Video: Rell Follows Through
With Veto, Maintains Death Penalty
by Christine Stuart | June 5, 2009 4:39 PM
Posted to State Capitol
By the time they convened the press conference Friday afternoon, opponents of the death penalty were too late. Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell had already vetoed the bill, which would have abolished the death penalty.
“The death penalty sends a clear message to those who may contemplate such cold, calculated crimes,” Rell said in her veto message. “We should not, will not, abide those who have killed for the sake of killing; to those who have taken a precious life and shattered the lives of many more.”
Rep. Gary Holder-Winfield, D-New Haven, the bill’s main proponent, said he met with Rell last week to talk about the issue. He said that although he is not surprised, he is disappointed by her veto message.
He said when they met for about a half-hour last Wednesday they both agreed that the death penalty was not a deterrent. However, she specifically cited it as such in her veto message.
“There is no doubt that the death penalty is a deterrent to those who contemplate such monstrous acts,” Rell wrote in her veto message.
Ben Jealous, president and CEO of the NAACP, said he came to Connecticut Friday with hope that he would have an opportunity to change the governor’s mind. But by the time he had an opportunity to speak with her, Rell already had vetoed the bill.
“She took umbrage when I compared her state to Texas. I told her it’s colder here, but the numbers don’t lie,” Jealous said, referring to the disproportionate number of minorities on death row and the disproportionate number of death row inmates prosecuted in Waterbury.
Andrew Schneider, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, testified earlier this year that seven out of 10 of Connecticut’s death row inmates are African-American or Latino, whereas only 9 percent of Connecticut’s population is African-American and 10 percent is Latino.
Jealous opined that these men are being killed because of place and race.
“There’s no way to make the death penalty more fair,” Jealous said. “You’re spending millions of dollars killing the killers that you’ve already caught.”
Death penalty opponents vowed to continue the fight, even though the legislature does not have the votes to override Rell’s veto.
Speaker of the House Chris Donovan, D-Meriden, said he was impressed with Holder-Winfield’s efforts to get the bill passed this year and would consider it for a veto session, but conceded that getting 11 more votes in the House would be a tough sell.
He said the last time the House voted in the death penalty there were only 60 votes in favor of abolition. This year the bill passed the House with 90 votes. The Senate voted 19-17 to abolish the death penalty. In order to override a veto the House would need 101 votes and the Senate would need 24 votes.
While Rell did speak with Jealous and met with Holder-Winfield, Ben Jones, executive director of the Connecticut Network to Abolish the Death Penalty, said she did not meet with the murder victims’ families who are in favor of abolishing the death penalty.
Jones said when they first approached the governor about a meeting she was “too busy with the budget.” Then, when he called a second time, she was considering it. But when he called Thursday he was told “the governor doesn’t have to have a reason” for not wanting to meet with the families.
Holder-Winfield said that is extremely disappointing because he would have yielded his time with Rell to the victims. He said the governor owes it to the people of the state to give this issue the same kind of consideration she claims to give all the bills that reach her desk.
The two co-chairmen of the legislature’s Judiciary Committee sent a letter to Rell Thursday asking her that if she vetoes the bill to submit a proposal which makes the current system more workable.
“She disagrees with Dr. Petit, who along with a number of legislators have suggested that the current law is in fact unworkable,” Rep. Michael Lawlor, D-East Haven, said Friday.
In 2003 a report on the death penalty commissioned by then Gov. John Rowland concluded that the only real way to speed up the death penalty process would be to provide more resources to the state’s prosecutors and to the court system.
However, Lawlor suggests that Rell is doing the exact opposite by having her budget office order the prosecutors not to spend the money in light of the recent budget crisis.
“I believe that the current law is workable and effective and I would propose that it not be changed,” Rell said in her veto message squarely addressing the invitation by the two lawmakers to make her own recommendations.
Despite the passionate opposition to the governor’s veto Friday, she seems to have public opinion on her side.
A recent Quinnipiac University poll found that 61 percent of state residents supported the death penalty rather than replacing it with life in prison without parole.
