The California state election is coming, and this year there is a host of propositions up for Californians to decide.
One of the most controversial measures on the ballot is Proposition 34: “Death Penalty. Initiative Statute.” The measure proposes replacing capital punishment with life in prison without the possibility of parole.
There are two main parts to the proposition. The first proposes that the highest penalty for criminal acts—death—will be replaced with life imprisonment and work, but without parole. A portion of the money prisoners make working will be deducted, and those deductions will be used to pay for victim restitution costs, such as services for people or businesses that were hurt due to their crime. These restitution fees include medical bills, repair of damaged or stolen property and attorney bills.
The second part of the law says it will give $100 million to the law enforcement agencies of California to help solve homicide and rape cases.
This law would be applied retroactively to the 726 inmates currently on death row in California, making it so that there will be no more executions in California if it passes.
The death penalty has been legal in California since 1872. It has been calculated by Judge Arthur Alarcon that the death penalty has cost California over $4 bi llion since 1978, when it was reinstated after a brief period illegality from 1972-1977, when courts ruled that it was a cruel and unusual punishment.
There have only been 13 executions since then, with none since 2006 due to a court case questioning the safety and humanity of lethal injection, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. It is estimated by Alarcon’s study that the death penalty will save the state up to $130 million.
According to the DPIC, if this law is passed,Californiawill be the 18th state without the death penalty.
So far the campaign funding has been leaning greatly toward the side supporting the repeal of the death penalty, with almost $7 million raised, while the supporters of the death penalty—opposition to the proposition—have raised fewer than $500,000 as of Oct. 14, according to KCET, a California broadcasting station.
According to the Huffington Post, opponents to the proposition have gone from a 13 percent lead to only three.
-Joe Sunde
Chris Bernstien / November 4, 2012
Prop. 34 proponents are perpetuating a huge FRAUD against California voters, knowing that with the millions of out-of-state dollars they can repeat their lies enough times that voters will begin to accept them. A Study by Judicial Watch concludes that Prop. 34 is “both disingenuous and deceptive.” Three former CA governors and every major law enforcement group in CA OPPOSE Pro. 34.
Pro. 34 is dangerous, will cost taxpayers more, and was poorly thought through.
Prop. 34 will NOT save money, but instead COST TAXPAYERS BILLIONS of dollars more in additional trials, prison changes, and escalating health care costs.
Claims that Prop. 34 will save money are based upon a paper written by a former judge who has been advocating for abolishing the death penalty for decades (biased and inaccurate). A review of these numbers by the Legislative Analyst’s Office concludes that the assumptions supporting these claimed savings “may well be wrong.” Michael Genest, former State Of California Finance Director, found that these “savings claims are grossly exaggerated.” Also, the loss of the threat of the death penalty will substantially increase the total number of murder trials by taking away a major incentive for murderers to plead guilty.
Prop. 34 ignores the escalating costs of medical care for life-time inmates. Prop. 34 will cost CA taxpayers billions more over the next several years. (It is these huge medical costs that are fueling the attack on life sentences under 3-strikes under Prop. 36.)
Prop. 34 is DANGEROUS. Experts conclude that Pro. 34 will increase the number of murders in California. Criminals will be more brazen in their crimes without the death penalty. Also, there will be no deterrent for the 34,000 inmates already serving life from killing a guard or an inmate. They are already serving the maximum penalty.
One of the key methods for “saving” money under Prop. 34 is to move death row inmates into the general population and house them from single-person cells with other inmates. One strong proponent of Prop. 34 admits this is unworkable– the risk of danger posed by mixing the prison population is too great, and would increase costs associated with such an arrangement.
Life without parole is means they WILL GET OUT. Efforts are already being pursued by the same people supporting anti-punishment ballots and legislation to get rid of life sentences. (Human Rights Watch, Old Behind Bars, 2012.) On 9/30/12, Brown passed the first step, signing a bill to allow 309 inmates with life sentences for murder to be paroled after serving 25 years. Someone who has committed a brutal murder at age 20 could get out by age 45! Governors are also notorious for releasing inmates who should never be released. Convicted killers get out and kill again, such as Darryl Thomas Kemp, Kenneth Allen McDuff, and Bennie Demps.
ARGUMENTS OF INNOCENCE BOGUS. Proponents can’t identify one innocent person executed in CA. They can’t identify one person on CA’s death row who has exhausted his appeals and has a plausible claim of innocence. Quite simply, CA’s appellate process, designed by the very same people promoting Prop. 34, is 100% effective in weeding out the innocent. Every person Prop. 34 proponents refer to are either non-death-penalty cases or out-of-state cases where defendants do not get the benefit of CA’s appellate process.
Don’t get fooled by the bombardment of lies. See cadeathpenalty.webs. com and voteno34. org for more facts explaining why you should NOT SUPPORT Prop. 34.
/