Long after pioneering the anti-death penalty movement more than a century and a half ago, Wisconsin could now see a public call for repeal of its 153-year-old ban when an advisory referendum appears on the ballot this November.

A recent poll by Research 2000, funded by WISC-TV, found 54 percent of potential voters would favor the referendum, while 39 percent would oppose.

State Sen. Alan Lasee, R-De Pere, authored Senate Joint Resolution 5 to put the referendum on the ballot and said an important distinction within the referendum is the mention of the support by DNA evidence.

"We put in the words about DNA evidence just to make the referendum clear wherever there was a possible question," he said. "The other reason it was important to include was because every single case where someone was found innocent, it has been through the use of DNA evidence."

Regardless of recent poll numbers, anti-death penalty organizations are confident Wisconsin voters will be against reinstating the long-standing ban, as the issue is not restricted to partisan bias.

"This is an issue that transcends party lines," Josh Morby, spokesperson for No Death Penalty Wisconsin, said. "Generally speaking, a majority of people oppose the death penalty."

The recently formed NDPW launched an informational website Aug. 21, the 155th anniversary of Wisconsin's last execution. Morby said the website lists a number of prominent public figures and organizations endorsing the anti-death penalty movement, as well as reasons to oppose overturning the ban.

"Enacting the death penalty does not deter crime, it costs more and it is not an effective tool," he said.

Lasee agreed the financial costs of enacting the death penalty are high, but said it is because of a flaw in the judicial system.

"The reason [the death penalty] is so expensive is because the appeals process is so long," he said. "And it appears to me [that] lawyers milk the system."

Lasee said he advocates a maximum limit of five years for the appeals process, which would "considerably cut costs."

But Sen. Jon Erpenbach, D-Middleton, said such cuts could have grave consequences.

"There's always the possibility that someone who is innocent will be put to death," he said. "I asked [Lasee] if he can guarantee no innocent person would die, and he said, 'Yes, I think so.' There's no absolute way of knowing."

Erpenbach said he advocates life imprisonment for those convicted of first-degree homicide, adding the non-binding referendum is "nothing more than political red meat" to turn out a certain political base.

And University of Wisconsin journalism professor Dhavan Shah said it is important voters seek out information to determine their own position on difficult "value conflicts," which are issues such as the death penalty that set up "conflicts between moral and ethical principles."

"Value conflicts involve complex legal, social and economic issues," said Shah, who specializes in political participation. "Reading the newspaper and reading columns that comprehensively discuss the issues are good ways to evaluate. There is not a lack of political information if you want to seek it out."

Erpenbach said that regardless of the outcome of the referendum, legislators will ultimately vote with their gut.

"Legislators should vote by their conscience," he said. "And if they don't, they don't have any backbone."

At this time, the death penalty is officially sanctioned in 36 states.