A staunch supporter of the death penalty, Dr. William Petit Jr. thanked Rell for her veto Friday. Petit’s wife and two daughters were brutally murdered in their home in July 2007.
“I want to thank Governor Rell for her moral courage and clarity to stand up for what is right and just with her veto of the bill to abolish the death penalty,” Petit said. “The death penalty is the appropriate just and moral societal response to those who commit capital felonies.”
Comments (27)
Posted by: Janet Hladky | June 5, 2009 5:15 PM
Wow. Texas!
Posted by: Gannon | June 5, 2009 5:16 PM
I'm so disappointed in Gov. Rell... not surprised, though. She fights like hell for the status quo.
I am so glad that Rep. Gary Holder-Winfield is in the legislature. He will no doubt have a bright future in this state!
And for those 90 & 19 who went on record to oppose the death penalty, knowing the bill would be vetoed, well done.
Posted by: ACR | June 5, 2009 7:24 PM
Our current "death row" amounts to solitary confinement and/or protective custody.
Without the death penalty those individuals could be placed with the general prison population *and* without fear of the death penalty, other criminals would I suspect quick dispatch child killers and the like to their `final reward'.
Undoubtedly in a fashion for more horrifying and painful than the lethal injections they could have had.
It worked out for Jeff Dahmer and it is for those reasons that I oppose the death penalty.
Posted by: Vincent Merola | June 5, 2009 8:46 PM
Nice article.
Hate to bring up the religion aspect, but I would have thought Rell's Episcopalian background would have prevented her from this veto. -Thou shall not kill????
Posted by: iBlogWestHartford | June 5, 2009 11:15 PM
"The death penalty sends a clear message to those who may contemplate such cold, calculated crimes."
The governor is right on this one. I live next to Route 84. Out my kitchen window, I can see a steady stream of cars driven by future-murderers, would-be-murderers, murderers-for-hire, guys who wish they could strangle their boss, guys who will someday in the not-too-distant future discover their wives in bed with another man, and even one large, hungry-looking chimpanzee -- ALL heading for Massachusetts.
Posted by: susan barnes | June 6, 2009 5:02 PM
"Despite the passionate opposition to the governor's veto Friday, she seems to have public opinion on her side.
A recent Quinnipiac University poll found that 61 percent of state residents supported the death penalty rather than replacing it with life in prison without parole"
Are our senators and representatives not supposed to "REPRESENT" the will of the people? Regardless of one's personal point of view, my own included, I thought this is how a democracy is supposed to work. 61% seems a pretty solid majority.
Posted by: Jennifer | June 6, 2009 8:51 PM
Vincent:
The original translation is "thou shall not MURDER"-i.e. the unlawful taking of a life. Execution is state administered and legal and not murder. In any case the death penalty is not about "religion".
Gannon:Wow, guess you have not heard him in person-not very well-informed nor articulate. Good luck.
ACR makes a valid point. The state (taxpayers) pay for their defense and personal cells-often to the tune of several million dollars. Victims can collect maybe 25-50,000 if they fulfill all the state's requirements and forms and the legislature is trying to decrease this funding and increase the funding for criminals.
Posted by: Bill | June 7, 2009 7:50 AM
There are many reasons to have a death penalty law. It helps prosecutors with plea bargaining in murder cases. Justice is usually represented by balance scales and it serves as the only justice in heinous crimes such as the Petit case. It helps prevent victims family from trying to extract revenge themselves if they believe the system will work. To those with religious objections, self defense or in the defense of others is allowed by most religions. The death penalty is societies self defense since it deters murder. Laws don't stop all crime but they stop some. It may be hard to quantify but even even it saves one innocent life it is still a deterrent.
Posted by: bunker | June 7, 2009 8:23 AM
There is only one reason the death penalty is NOT a deterrent and that is because it is not used often or swift enough.
Posted by: City Hall Watch | June 7, 2009 9:10 PM
Holder-Winfield is on the wrong side of this issue.
