Adam Bedau and Paul G. Cassell (2004) reference the cost of the death penalty in the State of Texas, which is also a state with the highest numbers of executions under the death penalty. Bedau and Cassell cite information that says the initial trial of a death penalty case, that is a case where the death penalty is a penalty option, is approximately two million dollars per case more than those cases that do not involve the death penalty in Texas (101). These costs, though specific to Texas, are reasonably no less expensive for other states that try cases where there is an imposable death penalty.
If the difference for the states is about room, the total number of people on death row at a given time is insignificant as compared to the overall prison population. It would hardly seem that a prison with as many fourteen people on death row might be causing prison overcrowding if the death penalty were eliminated. Additionally, if we save two million dollars per death penalty case by not imposing the death penalty, then there is certainly enough money saved to build extra prison lifetime incarceration housing units.
Brian W. Kappler (2000) raised questions about individual states, electing to keep the death penalty, but to circumvent the length of time, and, therefore, the cost of maintaining death row prisoners, but reducing the number of appeals and reinventing the appeal process for death row inmates (467). This has created a number of cases to be heard by, or that have been heard by the Supreme Court for violations of Habeas Corpus (467). The processes for establishing a shortened route to the death penalty is no doubt...
That the states would reinvent the argument for Habeas Corpus, which is important and an essential legal right to all people coming before the
judicial system for any reason; is almost more frightening than the death penalty. You must, however, give states like Arizona credit for trying please its voters with the death penalty, and a low cost execution (467).
The cost of the death penalty is such that, according to some sources, is enough to house 1.5 times the prison population by the time an execution takes
place. The housing of just the people on death row alone could save the states millions of dollars, and, given the likelihood of natural death which would cause the people on death row to die around the average of 70 years of age, the savings alone is worth it.
It would be great to see, even if we do not eliminate the death penalty, thus saving the taxpayers millions more in current, future, and ongoing death penalty arguments; if the states would simply not impose it - it could be there for some case that was so significant - like trying the anti-Christ - that it would make the cost and execution one worth investing in.
Works Cited
Bedeau, Adam and Cassell, Paul G., Debating the Death Penalty, Oxford University Press, (2004).
A www.questiaschool.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5001761330
Kappler, Burke W. "Small Favors: Chapter 154 of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, the States, and the Right to Counsel." Journal of
Criminal Law and Criminology 90.2 (2000): 467. Questia. 15 Dec. 2008 http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5001761330.
Patterson, Krista L. "Acculturation and the Development of Death Penalty Doctrine in the United States." Duke Law Journal 55.6 (2006): 1217+. Questia. 15 Dec. 2008 http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5018256017.
