In the recently concluded mid-term polls, the gay-marriage referendum captured most of the publicity. However, another referendum was included on the back of the ballots. This advisory referendum asked Wisconsin voters whether or not the state should reinstate the death penalty if the case is supported by DNA evidence.
Wisconsin abolished the death penalty 153 years ago after using it a single time. This new advisory referendum on reinstating the punishment passed with a 55-45 percent majority. I didn't have a lot of knowledge about the issue, so I decided to do a little research on the merits and disadvantages of the death penalty to see how it held up under scrutiny.
Before I delve into some of the issues, I will say one thing. Morally, I have no problem with the state, in accordance with the wishes of the people, meting out the death penalty for certain crimes. Some crimes deserve the ultimate punishment. Whether the crime is premeditated murder or a particularly ugly series of rapes, I have little sympathy for these criminals and would gladly see them off on their way out of existence. That said, my search for information has shown some problems with re-establishing the death penalty.
Ideally, the judicial system is supposed to guarantee defendants a fair and unbiased trial to determine their guilt as well as their punishment. However, a number of disturbing statistics cast doubt on whether the death sentence has been used fairly. The first statistic I came across is from the American Civil Liberties Union's website. The article stated 80 percent of all capital cases involve white victims, while white victims make up only 50 percent of all murder cases. This seems to be a racial bias that holds up through several different sources. Although I have also seen the racial bias of the death penalty disputed, until the issue is resolved, the very existence of the dispute argues against reinstating the death penalty.
Another issue mired in dispute is the cost of the death penalty. Both opponents and proponents of the death penalty agree that the upfront costs of a capital murder trial are several orders of magnitude greater than that of a life without parole trial. The debate becomes heated when the long-term costs of imprisoning inmates for life without parole versus executing them are considered. Here, there are some important things to keep in mind. The average stay on death row seems to range from 10 to 20 years, depending on the state. This usually costs more than a general prison cell, adding to the expenses. The cost of life without parole is more difficult to determine. Depending on the age of the offender and how long the offender's lifespan is, the average cost of housing an inmate for life could vary greatly. Opponents of the death penalty contend that this cost is lower, while proponents say it's higher.
Throughout my search for information on the cost of the death penalty, I was not able to find completely conclusive information. However, Wisconsin Attorney General Peg Lautenschlager recently wrote in an opinion piece for The Capital Times, "The implementation of the death penalty would cost Wisconsin taxpayers millions of dollars." It's obvious that just building the necessary infrastructure could cost enormous sums of money to say nothing of the future cost of actually litigating the cases. Without more information, it's hard to recommend implementing a sentence that costs significantly more money for the same effective result.
Finally, the issue of deterrence is often a factor in death penalty debates. Today, it seems clear that the death penalty has little to no effect on crime rates. Because only first-degree or capital murder cases allow the death penalty as an option in most states, this should not be a surprise. Individuals committing crimes other than premeditated murder are not going to receive the death penalty. Hence, they are not going to be deterred by it. One of the primary purposes of punishment for crimes is deterrence, and without that the debate about the death penalty comes down to a comparison of the cost of the death penalty versus its emotional value.
Without more information about the death penalty, no hasty action should be taken. Before any proposal to reintroduce the death penalty is made, the Legislature should commission a study to determine the costs of implementing the death penalty. Personally, I feel that the uncertainty over its cost effectiveness, and the possible bias present in the system render the death penalty unworkable. Even with DNA evidence to prevent errors, the death penalty may not be the best solution for Wisconsin.
Andrew Wagner ([email protected]) is sophomore majoring in computer science and political science.