Voters in CT support the death penalty. Why do legisators vote against our wishes? Second, Ben Jealous takes a cheap shot by comparing CT to TX. If Jealous knew anything about TX, or if he knew anything about CT for that matter, he wouldn't make that comparison. It is clear he knows nothing of either. Jealous might best focus on changing the name of his organization to something more relevant and politically correct, quit supporting descrimination against other groups of Americans and quit using the color of skin to excuse poor performance on tests.
Posted by: iBlogWestHartford | June 7, 2009 9:18 PM
William,
Killing a killer provides little, if any, defense for the victim who is already dead (I know I'm going out on a bit of a limb there . . .)
And on Planet Earth, as well as in Connecticut, it has been proven that executions do NOT deter murderers. You may THINK they do, but that's only because you are wrong.
As for your point that "execution prevents victims' families from themselves killing the murderer," well, so do the police.
Finally, William, I think that if we put to death every resident of Connecticut, it would probably reduce the state's murder rate. Do you recommend this policy?? To save a single life??
Cheers!
Posted by: Rep Holder-Winfield | June 7, 2009 10:47 PM
Iblogwesthartford:
Coming to a different conclusion than the voters does not necessarily indicate that one is ignoring them. We are not simply supposed to reflect the voters otherwise we would legislate by poll. When a legislator sits through the public hearings and goes through the deliberative process on the floor they sometimes earn things that the general public may not know. It is our job I believe, and a difficult one at that, to take that info back to the public.
Where the death penalty is concerned if you look at the polls internals you will find that 15 percent believe it to be a deterrence and while the Governor may have stated as much in her veto letter I heard differently in my meeting with her. In CT very few of the proponents of keeping the death penalty make a detterence argument because it does not stand up. Even if it were a detterence it would only deter those murders to which it applies which are a very narrow group. For the majority of murders it would have no effect.
23 Percent believe that we should keep it b/c life in prison costs more. That just doesn't turn out to be true.
I could go on but the point is that a significant percentage of those who think we should keep the death penalty misunderstand the death penalty scheme in this state.
Bill - the fact that the death penalty is used to plea bargain is another part of the problem. Our law is allowed because it supposedly is in compliance with the '76 Gregg case but if it is then where it applies it must be aplied. Plea bargaining circumvents this.
Posted by: ACR | June 8, 2009 5:09 AM
>>it has been proven that executions do NOT deter murderer
Cite
Posted by: Bill | June 8, 2009 8:16 AM
iBlogWestHartford
You twisted mind has twisted what I said. Please re-read and show your proof that the death penalty is not a deterrent.
Posted by: Bill | June 8, 2009 8:18 AM
Rep Holder-Winfield,
Plea bargaining saves the taxpayers money which I know you are not concerned about. A murder trial is very expensive.
Posted by: iBlogWestHartford | June 8, 2009 10:50 AM
Rep Holder-Winfield,
I admire and support the great work you have done on the death penalty.
I think you were referring to anothor person's post (perhaps City Hall Watch) when you mentioned me in your response.
Thanks again for your efforts!
Posted by: iBlogWestHartford | June 8, 2009 11:20 AM
BillACR,
"cite!"
"Yes,sir!"
Hey - I've been down this road so many times on blogs that I can tell if there's a new squashed bug on the pavement.
Here's how it goes:
1) You make un-provable claims.
2) I call you on it.
3) You still can prove nothing.
4) So you use your only "out" - shift the burden to me and insist that I prove you are wrong.
5) If I can keep a straight face, I do the proving.
6) Then, you have several options. You might:
> completely ignore my post by changing your argument, or by changing the subject, OR by never being heard from again on this topic
> dismiss all my proof with some sweepingly inane generalization, like: "Of course, that's just what those commie-liberal-professor-types WOULD say!"
> You dredge up, from the hundreds of studies that agree with me, the ONE poor-quality minor study that found otherwise (generally funded by the Heritage Foundation or some other "smoking DOES NOT cause cancer"-type outfit).
> OR - you revert to snide personal attacks, then run away.
