Nebraska state senators on Wednesday resoundingly turned down a proposal by Omaha Sen. Brenda Council to determine the costs of carrying out the death penalty in the state.Senators had opened the day debating repeal of the death penalty with a bill (LB306) that would substitute a sentence of life without the possibility of parole. In that debate, proponents talked about the need to know the costs of death penalty cases to Nebraska taxpayers.
Other states had figured out the costs, Council said. Nebraskans should know, too.
Kansas, for example, found the median cost for death penalty cases, through execution, was $1.26 million. The median cost for non-death penalty cases through the end of incarceration was $740,000.
It found investigation costs were 3 times higher for death penalty cases; trial costs 16 times greater, partly because of the length of trial; and appeal costs were 21 times greater.
The Kansas report stressed that actual cost figures for those cases in that state don't exist. No cases have completed the appeals process and resulted in executions.
A little more than 90 minutes into the repeal debate Wednesday, Council filed a replacement amendment to direct State Auditor Mike Foley to find and report on those costs.
Saying that she absolutely supported repealing the death penalty, and she didn't personally care if carrying out a death sentence cost nothing, Council said taxpayers needed to know the costs to determine if the state was wisely spending taxpayer dollars.
Capital punishment is the most inefficient use of tax dollars in fighting crime, she said. And if it's merely a matter of revenge, the state should not be engaged in that effort, she said.
Council's amendment required what she called a responsible and objective audit that would have included costs to the attorney general's office, the state Department of Correctional Services, counties where trials occur, public defenders, the Center for Public Advocacy, court-appointed attorneys, appeals courts and district courts.
Speaker Mike Flood said Council's amendment changed the debate and should have been introduced as a separate bill with a hearing.
Council maintains capital cases are enormously expensive and wasteful in a cash-strapped state that could use the money in more effective ways to keep the public safe.
Lincoln Sen. Danielle Conrad said the number of sworn officers in the Nebraska State Patrol has gone down from 525 in 2002 to 505 in 2009 and a proposed 488 this year. And the Nebraska crime lab needs more resources to overcome serious problems with the ability to carry out its role in investigation of crimes.
But some senators who support the death penalty said knowing the costs wouldn't matter to them or change their minds.
The state has the right and the duty to impose the death penalty for certain heinous crimes, said Flood, whose district experienced a capital crime in 2002 -- the murders of 5 people in a Norfolk bank. The "ringleader" in that crime, Jose Sandoval, was eventually convicted of killing seven people, he said.
Trying to compare costs of capital crimes with other murder cases doesn't make sense because cases are so different, Flood said.
The human costs of those crimes are just as important in deciding use of the death penalty, he said.
Supporters of Council's amendment said senators should never be afraid of information.
Council said there is discussion about others taking on the proposal to find out the costs, amending it and introducing it as a standalone bill.
Knowing the costs may not change minds in the Legislature, she said, but it might change minds among taxpayers.
Senators will take up the repeal bill again Thursday.
Source: Lincoln Journal-Star, January 20, 2010
No comments:
Post a Comment