We, the comrades of Unit 1012, have
a serious warning for those who support the death penalty in the State of
Nebraska. Please vote repeal to save the death penalty and NEVER, NEVER vote
retain as it will abolish capital punishment. These two articles will explain
why:
INTERNET SOURCE: http://www.omaha.com/opinion/beau-mccoy-repeal-we-should-make-punishments-fit-the-crimes/article_307a7ec7-06fd-5725-aaff-62fd30a0e4ad.html
Beau McCoy:
Repeal: We should make punishments fit the crimes
Midlands Voices
Sep 4, 2016
The author, a state senator from
Omaha, is co-chair of Nebraskans for the Death Penalty.
In less than 10 weeks, voters will
decide the future of capital punishment in our state.
This summer, opponents of the death
penalty spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on advertising in an attempt to
influence public opinion.
Death penalty opponents also paid
$16,000 to economist Ernie Goss to produce a report on the costs of the death
penalty.
That study has serious flaws.
It is not an independent, unbiased
fiscal analysis.
The Goss study is based on academic
theories and statistics, not actual costs paid by Nebraska taxpayers.
Goss uses U.S. Census Bureau figures
to arrive at a cost-savings figure.
But unlike a fiscal study, Goss did
not include actual costs of enforcing and defending capital punishment incurred
by Nebraska state and local government.
Nebraska Attorney General Doug
Peterson called Goss’ report “misleading” and said it “failed to accurately
reflect actual costs associated with the death penalty in Nebraska.”
Goss’ study ignored three 2015 fiscal
analysis notes prepared by the Legislature’s Fiscal Office.
Each fiscal note showed no cost
savings associated with replacing the death penalty with life imprisonment.
Fiscal notes are not to be taken
lightly — they are developed for every bill introduced in the Legislature and
define authoritatively the impact each bill has on the state budget. The lack
of respect given to the Legislative Fiscal Office in the rush by death penalty
opponents to embrace the Goss study is astounding.
So instead of getting caught up in the
flawed Goss study, I suggest focusing on the reasons we have a death penalty in
Nebraska.
Through numerous appeals, the
convictions of Nebraska’s 10 current death row inmates have been affirmed.
The death penalty serves as an
appropriate punishment for the most horrific of criminal acts and is used
sparingly. It protects society from individuals who serve as an undeniable
threat to our communities and families and serves as a deterrent against more
heinous acts.
Also, Nebraska law allows capital
punishment for the murder of a law enforcement officer — particularly relevant
after the assassinations of Dallas and Baton Rouge law enforcement officers
this summer.
Going forward, I expect the federal
government will come up with a drug protocol to carry out the capital sentence
given to the Boston Marathon bomber.
This protocol will provide a new
pathway for Nebraska and other states to similarly carry out executions through
lethal injection.
For these reasons, my support for
capital punishment remains steadfast.
This November, when given the choice
on my ballot to retain or repeal Legislative Bill 268, I will vote repeal to
keep the death penalty.
INTERNET SOURCE: http://www.omaha.com/sarpy/papillion/confusion-could-affect-death-penalty-vote/article_ebcca055-3f42-52ef-af37-8471ea415f7a.html
& https://web.facebook.com/VictimsFamiliesForTheDeathPenalty/posts/987197854735514
Confusion
could affect death penalty vote
By Eugene Curtin / Times Associate
Editor
Sep 20, 2016
Nebraskans for the Death Penalty will
soon launch a multi-media effort to inform voters about potentially confusing
language on the Nov. 8 general election ballot.
Bob Evnen, an attorney and co-founder
of Nebraskans for the Death Penalty, told a gathering of the Sarpy County
Pachyderm Club Thursday that voters wishing to retain the death penalty must
mark the “repeal” oval on the ballot. The confusion arises because voters will
be asked whether they wish to retain or repeal the Nebraska Legislature’s 2015
decision to abolish capital punishment.
A vote to “retain,” he said, will
confirm the Legislature’s decision to abolish.
A vote to “repeal” will undo that vote
and reinstate the death penalty.
Evnen told the gathering of Sarpy
County Republicans he is confident voters will overrule the Legislature.
Surveys continue to show that
Nebraskans support the death penalty by a 2 to 1 margin, he said.
Evnen made his comments in the meeting
room of the Shadow Lake Hy-Vee where he described capital punishment as a moral
and practical good.
“Capital punishment is an
act of moral accountability for the most heinous crimes committed by the most
depraved killers,”
he said.
“We don’t do it very much in
our state. We sentence people to death only in a very limited number of cases,
a limited number of crimes, and that is as it should be. But that doesn’t mean
you get rid of it.”
Evnen said it is difficult to end up
on Nebraska’s Death Row, and outlined the brutal nature of murders committed by
those who have landed there.
He dismissed concerns about wrongful
conviction, asserting that death penalty opponents must reach back to the 19th
century to find a Nebraska Death Row inmate who might credibly be considered
innocent of a capital crime.
Nebraska’s death penalty law requires
a complex weighing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances, he said, which
means only the most heinous crimes are likely to be eligible.
Law enforcement officials are
overwhelmingly in favor of the death penalty, Evnen said, in part because they
believe capital punishment exercises a deterrent effect on criminals who
understand that murdering a police officer could result in a death sentence.
He also dismissed concerns about the
cost of keeping the death penalty.
He said studies showing high costs,
such as a recent study by Creighton University economics professor Ernie Goss,
are not credible and fail to show the other side of the ledger.
The Goss study, which showed the death
penalty costing Nebraska taxpayers $14 million a year, was a composite of
statistics from other states, Evnen said, and bears no relation to actual costs
in Nebraska.
He said the study also failed to
account for cost savings incurred when expensive trials are avoided after
suspects plead guilty to first-degree murder in exchange for a promise that
prosecutors will not seek the death penalty.
No comments:
Post a Comment