Feingold To Death Penalty: Drop Dead

Senator Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) reintroduced legislation Thursday to abolish the death penalty at the federal level. The "Federal Death Penalty Abolition Act of 2009" comes just after New Mexico governor Bill Richardson's decision to ban capital punishment in his state.

"I oppose the death penalty because it is inconsistent with basic American principles of justice, liberty and equality," Feingold said in a press release, which notes Richardson's decision and also that capital punishment is illegal in 123 countries around the world. The release says the practice puts the United States in some unseemly company: "In 2007, only China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan executed more people than the United States."

The full release:

FEINGOLD REINTRODUCES BILL TO ABOLISH FEDERAL DEATH PENALTY

Feingold's Longtime Effort Comes as New Mexico Repeals Death Penalty

Washington, D.C. - As momentum builds in states to abolish the death penalty, U.S. Senator Russ Feingold reintroduced legislation today to abolish the death penalty at the federal level. Feingold's Federal Death Penalty Abolition Act of 2009 would put an immediate halt to federal executions and forbid the use of the death penalty as a sentence for violations of federal law. The use of the death penalty has been questioned by a range of prominent voices across the country, recently repealed in New Mexico and New Jersey, and abolished by 123 countries around the world. Feingold's bill would stop executions on the federal level, which are part of a death penalty system that has proven to be ineffective, wrought with racial disparities, and alarmingly costly.

"I oppose the death penalty because it is inconsistent with basic American principles of justice, liberty and equality," Feingold said. "Governor Bill Richardson and the New Mexico legislature's action to abolish the death penalty in that state adds to the growing momentum behind ending the death penalty in this country. It is truly unfortunate that we are in a shrinking minority of countries that continue to allow state-sponsored executions."

Feingold is not alone in his opposition to the death penalty. A range of prominent voices have questioned the system in recent years, including former FBI Director William Sessions, former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, law enforcement officials and many others across the political spectrum. In 2007, only China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan executed more people than the United States.

In 2007, Feingold chaired a Senate Judiciary Committee, Constitution Subcommittee hearing on oversight of the federal death penalty that highlighted the lack of transparency at the Department of Justice in the decision-making process about the death penalty and continuing problems of racial disparities in the federal system. Also in 2007, the American Bar Association called for a nationwide moratorium on capital punishment based on its detailed study of state death penalty systems, which found racial disparities, convictions based on bad evidence, grossly inadequate indigent defense systems, and a host of other problems with the implementation of capital punishment in this country.

Feingold is not alone in his opposition to the death penalty. A range of prominent voices have questioned the system in recent years, including former FBI Director William Sessions, former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, law enforcement officials and many others across the political spectrum. In 2007, only China, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan executed more people than the United States.

In 2007, Feingold chaired a Senate Judiciary Committee, Constitution Subcommittee hearing on oversight of the federal death penalty that highlighted the lack of transparency at the Department of Justice in the decision-making process about the death penalty and continuing problems of racial disparities in the federal system. Also in 2007, the American Bar Association called for a nationwide moratorium on capital punishment based on its detailed study of state death penalty systems, which found racial disparities, convictions based on bad evidence, grossly inadequate indigent defense systems, and a host of other problems with the implementation of capital punishment in this country.

Comments

[arvay]

The misery that Bernie Madoff faces in his little cell for the rest of his life is key to this discussion. For those who want to use the death penalty to achieve punishment -- death is the end of suffering. Life behind bars is misery for most.

[Texas4Obama]

Feingold said: "I oppose the death penalty because it is inconsistent with basic American principles of justice, liberty and equality,"
----------­----------­----------­---------

Well if someone kills me then I want them to be executed and be as EQUALLY dead as I would be!

That to me is justice and equality ;)

[jatkins]

Justice and equality are a far cry away from state-sponsored murder.

[Just2stressed]

Ok, regarding my comment earlier where persons started with the, "how do you know the person was truly guilty, there are innocent people in prison".

KILL THEM, once there are undeniable proof....where the evidence is so clear and not circumstantial. Not all cases are like this, but say, a man is caught on camera shooting another person....This person has no reason to be left alive.

The economy would do somewhat better if we didn't have so many murderers to feed. Once they are convicted, they should not stay in prison for more than a year.

There are many cases out there where persons kill and the evidence against them merit them being put to death as soon as possible.

For those of you who want these people to live, you can go ahead and be technical. I remember an activist who was so caught up with the rights of criminals (murderers) and was always attacking the government - she later changed her tune and started advising the government, when her son was murdered.

[Deja Peterson]

you must be from texas.

[returnofthejedi]

The Economy would also do alot better if we didn't have Ceo's and their families to feed either.
Question..­..........­.What about the officers that shot unarmed Michael Bell 50 times. Should they be executed? I know you won't answer, but still.

