http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-death-penalty-prop-62-prop-66-20161109-htmlstory.html
The death penalty has been a constant issue in states across the country. They have constantly gone back and forth on whether to keep the penalty or get rid of it. Also if the state elects to keep the penalty, they must decide on how to reform it. Last Tuesday, Californians narrowly voted to keep the death penalty and to expedite the system as a whole due to the state's large death row population. However, many people have begun to voice their opinions on the various side of Proposition 66. In this article, Jazmine Ulloa describes not only the various sides yet the complications that will come with the new prop. The abolitionists against the punishment have states the prop will impair the constitutional and inherent powers of the courts. Others have states the prop only passed due to the "Trump Effect" where people passed this only out of fear. On the other side of the aisle, the supporters claim the prop will only save taxpayers money and strip away a layer of bureaucracy . Now that proposition has passed, the question becomes how to implement such an aggressive proposition. This prop states that individual trial judges will now have the power to decide whether or not the penalty should be used. This strategy will lead to different statewide uses of the penalty creating havoc. Also all the inmates on death row trying to challenge their conviction will have their cases sent to lower courts instead of the overloaded California Supreme Court. This will speed up the challenge process yet it will create varied responses court to court in California.
Connection: Recently we have discussed the power and strength of bureaucracy and the benefits and cons that come along with it. This new prop weakens the power of the bureaucracy and gives it back to the people to control.
Questions:
1. If you were the lawmaker how would you address the challenges caused by this new proposition?
2. Should the federal government play a more important role in the death penalty? Explain why or why not.
3. Do you feel that the "Trump Effect" has led to the desire to keep such capital punishment around? Why?
I feel that the "Trump Effect" may have contributed to the desire to keep capital punishment, but that is not a bad thing. Propositions are extremely important because the people of the state directly vote for a law. Therefore if there is higher voter turnout, potentially due to Donald Trump, than the Trump Effect is good because it increases voter turnout, which increases the voices heard in California.
ReplyDeleteI think a key thing to look at here, however, is the fact that the "Trump Effect" could sway people to vote a certain way. Indeed, it may help increase voter turnout, but is it beneficial if the opinions are leaning towards a certain side? But in any case, it is vital to have people calling for action on such a controversial topic that truly demonstrates the morality of the human race.
DeleteThe federal government should play an important role in the death penalty. The reason is because of the severity of the death penalty. Considering the moral debate that the issue of the death penalty causes it is important for the federal government to make sure that a ruling considers all implications of the death penalty. If different states have different rules regarding the death penalty it could lead to division within the country.
ReplyDeleteI agree, the federal government should have an active role in establishing and maintaining death penalty rules to promote uniformity in the United States. Every citizen should have equal opportunity to trial and equal punishment for crimes across the nation. The national government must impose laws to keep the death penalty the same across states to preserve the right to life. While it is acceptable and healthy for the nation to have some laws differ across state borders, the death penalty is not one that should vary because of the divisions it may create within the country by disrupting the unalienable rights.
DeleteI agree, the last thing we need is a more polarized country. Since we have a two-party system, most of the country seems to be pretty divided. If we make capital punishment a federal rule, then the country will become slightly more unified. As Alex mentioned above, the death penalty is such a complicated process that need more attention from the federal government. With the federal government's help, we can institue more regulations and a more efficient way to decide whether or not a person should be put to death for their crimes.
DeleteI don't believe the federal government will make the process more efficient as that will just lead to more regulation and unnecessary provisions. Leaving it up to the states allows the locality to decide their own laws as it should be.
DeleteAdding the federal government into the equation regarding the death penalty will make this bureaucratic process even more bureaucratic. The death penalty is already inefficient and leaves people trapped in years of trials and waiting, and the federal government wouldn't help in this situation. Furthermore, attempting to implement a federal policy regarding the death penalty will be a lengthy and complicated process that ultimately negates the effect of the death penalty.
ReplyDeleteI agree that involving the federal government will make this an even more bureaucratic situation. However, I disagree with you that the effect of the death penalty will be negated. I believe that if the federal government were to step in, they would be able to unify the death penalty standards nationwide. Initially, it may be a slow and tedious process, but in the long run, many death row inmates may be able to benefit from the standardization of the death penalty.
DeleteI agree that the US should establish some sort of uniform ruling concerning death penalties, but in reality legislation that would nationalize capital punishment would be shot down in its early stages, because states have such differing views on it. According to polls, most Americans want to keep the death penalty but disagree on how to carry it out. The "Trump effect" of increased white male voters probably aided supporters of the death penalty, because that demographic usually favors capital punishment.
ReplyDeleteLike Nick, I would also make Death Penalty laws much easier and the process less harmful. I would do this so that states that are more anti-death penalty would be more inclined to follow in the footsteps of the less harsh laws. This would help grow support towards a more nationalized capital punishment. Although this is what I would do, it is possible that it would be shot down in its early stages like Jason said.
DeleteIf I was a lawmaker I would go ahead and make laws making the death penalty easier, and the process less harmful. Especially with some crimes being able to be so terrible and still get away for years from the death penalty. The us should establish a uniform ruling regarding the death penalty and it should also reform the justice system.
ReplyDeleteMaking the death penalty less expensive would be my priority. As of now it coast less to sentence a criminal to life in prison. Because of all the appeals, being sentenced to death is an extremely expensive process which burns through tax money which could be used for many different purposes.
DeleteI think the federal government definitely needs to get involved in capital punishment because it is a very serious and polarizing topic regarding cruel and unusual punishments. I think the Trump effect could certainly be real in the sense that it would influence those who are conservative to get out and vote more since they're party is in the majority. However, I think it this case the Trump effect does not necessarily impact capital punishment in California. California is already very liberal to begin with so whatever Trump effect would be present in the state would be a weak one.
ReplyDeleteThe federal government has attempted to intervene in the death penalty before, with the Supreme Court ruling that the death penalty was neither a cruel nor unusual punishment. Given that death penalty support is generally a more conservative policy, the intervention in this situation would likely be in favor of the death penalty instead of against it.
ReplyDeleteIt is obvious that the "Trump effect" has reinvigorated conservatives across the country. This means that we likely begin to see an increase in polarization among liberal and conservative states. Propositions like this one will ensure that this gap will continue to widen.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI definitely think that the "Trump effect" has had an effect on voters keeping the death penalty legal. I do think that the Government should be more actively involved in resolving the issue of death penalty by having a uniform system instead of having some states outlying the death penalty, while having it legal in others. As stated above i agree that this type of action will be resisted by advocates of states rights and may be seen as a violation of the 10th amendment.
ReplyDelete