The recent Field Poll con­duct­ed in California indi­cat­ed that more vot­ers now pre­fer life with­out the pos­si­bil­i­ty of parole instead of the death penal­ty for con­vict­ed mur­der­ers. For the first time since the poll began ask­ing the ques­tion over a decade ago, more vot­ers (48%) say they would pre­fer that some­one con­vict­ed of first-degree mur­der be sen­tenced to life with­out parole than the death penal­ty (40%). Eleven years ago, only 37% of respon­dents favored the life sen­tence and 44% pre­ferred the death penal­ty, a 15 point change in the spread. Field Poll direc­tor Mark DiCamillo said that vot­ers are far more skep­ti­cal of the death penal­ty now than they were twen­ty years ago: There has been a change in atti­tude,” he said. Twenty-two years ago, the death penal­ty side argu­ment pre­vailed by a large major­i­ty — now vot­ers are divid­ed in their opin­ions on many state­ments, includ­ing the cost of death ver­sus life in prison, does a life sen­tence actu­al­ly guar­an­tee they will stay in prison, whether inno­cent peo­ple are exe­cut­ed, and their views of how it is admin­is­tered to the eth­nic pop­u­la­tion.” A recent study in California found that main­tain­ing the death penal­ty costs tax­pay­ers $184 mil­lion a year more than if the state’s con­demned killers were kept in prison for life.

A new effort has been launched to replace the death penal­ty with a sen­tence of life with­out parole through a bal­lot ini­tia­tive in 2012. The mon­ey saved would be used for fight­ing crime. The Field Poll was con­duct­ed in ear­ly September and had a mar­gin of error of 3.2.

(M. Lagos, Field Poll: Less vot­er sup­port for death penal­ty,” San Francisco Chronicle, September 29, 2011). See Public Opinion.

Citation Guide