Wasting Money on a Ineffectual Policy

The Supreme Court this week upheld Kentucky's use of lethal injection, rejecting the claim that it violates the Eighth Amendment's cruel and unusual punishment clause.

At issue was not the constitutionality of lethal injection applied by 35 of the 36 states that apply the death penalty, but rather the chemicals used, the training of those that administer, the quality of the medical supervision, along with the consequences should any error occur.

Too bad this latter concern is not proactively given a higher priority as it relates to the death penalty in general. Between elected official's politicizing and our primordial thirst for revenge, little thought is given to the consequences should any error occur.

The current Supreme Court debate centered on how to administer capitol punishment, but seldom does such discussions include how much this insane policy is costing the taxpayer.

According to a report released by the ACLU, California taxpayers pay at least $117 million annually at the post-conviction level seeking execution of those on death row, translating to $175,000 per inmate per year. The ACLU report estimates the execution of all inmates currently on death row or waiting for them to die naturally -- which for most is the case -- will cost California an estimated $4 billion.

Moreover, after one factor that death penalty trials cost at least $1.1 million more than non-death penalty trials, the conservative estimate concludes that California counties spend roughly $22 million per year more seeking execution than life without the possibility of parole.

The combined state and county costs could pay the salaries of 2,250 CHP officers. Since 2000, Alameda County has spent $14.3 million on 13 death penalty cases, enough to pay for 31 experienced teachers during the same period.

But instead of debating the rationale of such cost, under the current climate the best that can be hoped for is to trim away some of the excess fat, which, in political speak, invariably means reducing the number of appeals for those convicted.

What is it about issues like the death penalty and war that makes it permissible to spare no expense? At a time when resources are desperately needed to repair the state's visibly crumbling infrastructure, the possibility of eliminating the death penalty because of the documented return on investment is underperforming is unimaginable.

One of the biggest criticisms about the current system is its length. But not much is mentioned about what it would require to shorten death penalty cases -- very simply more money.

A faster moving process would require more attorneys, more judges, and more staff support. While much has been made of DNA testing to enhance the accuracy of the guilty; DNA doesn't find nor test itself, which would require the hiring of more DNA experts.

Natasha Minsker, Death Penalty Policy Director, ACLU Northern California, states: "Our culture is too focused on revenge rather than solving problems on the front end; and politics is a huge part of this problem."

The combination of politics and revenge work in tandem to blind the public of certain realities. The tough on crime rhetoric, notwithstanding, recent homicide conviction rates leave much to be desired.

The ACLU report also indicates that only 5 of the 10 most aggressive pro-death penalty counties in California solve more than half of the murders committed. In Alameda County, that number reduces to 26 percent.

We have within our ability to guarantee that convicted murderers can stay in prison until they die. But we are currently left with two dreadful choices: spend even more money on death penalty cases or stay the current course.

But to stay the course, we sacrifice resources that could go toward policing or quality education, which is still the best remedy for preventing homicide.

According to Fight Crime: Invest in Kids of California, if we increase high school graduation by 10 percent it prevents 500 homicides. Seems like a small price to pay to do away with an expensive barbaric and ineffectual policy.

Byron Williams is an Oakland pastor and syndicated columnist. He is the author of "Strip Mall Patriotism: Moral Reflections of the Iraq War." E-mail him at [e-mail] or go to his website, byronspeaks.com