Davis / 4 Senator Abrams

S.R._____
A BILL

To eliminate the Death Penalty.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress
assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE
This act may be cited as the Abrams Act of 2017.
SECTION 2. FINDINGS
Congress hereby finds and declares that,
1)Even in states where prosecutors infrequently seek the death penalty, the price of obtaining convictions
and executions ranges from $2.5 million to $5 million per case (in current dollars), compared to less than $1
million for each killer sentenced to life without parole.
2) The Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty is not a per se violation of the Eighth Amendment's
ban on cruel and unusual punishment, but the Eighth Amendment does shape certain procedural aspects
regarding when a jury may use the death penalty and how it must be carried out. Because of the Fourteenth
Amendment's Due Process Clause, the Eighth Amendment applies against the states, as well as the federal
government.
3) The murder rate in the United States is three times higher than in countries such as France, Italy, and
Sweden, all of which do not use the death penalty as a form of punishment.
4) The death penalty costs California $90 million annually beyond the ordinary costs of the justice system $78 million of that total incurred at the trial level.
5) A 2006 study by a Stanford University research team concluded that black male murderers found guilty of
killing a white person were more than twice as likely to get the death penalty when they had stereotypically
black-looking features, such as darker skin
6) . The role of religion in shaping attitudes about capital punishment is paradoxical: most major religious
groups in the United States oppose Capital Punishment, but most of the adherents to these religions profess
support for the death penalty.
7)With respect to race, studies have repeatedly shown that a death sentence is far more likely where a white
person is murdered than where a black person is murdered. The death penalty is racially divisive because it
appears to count white lives as more valuable than black lives. Since the death penalty was reinstated in
1976, 202 black defendants have been executed for the murder of a white victim, while only 12 white
defendants have been executed for the murder of a black victim. Such racial disparities have existed over the
history of the death penalty and appear to be largely intractable.
8)In California, for example, the prosecutor in San Francisco long opposed the death penalty and refused to
seek it in any case, regardless of the facts of the crime. Less than 200 miles away, in Visalia, California,
prosecutors regularly sought the death penalty in aggravated murder cases. This resulted in a geographic
disparity that had nothing to do with the culpability of the offender, the facts of the crime, and the purported
penological justifications for the death penalty (deterrence and retribution), and everything to do with the
political whims of the prosecution.
9)California had little money for innovations like community policing, but was managing to spend an extra
$90 million per year on capital punishment. Texas, with over 300 people on death row, is spending an
estimated $2.3 million per case, but its murder rate remains one of the highest in the country
SECTION 3. STATUTORY LANGUAGE
A) The Abrams Act of 2017 shall hereby eliminate capital punishment in all 50 states.
B) The judicial system shall be responsible for ensuring that the use of improper punishment is discontinued.
C) This bill shall be enacted on January 1, 2017. There is no expiration date for this bill.
Capital Punishment has proven to be extremely costly, it has proven to be arbitrary, and lastly, it questions

morality. There seems to be a constant war between the opposing sides about the costs of capital
punishment. Pro death penalty supporters claim that keeping our prisoners in jail instead of executing our
societys most horrific offenders would be extremely costly. On the other hand, the people who are pushing
to eliminate the death penalty claim that the actual execution itself is far more expensive. In 2011, Judge
Aurther Alarcon and Professor Paula Mitchell conducted research on the costs of the death penalty in
California. They stated, if the Governor commuted the sentences of those remaining on death row to life
without parole, it would result in an immediate savings of $170 million per year, with a savings of $5 billion
over the next 20 years. California had little money for innovations like community policing, but was
managing to spend an extra $90 million per year on capital punishment. Texas, with over 300 people on
death row, is spending an estimated $2.3 million per case, but its murder rate remains one of the highest in
the country. This alarming statistic shows that not only is crime deterrence ineffective but the costs for the
death penalty is absolutely ridiculous. This $90 million could go to bettering our states overall infrastructure
and to our schools.
Time and time again, the death penalty has proven to be arbitrary. Although unfortunate, it is
undeniable that there are sexist and racist attorneys, jurors, and judges in our American court system. With
respect to race, studies have repeatedly shown that a death sentence is far more likely where a white person
is murdered than where a black person is murdered. The death penalty is racially divisive because it appears
to count white lives as more valuable than black lives. Since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, 202
black defendants have been executed for the murder of a white victim, while only 12 white defendants have
been executed for the murder of a black victim. Such racial disparities have existed over the history of the
death penalty and appear to be largely intractable. It is also found that different geographical locations and
political views can affect the verdict of whether someone is to receive capital punishment or not. Capital
punishment is an intolerable denial of civil liberties and is inconsistent with the fundamental values of our
democratic system. The death penalty is uncivilized in theory and unfair and inequitable in practice. Two
people can commit the same crime but they could get very different sentences. In California, for example,
the prosecutor in San Francisco long opposed the death penalty and refused to seek it in any case, regardless
of the facts of the crime. Less than 200 miles away, in Visalia, California, prosecutors regularly sought the
death penalty in aggravated murder cases. This resulted in a geographic disparity that had nothing to do with
the culpability of the offender, the facts of the crime, and the purported penological justifications for the
death penalty (deterrence and retribution), and everything to do with the political whims of the prosecution.
This proves to be unfair and not just. If the death sentence were to be in use then it would need to be in use
for everyone not just when convenient, it needs to be used objectively.
Lastly, the death penalty questions morality. The death penalty is considered cruel and unusual,
which can be considered an infringement on our 8th amendment rights (the 8th amendment bans any form of
cruel and unusual punishment, protecting US citizens). A big question that comes along with capital
punishment is what punishment deserves the death penalty and what punishment does not? With this
punishment there is no fair way to decide if someone is deserving of the death penalty or not because the
deciding factor is ultimately in the hands of the judge and the jury. Someone who has committed the same
act as someone else could be given life without parole while the other person could be given the death
penalty. This is unfair and not just and if the death penalty is going to be in use, then crimes and heinous acts
need to be treated with the same level of punishment. Religion is also a big factor in Capital Punishment.
Certain religions such as Christianity and Judaism do not oppose of the death penalty at all and think that it
is a deserving crime for the worst. On the other hand, Buddhism and Islam prefer more peaceful methods
and forgiveness.