The Sentence Shall Not Be Death: But Why?

Washington State is now seriously considering abolishing the death penalty. The reason for the Legislature’s motivation matters.


THE WASHINGTON STATE legislature is now seriously considering passing a law that would abolish capital punishment in our state. Senate Bill 5372, and its companion House Bill 1504, would abolish the death penalty and instead mandate, for appropriate sentences, life without parole. The legislators who support this legislation believe it is not merely a fist in the air; for perhaps the first time the legislation has a legitimate chance of passing both legislative chambers and being signed into law by Governor Inslee.

This is not the first time our state’s legislature has tried to eradicate the death penalty: some version of the currently pending legislation has been introduced by a legislator several times before. But this year there is a momentum unlike during years past; this year there is something apparently crucial at stake: money.

State legislators argue that our death penalty is too expensive. It costs the state of Washington about $800,000 more to legally prosecute a death penalty case than a non-death penalty case. When our state is failing to make ends meet, the financial cost benefit analysis that favors eliminating the death penalty is certainly attractive. The money saved from prosecuting and administering death penalty cases would, for example, undoubtedly be better spent on such things as public education.

As beneficial as it would be for our state to dismantle its gallows (yes, Washington is one of two states that permits killing the condemned by “hanging by the neck until the defendant is dead”), there is something unsettling about the fact that mere dollars and cents offer the legislation’s best chance at success. Apart from any immediate budget concerns, there are compelling social, democratic, and human rights reasons for abolishing the death penalty that do not bend in winds of economic change.

For example, the death penalty provides very little, if any, social benefit. The death penalty does not deter crime as proponents claim: murder occurs much less in states that do not impose the death penalty than in states that do.

And it appears the fallibility of our justice system is too great to implement the irreversible penalty of death. The death penalty was declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1972, but the ban was lifted by the Court in 1976. Since then, at least 130 people have been released from death row after being exonerated by favorable evidence. These figures show that states have, undeniably, executed innocent people who were wrongly convicted.

Perhaps the most persuasive reason to abolish the death penalty is that states should not be permitted to grant itself the right to take a person’s life. State execution, as Albert Camus described it, is more than just a death; it is in fact a perpetuation of the same violent conduct that capital punishment is supposedly meant to prevent. Except that when a state kills a person it completes the act with ceremony and fanfare: in Washington State, the condemned who die by lethal injection are ritually strapped to a chair at the witching hour on the day of their death and placed before viewing witnesses that some may consider and example of morbid voyeurism.  

These are all convincing reasons that appeal to higher standards of moral justice that should motivate our legislators to abolish capital punish. And when it does occur, the reason our legislators abolish the death penalty will matter. Indeed, consider this: if the legislation passes this year, will the legislature revive the death penalty when our coffers are once again full and the added savings are no longer needed?

Our state – and our government at-large – should rise above the conduct it condemns and not sink to the same heinous level of murderers. That our legislators are motivated now more than ever to abolish the death penalty simply to save a buck is, well, almost criminal.


Trent Latta can be reached at TrentLatta@gmail.com.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

dexterjibs February 28, 2013 at 03:47 AM
Oh Pauline, I know you are not a simpleton like you comment implies. You know law makers don't write or read most of the bills that are introduced. It is partisan ideologues that attach themselves to politicians that dictate and write laws. The politican is the tool they use to introduce it into teh legislative body. Look at ObamaCare. Obama didn't write that, partisan hacks looking to destroy the US health industry wrote it.
employee February 28, 2013 at 04:09 AM
No, dex, Mitt Romney wrote "obamacare". Want a reference? A hyperlink or two?
employee February 28, 2013 at 04:14 AM
Dex, why do you have to call someone a derogitory name every time you post, thats kind of rude. Maybe people would be more inclined to agree with your crazy logic, if you stopped calling them simpletons, or libtards, ect, ect.
Edward A. February 28, 2013 at 08:07 AM
Ignore him. He thinks identifying him as a troll is "demonizing" him, but it is clearly the case, by his own admission, that he enjoys getting under peoples' skin. I think it is like basic sustenance to him, and I refuse to provide him with any, although he probably doesn't notice when anyone ignores him, because there are usually people willing to take the bait. If he ever manages to dial it back a few notches, tries to be civil and uses evidence-based arguments without continuously turning to ad hominem, I will stop ignoring him.
Pauline February 28, 2013 at 04:52 PM
OK, dex, I'll change my question: Instead of "which lawmaker has already written this bill", I'll ask you "WHO has already written this bill"? Semantics, yeah. You know darn well what the question was. So you seem to know the bill has already been written...I was just asking how you know this and who wrote it. And again, I'll predict that you will dodge and not answer this question, because there is no answer, because you were just making things up when you said the bill has already been written. BTW, if you continue to call me (and others) "simpleton" and "libtard" in your comments, I will continue to notify the Patch moderator that your comments should be removed.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »