The moral issue of whether the death penalty is right or wrong and its constitutionality, is beyond the scope of this paper. The death penalty already exists in 36 states, and given its existence it should be enforced. The problem that arises within the criminal justice system as it is currently written in the law books becomes the focus of this discussion. Since the United States Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1976, 36 States have legislated capital punishment statutes.(Capital Punishment 1992) All but 13 states and the District of Columbia have death as a sentencing option, including Alaska, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.(Norman 1) Since capital punishment is already in existence, the problem is that it is not enforced. This lack of enforcement translates into inefficient functioning of the criminal justice system.
Two reasons why the death penalty should be enforced are saved time, by the court system through limited appeals, and saved money, by taxpayers due to reduced court and imprisonment fees. Much of the court's time could be saved if death row inmates were limited to a set number of appeals in a reasonable amount of time. Facilitating numerous appeals results in many unforeseen costs. In 1992, expenditures on criminal justice activities by all federal, state, and local governments combined reached $299 per capita.(BJS) Ted Bundy's 10 year stay on death row, involving numerous appeals and excessive imprisonment fees, eventually cost the Florida state taxpayers more than $6 million dollars.(Lamar 34) These expenses are unnecessary and unjustifiable and could be alleviated by limiting appeals. In addition to this, public defense expenditures reached a startling $16.4 billion in 1990, which breaks down to about $7 per capita for each case tried in public defense costs alone.(Capital Punishment 1992) Although these figures are for total spending on public defense, it is easy to deduce that by limiting the number of appeals for death row inmates, these figures could be significantly reduced.
An automatic appeal has been instituted in 35 of the 36 death-penalty states in an effort to reduce the amount of time spent by the court's appeal system reevaluating capital cases.(Capital Punishment 1992) Mandatory appeals shorten the length of time spent on death row and therefore could not be considered cruel and unusual punishment, although some opponents of the death penalty argue that appeals themselves are a form of torture as they keep inmates on death row for many years. This argument is contradictory because they also assert that there is a possibility of executing an innocent person. With no appeal, the chance of freeing a falsely convicted felon is also decreased. They cannot make this argument because arguing against mandatory appeals in that they bog down the system defeats the purpose of their argument against killing an innocent person. There must be a balance between these concepts two and to argue one side or the other is illogical. Though this logic may seem twisted, mandatory appeals expedite the execution process, which is currently an average of 9 years and 6 months on death row before the sentence is carried out.(Capital Punishment 1992)
Use of the death penalty as intended by law could actually reduce the number of violent murders by eliminating some of the repeat offenders thus being used as a system of justice, not just a method of deterrence. Opponents of the death penalty will argue that although it is said to exist as a crime deterrent, in reality it has no effect on crime at all. Modern supporters of capital punishment no longer view the death penalty as a deterrent, but as a just punishment for the crime, a shift from the attitudes of past generations.(Norman 1) Previously the deterrence argument put the burden of proof on death penalty advocates, but recently this argument has become less effective due to what one source said, "...in recent years the appeal of deterrence has been supplanted by a frank desire for what large majorities see as just vengeance." (Dionne 178-180)
More timely enforcement of the death penalty would help to reduce the crime problem by instilling a sense of respect for the law in that sentences are more than words on a page. Crimes carry consequences which should be understood. This change in the ideology also would effect reduced costs. "One of the many problems with the death penalty is that it is anything but swift and sure..."(PD Chiefs: Death Penalty Fails) As in the case of Ted Bundy, the system fell down by allowing him to remain on death row for 10 years after murdering more than 50 women. The justice system cannot allow oversights of this type to occur. It is the responsibility of all Americans to take action to reform the current statutes regulating the death penalty and its execution.
2. "Capital Punishment 1992." 14 March 1992.
3. Cooney, Peter, "High court stays execution of death row inmate." 3 March 1994.
4. Dionne, E.J., Jr., "Capital Punishment Gaining Favor As Public Seeks Retribution." Corrections Today. August 1990: 178-182.
5. Lamar, Jacob V., "I Deserve Punishment." Time. February 1989: 34.
6. Norman, Jane, "Iowa remains on shrinking list of states without death penalty." The Des Moines Register. 4 September 1994: 1.
7. "PD Cheifs: Death Penalty Fails." 23 February 1995.