A Journal Gazette editorial makes the economic case against the death penalty. They start out by saying that the victim’s family has a pretty simple interest, revenge. It goes on to say, “And if justice were based on visceral reactions to crime, then the death penalty would make sense. However, American justice has moved beyond an eye-for-an-eye order of punishment. If we did live in such a place, then all punishment would be based on the extreme margins of cruelty.”
But, the editorial argues, it’s cheaper to incarcerate an inmate for life than it is to execute him. Why should budgetary concerns affect every other part of government but not the death penalty.
Let’s face it: The state doesn’t get much out of executions. The deterrence argument is dubious, as is the notion that it’s better for the public’s safety.
As for costs, the state and counties spend on average $741,000 over 16 years to execute a 30-year-old offender sentenced to murder, according to the Legislative Service Bureau. The figure includes jail costs, prosecutor’s and defender’s fees from murder trial through appeals, and execution costs.
It costs states and counties $622,000 to lock the same person up for life, estimated to be 47 years in prison. That includes appeals, which aren’t automatically triggered as they are in death penalty cases, as well as health care costs. It costs $506,000 to imprison someone sentenced to 65 years with a 50 percent reduction for good behavior.
The money saved could be redistributed to the juvenile justice system, victim’s assistance, offender re-entry schemes, grassroots police programs and social service agencies that work with at-risk youth.
The money and resources saved by ending the death penalty would have a more profound effect to the greater good of Indiana than executing murderers.
My personal objection to the death penalty ties into the economic argument, I suppose. Based on the Illinois investigations and the horror stories I hear coming out of Texas, I’m not altogether convinced we have a great system to make sure we are 100% accurate on our death penalty convictions. Ensuring greater accuracy would involve greater expense. (From a moral standpoint, if our system is able to ensure the accuracy of the conviction, I have no qualms about the State killing murderers.)
And, I have one possible nit to pick with the editorial’s selection. They base their cost structure on 30 year old murderers. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that most murderers would be younger than that. Seems like most violent crime is committed by those in their teens and early twenties. But, maybe it takes awhile to work their way up from mere violent crime to actual murder.
As for costs, the state and counties spend on average $741,000 over 16
years to execute a 30-year-old offender sentenced to murder, according
to the Legislative Service Bureau. The figure includes jail costs,
prosecutor’s and defender’s fees from murder trial through appeals, and
execution costs.
Leave a Reply