And claim victory.
So, OK, just for fun, take these:
> Studies in Oklahoma and California failed to find that capital punishment had a deterrent effect on violent crime and, in fact, found a significant increase in stranger killings and homicide rates after the death penalty had been reinstated. (William Bailey, "Deterrence, Brutalization, and the Death Penalty," Criminology, 1998; Ernie Thompson, "Effects of an Execution on Homicides in California." Homicide Studies, 1999)
> The murder rate in Canada has dropped by 27% since the death penalty was abolished in that country in 1976. (Amnesty International)
> A Texas study determined in 1999 that there was no relation between the number of executions and murder rates in general. (Victoria Brewer, Robert Wrinkle, John Sorenson and James Marquart)
> A New York Times survey demonstrated that the homicide rate in states with capital punishment have been 48% to 101% higher than those without the death penalty. (Raymond Bonner and Ford Fessenden, "Absence of Executions," New York Times, September 22, 2000)
> The five countries with the highest homicide rates that do not impose the death penalty average 21.6 murders per 100,000 people. The five countries with the highest homicide rate that do impose the death penalty average 41.6 murders for every 100,000 people. (United Nations Development Program).
You move, pals.
Posted by: ACR | June 8, 2009 11:52 AM
Geeesh.
Get your knickers in a knot why don't you?
I'm the minority in my party and within the state in general too, as I agree with you that the death penalty should be gone.
I doubt we agree as to why however.
Posted by: bill | June 8, 2009 1:32 PM
iBlogWestHartford:
(2003) Emory University Economics Department Chairman Hashem Dezhbakhsh and Emory Professors Paul Rubin and Joanna Shepherd state that "our results suggest that capital punishment has a strong deterrent effect. An increase in any of the probabilities -- arrest, sentencing or execution -- tends to reduce the crime rate. In particular, each execution results, on
average, in eighteen fewer murders -- with a margin of error of plus or minus 10." (1) Their data base used nationwide data from 3,054 US counties from 1977-1996.
(2003) University of Colorado (Denver) Economics Department Chairman Naci Mocan and Graduate Assistant R. Kaj Gottings found "a statistically significant relationship between executions, pardons and homicide. Specifically each additional execution reduces homicides by 5 to 6, and three additional pardons (commutations) generate 1 to 1.5 additional murders." Their "data set contains detailed information on the entire 6,143 death sentences between 1977 and 1997. (2)
(2001) University of Houston Professors Dale Cloninger and Roberto Marchesini, found that death penalty moratoriums contribute to more homicides. They found: "The (Texas) execution hiatus (in 1996), therefore, appears to have spared few, if any, condemned prisoners while the citizens of Texas experienced a net 90 (to as many as 150) additional innocent lives lost to homicide. Politicians contemplating moratoriums may wish to consider the possibility that a seemingly innocuous moratorium on executions could very well come at a heavy cost." (3)
(2001) SUNY (Buffalo) Professor Liu finds that legalizing the death penalty not only adds capital punishment as a deterrent but also increases the marginal productivity of other deterrence measures in reducing murder rates. "Abolishing the death penalty not only gets rid of a valuable deterrent, it also decreases the deterrent effect of other punishments." "The deterrent effects of the certainty and severity of punishments on murder are greater in retentionist (death penalty) states than in abolition (non death penalty) states." (4)
(2003) Clemson U. Professor Shepherd found that each execution results, on average, in five fewer murders. Longer waits on death row reduce the deterrent effect. Therefore, recent legislation to shorten the time prior to execution should increase deterrence and thus save more innocent lives. Moratoriums and other delays should put more innocents at risk. In addition, capital punishment deters all kinds of murders, including crimes of passion and murders by intimates. Murders of both blacks and whites decrease after executions. (5)
(2003) FCC economist Dr. Paul Zimmerman finds: "Specifically, it is estimated that each state execution deters somewhere between 3 and 25 murders per year (14 being the average). Assuming that the value of human life is approximately $5 million {i.e. the average of the range estimates provided by Viscussi (1993)}, our estimates imply that society avoids losing approximately $70 million per year on average at the current rate of execution all else equal." The study used state level data from 1978 to 1997 for all 50 states (excluding Washington D.C.). (6)
(2003) Emory University Economics Department Chairman Hashem Dezhbakhsh and Clemson U. Professor Shepherd found that "The results are boldly clear: executions deter murders and murder rates increase substantially during moratoriums. The results are consistent across before-and-after comparisons and regressions regardless of the data's aggregation level, the time period, or the specific variable to measure executions." (7)
The findings reflect reason, common sense and history.