[Just2stressed]

You know what, forgive me for my 'you are one of the protectors of murderers comment'....that was out of line...but, just don't get technical with me. Because I do think you understand the point I was trying to make.

[jatkins]

Oh the humor. You do realize that the main reason so many states are considering abolishing or halting the death penalty is because it costs so much more the life without parole?

[just4shiggles]

It is beyond me how anyone can honestly say that it's o.k. to kill another human being. No matter what horrible act someone committed, to kill that person for his act is only making matters worse. An eye for an eye will only leave the whole world blind. If it takes the argument that it costs more to put someone to death than to keep them imprisoned for life to change this awful law, I'm glad that they are finally seeing that.

[113]

Feingold is the man

[teron678]

Can't say which side I'm on .... If someone m.u.rde.rs my family ....... him spending his rest of life in p.ri.son will not be j.us.tice for me the same goes for him getting the d.eat.h p.en.al.ty ...

[joebloe]

I would understand the anger someone would feel towards a loved one's killer. But the reality is that innocent people have been sent to death row.

I would even more angry to find out that A)my loved one's killer had not been brought to justice and B)that another innocent life had been taken in the process.

[returnofthejedi]

Your right. The families of those innocent people might feel the same way about the government that put their innocent family member to death. The definition would be murder.

[teron678]

Can't say which side I'm on .... If someone murders my family ....... him spending his rest of life in prison will not be justice for me the same goes for him getting the death penalty ...

[mark hinkley]

At the same time that California put David Alton Harris to death, the first execution in decades, a murder trial was going on in New York. The victim was strangled and the defense was accidental death by rough sex. The man was convicted.

In California, the families of Harris' two teen victims had been made to wait over 14 years for an execution that would finally mean closure to their ordeal. Last minute appeals and stays prolonged their torment, and those poor people were reduced to howling for Harris' blood.

New York did not have the death penalty at the time. When the jury found him guilty, the judge sentenced him to life in prison without the possibility of parole. And the family of the poor girl walked out of the courtroom, drew a deep breath in front of the cameras and said, "Thank God it's all over."

Really, really, really, which outcome served the vicims better?

[tokenconservative]

Sorry dude, was it Gregg v. Georgia that made the dp constitutional? Thereby making this bill unconstitutional?

[joebloe]

Just because the Supreme Court found those cases to be constitutional does not necessarily mean that a law to ban federal executions would be un-constitutional.

[FogBelter]

Right on, Senator Finegold!!

The Death Penalty is a primitive ritual that legitimizes vengeance in the guise of Justice. With a Justice System as flawed and corrupt as we have in the United States, where Judges, DAs and Cops have all been found wanting of ethics and morality at one time or another, in a Nation where some States are willing to execute minorities or the retarded for the sheer pagentry of it ... there needs to be another way to punish the guilty besides a system where the accidental execution of an innocent is an acceptable byproduct.

Barry Sheck's "The Innocence Project" has already rescued 234 wrongfully convicted citizens from Prison, including a good percentage from Death Row. (www.innocenceproject.org/) so wrongfully convicted citizens on Death Row isn't a myth, and the bottom line is that the United States cannot murder the innocent due to Judicial incompetence or malfeasance.

Good for you, Senator Finegold.

[FogBelter]

apologies ... Senator FEINgold.

[Areyoume2]

Thank you America for regaining your sanity. I'm an aging ex-hippie and so many things that we'd gloriously said goodbye to - came back. WAR, for one - gas guzzling autos, for another and the death penalty. just say NO - Drop Dead to the Death Penalty, Halleluia (where was the Christian Right on that one???)

[brandnewstuff]

I love Sen. Feingold! He Rocks

[mark hinkley]

Little by little, the land of the free is catching up with the civilized world. Bless you, Senator Feingold.

[Beachrunner]

It's comforting to know that no matter how horrific the murder of a child may be, the perp will not have to worry about a similar fate. Three squares, a warm bunk, A.C., T.V., exercise, free medical care. Even conjugal visits!

[coogrr4u]

beachrunner , I'm glad you're comforted by your fantasies of prison life however unrealistic they may be, but I must ask , What percentage of wrongful execution would you also be comfortable with?

[Beachrunner]

Well, I'm comfortable with "no doubt about it." Plenty of witnesses, a video tape, DNA. Execution at dawn the day after conviction. Then the death penalty would be a deterrent.

Sorry, I have no percentage. But as things stand now, justice takes too long.

[PlaceboStudman]

Has anyone considered the argument that abolishing the death penalty could lead to vigilanty justice by those people who have been victimized and in a fit of anger rage and dispair seek out revenge, which would only end up increasing the murder rates in the long run?

No, death penalty is not a deterrant for those who are bound to kill out of greed and self interest, but it might be a deterrant for those victims who might turn to acts of vengence when they have been wronged