Beyond the Obama-Romney Duel: The Death Penalty Soon to Be Abolished in California?

On Nov. 6, Americans will choose their new president. They will also vote on Congressional representatives and a number of important ballot questions. In California, the abolition of the death penalty is at stake. A special report by Marie Brunerie, author of “Barack Obama Under Threat: Conservative America’s Drive to Conquer the White House.”’

We don’t hear much about it, but on Nov. 6, Americans are not just voting for their president and Congress. In addition to a number of local representatives, several ballot questions will also be put to a vote in all 50 states.

In California, for example, voters this year will vote “Yes” or “No” on a variety of different propositions, such as total budget reform (Proposition 31) and a measure requiring pornographic film actors to wear condoms (yes, that’s Proposition B,* and it’s up for vote!).

On Friday, everyone was talking about Proposition 34, which would eliminate the death penalty in the state and commute death sentences to “life in prison without the possibility of parole.”

Californians Are Changing Their Minds

A recent Los Angeles Times poll showed a shift in public opinion for the first time, with a six-point increase in opposition to the death penalty since September: 45 percent of California’s voters would vote “Yes” on the proposition (compared to 41 percent who would vote “No” to maintain the death penalty in the state).**

If the state’s voters do vote “Yes” on the proposition, California would become the 18th state to abolish the death penalty (following Connecticut in May 2012). Even though the last execution took place seven years ago, California’s death row is the most crowded in the United States: There are currently 724 prisoners on death row. 13 have been executed since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976 after a four-year moratorium (compared to the 308 prisoners on death row in Texas — though 472 prisoners have been executed there since 1976).

But the arguments being put forth by death penalty opponents are not those that we would first think of in Europe. Of course, those same arguments are put forth by those who wish to abolish the death penalty. That it is immoral and inhumane first of all: Out of 8,000 death row inmates in the United States, 16 percent have been executed since 1976 (close to 1,300). The possibility of judicial error, of course: The Death Penalty Information Center has counted 140 people who were sentenced to death only to be exonerated later, which brings to mind the case of Hank Skinner, who has been requesting DNA testing since 1994 in order to prove his innocence.

There is also a religious argument heard from anti-death penalty activists such as Sister Helen Prejean — known in France thanks to the Tim Robbins film “Dead Man Walking” with Sean Penn, which was based on her autobiography (Susan Sarandon played her in the film).

But these arguments are nothing compared to another, more critical one made this year in a state on the verge of bankruptcy, whose motto is “Eureka!”

The Economic Argument

Death penalty opponents have found their strongest argument in Fox News commentator Bill O’Reilly, a highly televised ultra-conservative who is usually not known for taking “liberal” positions. His argument? It’s the same one that won over the Californians who were polled this week: The death penalty costs too much, and the state of California would save immensely by shifting to life in prison.

The figures vary: According to the Death Penalty Information Center, death row costs the Golden State’s taxpayers $130 million. According to a study by the Ninth Court of Appeals, the state would save $185 million by abolishing it. Because, yes, life in prison costs less: $50,000 per prisoner per year, which is — according to the figures — between three and a half and five times less expensive than a prisoner sentenced to death (much higher legal fees, expensive imprisonment conditions, etc.).

Not a Campaign Topic

This Sunday, former president and Nobel Peace Prize winner Jimmy Carter published an unequivocal editorial in the Los Angeles Times: “Yes on Proposition 34.”

What do this year’s candidates have to say? It’s not a campaign topic. Obama has never taken a clear position on the subject; he simply states that he supports it for “extraordinarily heinous crimes,” but that it’s a subject of legitimate debate. Romney, meanwhile, supports capital punishment with appropriate safeguards to ensure that no errors are made. During his campaign to become governor of Massachusetts in 2002, he promised to re-establish the death penalty in the state (which had abolished it in 1984), without success.

On the one side, lex talionis — the law of retaliation: victims deserve justice; an eye for an eye! On the other, the law of economics: a dollar for a dollar. On the morning of Nov. 7, Californians and the 724 prisoners currently on death row will learn who won.

* Editor’s Note: The correct title is Measure B, not Proposition B.

** Editor’s Note: The author is somewhat inaccurate in her reports on the poll results: When asked initially, 42 percent of respondents said that they would vote “Yes” on Proposition 34, while 45 percent indicated that they would vote “No.” After those polled were informed of the proposition’s effects on the state’s financial situation and conditions for prisoners, 45 percent then said that they would vote “Yes,” with 42 percent indicating that they would vote “No.”