"According to the standard economic model of crime, a rational offender would respond to perceived costs and benefits of committing crime." "Capital punishment is particularly significant in this context, because it represents a very high cost for committing murder (loss of life). Thus, the presence of capital punishment in a state, or the frequency with which it is used, should unequivocally deter homicide." Furthermore, "an increase in pardons (commutations) implies a decrease in the probability of execution, which economic theory predicts should have a positive (increase) impact on murder rates." (8)
Isaac Ehrlich (1975) provided the first systemic analysis of the relationship between capital punishment and the crime of murder along with the first empirical analysis of the deterrence hypothesis. He found that each execution deterred, on average, 8 murders. Many additional studies have found corroborating evidence supporting the deterrent effect of the death penalty -- from the United States (Ehrlich, 1977, Layson, 1985, Cloninger, 1992, Ehrlich and Liu, 1999, Dezhbakhsh et al, 2000) and Canada (Layson 1983) and the UK (Wolpin, 1978). (9)
1). "Does Capital Punishment Have a Deterrent Effect? New Evidence from Postmoratorium Panel Data", American Law and Economics Review V5 N2 2003 (344-376), Hashem Dezhbakhsh, Paul H. Rubin and Joanna M. Shepherd.
contact Dezhbakhsh at econhd@emory.edu, ph 404-727-4679, Rubin at prubin@emory.edu, ph 404-727-6365 and Shepherd at ph 864-656-6786, e-mail jshephe@CLEMSON.EDU
The quotation is from the complete, pre publication study which can be found at
http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~cozden/Dezhbakhsh_01_01_paper.pdf
2) "Getting Off Death Row: Commuted Sentences and the Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment," Journal of Law and Economics, Volume 46, Number 2, October 2003, at www.journals.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/resolve?JLE460202 - registration required
H. Naci Mocan (mmocan@carbon.cudenver.edu, ph 303-556-8540) and R. Kaj Gottings (rgitting@carbon.cudenver.edu),
This is a revised version of "Pardons, Executions and Homicide," NBER WP8639) at
econ.cudenver.edu/mocan/papers/GettingOffDeathRow.pdf
The quote is from the working paper "Pardons, Executions and Homicide", October 2001, located at
http://econ.cudenver.edu/beckman/kai.pdf
downloaded on 1/22/01
3) "EXECUTION MORATORIUM IS NO HOLIDAY FOR HOMICIDES", Prof. Dale O. Cloninger and Prof. Roberto Marchesini. go to http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/Moratoriums.htm based on the study "Execution and deterrence: a quasi-controlled group experiment", Dale O. Cloninger (cloninger@cl.uh.edu, phone 281-283-3210), Roberto Marchesini (marchesini@cl.uh.edu, phone 281-283-3215), Applied Economics, 4/01, Vol 33, N 5, p569 -- p576
4) Capital Punishment and the Deterrence Hypothesis: Some New Insights and Empirical Evidence, December 2001, Eastern Economic Journal, Forthcoming , ZHIQIANG LIU (e-mail zqliu@buffalo.edu, ph. 716-645-2121) on line at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=352681
5) Murders of Passion, Execution Delays and the Deterrence of Capital Punishment, March 2003, at http://people.clemson.edu/~jshephe/, Joanna M. Shepherd, ph 864-656-6786, e-mail jshephe@CLEMSON.EDU
6). "State Executions, Deterrence and the Incidence of Murder", Paul R. Zimmerman (zimmy@att.net), March 3. 2003, Social Science Research Network, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID354680_code021216500.pdf?abstractid=354680
