Executions in California cost $300 million each

[lionking]

http://www.theage.com.au/world/executions-cost-300m-each-in-california-study-20110621-1gdfu.html

EACH of the 13 prisoners executed in California over the past three decades has cost the state and federal governments more than $US300 million ($A284 million), a new study shows.
The study, by two senior legal figures, includes costs at both state and federal level in keeping 714 inmates on death row, as well as steering them through the tortuous judicial process all the way to the death chamber.

Not only that:

The average time between conviction and execution in California now stands at more than 25 years, double the national average.

Even if you factor in a three times fudge factor, that's still $100 million an execution. Does anyone want to rationalise this practice, as against incarceration for the rest of the offenders' lives? What's the point of justice delayed 25 years?

And please, no "a bullet costs a quarter" posts. We are talking about the administration of justice in a first world country.

 

[Travis]

In practical terms those on Death Row are simply going to have a life sentence.

 

[lionking]

In practical terms those on Death Row are simply going to have a life sentence.

Fine. So why the interminable and ultra expensive appeals then? Wouldn't the rational and cost effective solution be to sentence them to life? Is the requirement to satisfy those who want to "hang 'em high" worth such a cost?

 

[Undesired Walrus]

I've never understood why - when Florida suspended lethal injections when it was concerned that it was 'cruel and unusual' - capital punishment states don't just go for Nitrogen asphyxiation, which is cheap, quick and painless. The only explanation I can come to is that the latter is too merciful, which contradicts the stated desire not to execute anyone by 'cruel and unusual' methods.

 

[lionking]

I've never understood why - when Florida suspended lethal injections when it was concerned that it was 'cruel and unusual' - capital punishment states don't just go for Nitrogen asphyxiation, which is cheap, quick and painless. The only explanation I can come to is that the latter is too merciful, which contradicts the stated desire not to execute anyone by 'cruel and unusual' methods.

It's not the final despatch which is costly, it's the legislated requirement for appeal after appeal. Lock them up and throw away the key. Easy and much, much cheaper.

 

[The Don]

There are those who would argue cost is not too high, it's the number of executions that are too low

 

[Emet]

Fine. So why the interminable and ultra expensive appeals then? Wouldn't the rational and cost effective solution be to sentence them to life? Is the requirement to satisfy those who want to "hang 'em high" worth such a cost?

Surely you know enough about US policies and laws to know that we are often amazingly irrational when it come to the actual monetary cost of standing by our supposed principles, whatever they may be.

 

[WildCat]

"includes costs at both state and federal level in keeping 714 inmates on death row"

Does it cost more to keep someone on death row than in the other cells in the same prison? It's not like they'd be set free if they didn't get the death sentence. They would also be entitled to appeals, though not as many and not as automatically.

 

[casebro]

But what is the benefit ? The biggest would be deterrence. As an example of a place with no death penalty, take Mexico. And only kidnapping for ransome. Here, it is one of the few federal capital offences. We have very few of them happen. Mexcico, no death penalty for KFR, the offense is rampant.

As far an the number 714, how many of them are very permanent? Death row was full when an appeal made executions stop, back in the 70s? All those inmates, if still alive, are permanently on death row, with no chance of execution.

Also, we need to contrast the $300M with the cost of keeping somebody for life. There is a cost, why no comparison?

 

[Alt+F4]

California politics never made sense to me. The public cared more about stopping gay marriage then ending capital punishment, which is helping to bankrupt the state. What I don't get, and what the OP article and other articles about this study don't answer is why the people of California still want capital punishment?

 

[Lisa Simpson]

California is a microcosm of the country as a whole. The coastal areas are mostly urban and liberal (excluding my little corner of the state) and the interior parts are rural and conservative. I think it often leaves us with a mishmash of indecisive politics. As far as Prop 8 went, I think the people in favor of it (which would have kept gay marriage) did a really crap job and lost to the money machine that is the Mormon church.

Anyway, the state is broke and the governor and attorney general are both anti-death penalty, so maybe things will change.

 

[uk_dave]

But what is the benefit ? The biggest would be deterrence. As an example of a place with no death penalty, take Mexico. And only kidnapping for ransome. Here, it is one of the few federal capital offences. We have very few of them happen. Mexcico, no death penalty for KFR, the offense is rampant.

The UK has no death penalty and 'KFR' is not rampant.

Next.

 

[Alt+F4]

Also, we need to contrast the $300M with the cost of keeping somebody for life. There is a cost, why no comparison?

According to this story in the Los Angeles Times, since 1978 the added costs have been more than $4 billion.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-death-penalty-costs.eps-20110620,0,3801158.graphic

 

[Newtons Bit]

That's running about $170k/year. Though 714 inmates at $4 billion a year for 33 years. I doubt those 714 were there the whole time. So the true cost per inmate per year is higher.

California's proposed corrections budget for 2011-2012 is $9.2 billion and it houses about 170,000 inmates at about $54k a year.

 

[Spindrift]

But what is the benefit ? The biggest would be deterrence. As an example of a place with no death penalty, take Mexico. And only kidnapping for ransome. Here, it is one of the few federal capital offences. We have very few of them happen. Mexcico, no death penalty for KFR, the offense is rampant.

As far an the number 714, how many of them are very permanent? Death row was full when an appeal made executions stop, back in the 70s? All those inmates, if still alive, are permanently on death row, with no chance of execution.

Also, we need to contrast the $300M with the cost of keeping somebody for life. There is a cost, why no comparison?

Please provide evidence that the death penalty is a deterrent.

You have shown no connection between KFR and no death penalty in Mexico. In Mexico most of the people speak spanish and in the USA most speak english. Maybe it's the spanish language that causes KFR?

 

[Alt+F4]

Anyway, the state is broke and the governor and attorney general are both anti-death penalty, so maybe things will change.

Yes, Brown is anti-death penalty but says he won't push for abolition because, "he respects the will of the majority, which has shown strong support for the death penalty in the past."

However....

A 2010 Field poll showed that although 70% of the state's voters favor capital punishment, a slight majority said that if given a choice between imposing a sentence of death or life without parole in first-degree murder cases, they'd choose the latter.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinionla/la-ed-death-20110505,0,1877631.story

 

[Monketi Ghost]

If we can't use the bullet-costs argument, I'd just like to say that capital punishment is essentially state-approved murder.

"We'll murder you to show society that murder is bad" has never been a successful argument in the US. Is it a deterrent? Texas loves 'em some capital punishment... I assume criminals get the message and nobody gets murdered in Texas any more.

 

[BenBurch]

...
Does it cost more to keep someone on death row than in the other cells in the same prison?

Yes.

Substantially more.

Illinois started saving several million a year when Ryan cleared Death Row.

 

[I Am The Scum]

Well, you see, lionking, when someone takes a life, they forfeit their right to life.

Just don't ask me how I know that is true, because then the whole house of cards falls apart.

 

[cwalner]

Yes.

Substantially more.

Illinois started saving several million a year when Ryan cleared Death Row.

Interesting. I am assuming that this is a result of isolating said prisoners and additional security, but would be interested if anybody who actually knows why this is would care to comment.