tactics right?
I used to be proud to call myself a liberal before I moved to Madison. "What problem could anyone have with an ideology that seeks only to help?", I thought. Then I met the arrogant, self-absorbed, over-entitled, selfish Madison "liberals", and it all became clear.
Now, speaking as a moderate who is opposed to the death penalty, I would ask that you muster up all the respect you can find in your body and try your very best to respect democracy and the wishes of those who disagree with you when you are in the minority. And grow up, please.
Dudley Sharp (March 27, 2007 @ 12:43pm):
Phansalkar majors in languages and cultures of Asia.
Interesting.
Asian countries are the most likely to have and impose the death penalty.
Mr. Phansalker, I strongly suspect they have the death penalty because they find it the most just sancion for some crimes and because they also find it to be a deterrent.
You know, I think Wisconsin folks are a lot smarter than you think they are.
I think they knew why they voted the way they did.
Reason supports the death penalty. Somehow, you cannot see this.
Anonymous (March 27, 2007 @ 2:03pm):
"Except for the fact he was innocent the first time."
Right, sure, but maybe just not proved guilty instead of actually innocent.
Anonymous (March 27, 2007 @ 2:13pm):
News Flash: Steven Avery was convicted of another crime concurrent to the rape that he was acquitted of. He was convicted in the murder case of a felon in posession of a firearm for a reason.
Anonymous (March 27, 2007 @ 2:21pm):
If there was a referendum on ___________, I guarantee that 51% would approve.
a) Cutting taxes to zero
b) Killing child molesters without trial
c) Banning Middle Easterners from planes
d) Eliminating the welfare system
e) All of the above
As a whole, we are a very backwards and ignorant society. Perhaps this is why our founding fathers formed a republic, rather than a strict democracy.
Anonymous (March 27, 2007 @ 5:16pm):
No, anonymous @ 2:13, he was proven innocent. As in proven. Steven Avery did not commit the rape he was charged with. The reputation of the Wisconsin Innocence Project should not suffer as a result of their freeing an innocent man, but it's tragic that that's what has happened.
I blame Steven Avery for that and should hope we all do better with our second chances.
Anonymous (March 27, 2007 @ 9:22pm):
2:03-- Didn't another man come forward and confess? That would mean that he wasn't just found "not guilty," but truly innocent.
And just because over 50% of the population wasn't to legitimate murder doesn't mean it's a good idea. If 50% of your roommates jumped off a bridge, would you do so too?
Anonymous (March 27, 2007 @ 10:15pm):
What is needed is a pre-cog pre-crime unit to jail people BEFORE they murder others!
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
