A recent edi­to­r­i­al in Pennsylvania’s Patriot-News rec­om­mend­ed doing away with the death penal­ty as a way to address the state bud­get cri­sis. Problems are entrenched in the sys­tem and giv­en its high cost, Pennsylvania should def­i­nite­ly put the idea of doing away with the death penal­ty on the table,” the paper wrote. Among the rea­sons cit­ed was the fact that the death penal­ty in Pennsylvania is essen­tial­ly a very expen­sive form of life with­out parole: In Pennsylvania, with the excep­tion of the three pris­on­ers who were exe­cut­ed, death row already means life with­out parole.… the major­i­ty of death penal­ty cas­es in our state that move through the appeals process end up as life sen­tences or less.” The edi­to­r­i­al also not­ed the risk of exe­cut­ing the inno­cent: Of course, there is a com­pet­ing rea­son, or real­ly a sound­ing alarm, that also is caus­ing more states to take a hard look at their death penal­ty. At least 139 death row inmates have been released after their inno­cence was estab­lished, includ­ing 6 in Pennsylvania. This should shake our confidence.”

The edi­to­r­i­al points to the costs of the death penal­ty in New Jersey, a state that recent­ly abol­ished the death penal­ty. That state spent at least $253 mil­lion on the death penal­ty between 1982 and 2007 with­out a sin­gle exe­cu­tion. These costs would like­ly be much high­er in Pennsylvania, which has the fourth largest death row in the coun­try with 220 pris­on­ers. Read full text below.

State could save by end­ing death penalty 

The state should look at cut­ting costs by doing away with the death penalty.

As Gov. Ed Rendell unveils what is expect­ed to be a tough bud­get this week, here is a mon­ey-sav­ing idea: Abolish the death penalty.

If Pennsylvania did, it would not be alone. More states are look­ing at a ban, many as they face tough economic realities.

New Mexico’s Gov. Bill Richardson, who was a long-time death penal­ty sup­port­er, signed leg­is­la­tion end­ing the prac­tice just last year, say­ing it would cut costs.

That came on the heels of New Jersey, which did the same in 2007, say­ing the cost was too high.

While there is no study in Pennsylvania on the over­all mon­ey spent on the death penal­ty, in New Jersey, research showed that from 1982 until 2007 the state spent at least $253 mil­lion and didn’t even exe­cute any­one for decades. The study exam­ined costs to prosecutor’s offices, pub­lic defend­er offices, courts and cor­rec­tion­al facil­i­ties among other items.

For the com­mon­wealth it is easy to spec­u­late the cost would be much more because our state has the 4th-largest death row in the coun­try — 220 prisoners.

Since 1976 though, only three peo­ple have been exe­cut­ed, two in 1995 and one in 1999. Compare that to the 22 who have died since 1988 of old age, ill­ness or sui­cide, and Rendell has signed 101 exe­cu­tion war­rants in the last seven years.

The state Corrections Department gives an aver­age tax­pay­er cost for each inmate as $33,237 a year. But the big rea­son the death penal­ty is so expen­sive is the extra­or­di­nar­i­ly high cost of pros­e­cut­ing cap­i­tal cas­es, includ­ing the appeals.

Some stud­ies say the price tag is as much as $2 mil­lion more for a pros­e­cu­tor to put some­one on death row than it would be to send some­one to prison for life.

Kansas last year looked at this issue as it faced a bud­get short­fall and deter­mined opt­ing for life impris­on­ment with­out parole instead of the death penal­ty could save the state more than $500,000 per capital case.

Most death penal­ty inmates can’t afford their own attor­ney so a defense is appoint­ed by a judge and paid by the state. Experts are hired to tes­ti­fy, inves­ti­ga­tions are con­duct­ed, mul­ti­ple legal pro­ceed­ings are held.

It all adds up.

Because the ulti­mate goal by the state is to put some­one to death, defense attor­neys say they put in mas­sive amounts of time, as they should, on capital cases.

Polls show a major­i­ty of Americans agree with the death penal­ty but when they also are asked whether they sup­port life sen­tences with­out parole for con­vict­ed mur­der­ers, a major­i­ty also say they do.

In Pennsylvania, with the excep­tion of the three pris­on­ers who were exe­cut­ed, death row already means life with­out parole. And accord­ing to the Death Penalty Information Center, the major­i­ty of death penal­ty cas­es in our state that move through the appeals process end up as life sen­tences or less.

Of course, there is a com­pet­ing rea­son, or real­ly a sound­ing alarm, that also is caus­ing more states to take a hard look at their death penal­ty. At least 139 death row inmates have been released after their inno­cence was estab­lished, includ­ing 6 in Pennsylvania.

This should shake our confidence.

As should the fact that the American Law Institute, which 50 years ago laid the intel­lec­tu­al and legal foun­da­tion that helped state leg­is­la­tors draft laws cre­at­ing a death penal­ty, has now come out against it.

The Philadelphia-based insti­tute with more than 4,000 lawyers, judges and law pro­fes­sors as mem­bers, has con­clud­ed it is impos­si­ble to admin­is­ter the death penal­ty con­sis­tent­ly and fair­ly and it should no longer be an option.

The insti­tute also talks about the high finan­cial cost of cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment for states.

While the institute’s new take on cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment has not caused a stir in the main­stream media, it was huge news in the legal com­mu­ni­ty and experts say it could even­tu­al­ly lead to the Supreme Court tak­ing a hard look at the death penalty.

Problems are entrenched in the sys­tem and giv­en its high cost, Pennsylvania should def­i­nite­ly put the idea of doing away with the death penal­ty on the table.

(J. Krebs (edi­tor, edi­to­r­i­al page), State could save by end­ing death penal­ty,” The Patriot-News, February 6, 2010.) See also Costs and Editorials.

Citation Guide