Committee Name: Science and Energy CommitteeBill Sponsors:Ami Bera Purpose:A Bill:This bill is meant to abolish Capital Punishment, which is the legally authorized killing of a convicted criminal who’s committed an extremely atrocious crime that wouldn’t warrant a life sentence. However the death penalty system in the United States is unfair and unjust in many ways against certain people usually being largely dependent on the amount of their income, the skill of their assigned or paid attorneys, race of the victim and where the crime took place.Terms and Benefits:Be It Enacted By The Congress:Section 1: Capital punishment be abolished in all states of the United States of America.Section 2:Money used to provide capital punishment will instead be used for better equipping police officers to prevent other crimes from happening, nonviolently and accurately.Funding Provision:The costs of implementing the death penalty is much more expensive than a life sentence. Lethal injection alone costs around $2,000,000 for each case while keeping a person for life is prison is at least $25,000 a year.
As well as proper training and equipment to prevent cops in detanning a people of suspicion, violently. This money can be used to help pay for better equipment for police officers, helping to keep other criminals off the streets. This bill doesn’t call for funding but rather a redirecting of funding. Even keeping a person for 40 years in prison is only half that cost. Bill StatementArguments IN FAVOR OF the Bill: The court system cannot always be perfect, and there have been many cases in which innocent people have been convicted with capital punishment and were proven innocent with new evidence against their wrongful conviction. Since 1973, over 125 people have been released from death row because of this. The fact that system errors result in the deaths of innocent people is unacceptable. Whereas capital punishment does not leave room for mistakes, life in prison allows mistakes to be corrected.
Capital punishment is not an effective deterrent against crime. A study found that a state with no executions, a state with one execution, and a state with over 200 executions in the year 1989 and 2002 all had very similar murder rates. Because a state does not have capital punishment does not mean that a criminal will be more influenced to murder someone because they cannot be killed by the law. Life in prison is an equally, if not more, effective way of treating crimes than simply killing off the convicted felons. Arguments AGAINST the Bill (opposition research): A recent study by Kenneth Land of Duke University and others concluded that, from 1994 through 2005, each execution in Texas was associated with “modest, short-term reductions” in homicides, a decrease of up to 2.
5 murders. And in 2009, researchers found that adopting state laws allowing defendants in child murder cases to be eligible for the death penalty was associated with an almost 20 percent reduction in rates of these crimes. Bibliography”Costs of the Death Penalty.
” Costs of the Death Penalty | Death Penalty Information Center, deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty.”EDITORIALS: Preserving Independent Funding for Death Penalty Representation.” EDITORIALS: Preserving Independent Funding for Death Penalty Representation | Death Penalty Information Center, deathpenaltyinfo.org/editorials-preserving-independent-funding-death-penalty-representation.”Millions Misspent: What Politicians Don’t Say About the High Costs of the Death Penalty.” Millions Misspent: What Politicians Don’t Say About the High Costs of the Death Penalty | Death Penalty Information Center, deathpenaltyinfo.
org/millions-misspent.Muhlhausen, David B. “How the Death Penalty Saves Lives.” U.
S. News & World Report, U.S. News & World Report, www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2014/09/29/the-death-penalty-saves-lives-by-deterring-crime.
Liptak, Adam. “Does Death Penalty Save Lives? A New Debate.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 17 Nov. 2007, www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/us/18deter.html.