7) Dezhbakhsh, Hashem and Shepherd, Joanna, "The Deterrent Effect of Capital Punishment: Evidence from a 'Judicial Experiment'" (Aug 19, 2003). Emory University Economics Working Paper No. 03-14 at www.ssrn.com/abstract=432621
contact Dezhbakhsh at econhd@emory.edu or ph 404-727-4679 and Shepherd at ph 864-656-6786 or jshephe@CLEMSON.EDU
8) "Pardons, Executions and Homicide", H. Naci Mocan (mmocan@carbon.cudenver.edu) and R. Kaj Gottings (rgitting@carbon.cudenver.edu), Journal of Law and Economics, forthcoming. Online version located at
http://econ.cudenver.edu/beckman/kai.pdf
downloaded on 1/22/01
9) Professor Ehrlich, e-mail mgtehrl@acsu.buffalo.edu, phone (716) 645-3287. For support and defense of his work go to: http://wings.buffalo.edu/economics/IEcrime.html
Review from Capital Punishment and the Deterrence Hypothesis: Some New Insights and Empirical Evidence, December 2001, Eastern Economic Journal, Forthcoming , ZHIQIANG LIU, e-mail zqliu@buffalo.edu, ph. 716-645-2121, on line at
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=352681
10) "Does the Death Penalty Save Innocent Lives?", Stuart Taylor, National Journal. D.C. Dispatch, 5/31/02 at http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/nj/taylor2001-05-31.htm
11) see paragraph 14, Section B, "The Incapacitation and the Deterrence Effects", Death Penalty and Sentencing Information in the United States, 10/1/97, at http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html
12) "Langley says Texas death penalty affected his actions during escape", by Stephen Martin, The Daily Democrat (Ft. Madison, Iowa), 1/8/97, pg 1.
13) Blecker book
13A) California District Attorneys Association, ''Prosecutors Perspective on California's Death Penalty,'' March 2003
14) Section B, "The Incapacitation and the Deterrence Effects", Death Penalty and Sentencing Information in the United States, 10/1/97, at http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html
15) "ASC RESOLUTION ON THE DEATH PENALTY", ASC Annual Meeting, Montreal, 1987, Anti-Capital Punishment Resources from the ASC's Critical Criminology Division, go to http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~critcrim/dp/dp.html
last viewed 12/2/01.
16) "Execution and deterrence: a quasi-controlled group experiment", Dale O. Cloninger (cloninger@cl.uh.edu), Roberto Marchesini (marchesini@cl.uh.edu), Applied Economics, 4/01, Vol 33, N 5, p569 -- p576, located at http://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/applec/v33y2001i5p569-76.html
17) i) Homicide trends in the U.S., Long term trends, Homicide victimization, 1950-99, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Source: FBI, Uniform Crime Reports, 1950-2000
at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/totalstab.htm, Page last revised on January 4, 2001
(ii) Crime in the United States -- 2000, Section II -- Crime Index Offenses Reported, "Murder and non negligent homicide", FBI, Uniform Crime Reports at http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_00/00crime2_3.pdf
(iii) "Number of persons executed in the United States, 1930-2001", Key Facts at a Glance, Executions
Bureau of Justice Statistics, Source: Capital Punishment 2000, December 2001 at
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/exetab.htm
18) Texas Department of Public Safety, Uniform Crime Reporting, Harris County data, from 1982 and 2000 database.
19) Boston Globe, 10/28/97, p A12
20) "A Review of the Econometric Evidence on the Effects of Capital Punishment", The Journal of Socio-Economics, v23 n 1/2, p 197-214, 1994
21) "Does the Death Penalty Save Innocent Lives?", Stuart Taylor, National Journal. D.C. Dispatch, 5/31/02 at http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/nj/taylor2001-05-31.htm
22) "Does the Death Penalty Save Innocent Lives?", Stuart Taylor, National Journal. D.C. Dispatch, 5/31/02 at http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/nj/taylor2001-05-31.htm
23) "Death penalty deters scores of killings ", Paul H. Rubin, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: 3/13/02, from
www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/opinion/0302/0314death.html
Posted by: Rep Holder-Winfield | June 8, 2009 5:28 PM
Yes iblogwesthartford you are correct I meant to address city hall watch
Posted by: City Hall Watch | June 8, 2009 5:47 PM
I do suggest your votes reflect our will - that's why they call you a representative, especially on an issue we care about. By the way, sitting in hearings, listening to special interest groups and hard core believers doesn't necessarily lead you to a more educated and knowledgeable place than the people who sent you to Hartford. Don't get seduced by the public official disease of "I know things you poor voters don't and therefore, I'm going to vote against your wishes" syndrome. That's precisely how bad policy becomes law; extraordinary taxes get shoved down our throats because pols on the local and state level claim to have some super knowledge that transcends common sense from real people. In the meantime, take water in a bottle from home - it's the only way to avoid becoming one of them.
Posted by: Rep Holder-Winfield | June 8, 2009 9:34 PM
City Hall Watch:
I never suggested that what is in the public hearing necessarily dictate. What I am suggesting to you is that a rep doing their job should not necessarily vote based on polls. Believe it or not there are times when the polls lead us to bad policy. I pointed out that the internals of the poll show that a significant percentage of the public do not understand how the death penalty works here. That is important.
One has to understand that a rep or senator must take all things into account when making policy not just polls. That thinking suggests that it was fine to have segregation because it was thewill of a majority of voters at one time when we know that segregation was never good public policy. But that is why we have elections. If people disagre enough they get to send someone else to so the job.
I respect your opinion though.
Posted by: truthtopower | June 9, 2009 8:11 AM
Thank you Rep. Holder-Winfield for pursuing the repeal of the death penalty.
Gov. Rell has no rationale for her veto, other than the primitive appeal to revenge.
The Republicans have a false toughness on crime, but it does appeal to the mob mentality that fears for its safety.
Someday the death penalty will be seen as ineffectual as the war on drugs and prohibition.
Posted by: iBlogWestHartford | June 9, 2009 9:35 AM
Bill,
Hello?
Hellooo?
Did anyone else survive that massive mudslide of a post??
Lord, I haven't seen this much cut-and-pasting since Collage Day at my daughter's pre-school.
Does CTNewsJunkie have the server space to survive this??
Anyway,
Let me respond point-by-point . . .
Just kidding!
I'll just take your first citation of "proof that deterrence works" and assume it's typical of the rest.
"1) "Does Capital Punishment Have a Deterrent Effect? New Evidence from Postmoratorium Panel Data", American Law and Economics Review V5 N2 2003 (344-376), Hashem Dezhbakhsh, Paul H. Rubin and Joanna M. Shepherd."
Connecticut's own Professor John Donohue at the Yale Law School demonstrated how this study is fatally flawed in methodology and in its conclusions. See: "A Reply to Rubin on the Death Penalty," at: http://bpp.wharton.upenn.edu/jwolfers/Press/Death%20Penalty(BEPressReply).pdf
And, as I suspected, all three of the authors of the study have very close ties to the "big three" of far-right-wing conservative think tanks: the Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, and the American Enterprise Institute.
Posted by: bill | June 9, 2009 2:11 PM
iBlogWestHartford
Nice try. There is plenty of evidence and counter evidence but a logical mind would conclude that laws do deter but not stop crimes. To say that the death penalty does not deter anyone is ridiculous. Let the readers decide.
Posted by: bill | June 9, 2009 2:16 PM
iBlogWestHartford
By the way, why is quoting from Far Left Liberal Think Tank, the Yale Law School, any different than a Conservative think tank?
Posted by: iBlogWestHartford | June 9, 2009 4:34 PM
Yeah - I can't decide which Yale Law grad is the bigger commie - Clarence Thomas or Pat Robertson. A little help from a logical mind??