The editorial staff at the New York Times is a world away from Dumbutt, Texas. This is the state that hated John F. Kennedy so much some idiot thought it was okay to shoot him. This is the state where someone as universally disgusting as Tom DeLay would get 70% of the vote for 20 years. This is the state where a man shooting unarmed Black Hispanics in the back is considered a hero. This is the state that gave us not only George W. Bush, the worst President in American history, but who as governor mocked and giggled through the execution of Carla Faye Tucker. Texas is no place for children.
December 27, 2007
State Without Pity
New York Times Editorial
It is a shameful
distinction, but Texas is the undisputed capital of capital punishment.
At a time when the rest of the country is having serious doubts about
the death penalty, more than 60 percent of all American executions this
year took place in Texas. That gaping disparity provides further
evidence that Texas’s governor, Legislature, courts and voters should
reassess their addiction to executions.
As Adam Liptak reported in The Times on Wednesday, in the last three
years, Texas’s share of the nation’s executions has gone from 32
percent to 62 percent. This year, Texas executed 26 people. No other
state executed more than three.
It is not that Texas sentences people to death at a much higher rate
than other states. Rather, Texas has proved to be much more willing
than others to carry out the sentences it has imposed.
The participants in Texas’s death penalty process, including the
governor and the pardon board, are more enthusiastic about moving
things along than they are in many states. Texas’s system also contains
some special features, like the power of district attorneys to set
execution dates. Prosecutors are likely to be more eager than judges to
see an execution carried out.
While Texas has been forging ahead with capital punishment, many
other states have been moving away from it. New Jersey abolished the
death penalty this month, and other states have been considering doing
the same thing. Illinois made headlines a few years ago when its
governor, troubled about the number of innocent people who had been
sent to death row, put in place a moratorium on executions.
These states have had good reasons for their doubts. The traditional
objections to the death penalty remain as true as ever. It is barbaric
— governments should simply not be in the business of putting people to
death. It is imposed in racially discriminatory ways. And it is too
subject to error, which cannot be corrected after an execution has
taken place.
In recent years, two other developments have undercut the public’s faith in capital punishment.
There has been a tidal wave of DNA exonerations, in which it has
been scientifically proved that the wrong people had been sentenced to
death. There is also increasing awareness that even methods of
execution considered relatively humane impose considerable suffering on
the condemned.
The Supreme Court will hear arguments next month in a case about
whether the pain caused by lethal injection is so great that it
violates the Eighth Amendment injunction against cruel and unusual
punishment. Those who study the death penalty say that if current
trends continue, eventually almost all of the nation’s executions will
occur in Texas. That is not a record any state should want. Some
states, such as Illinois and New Jersey, have already had wide-ranging
discussions about what role they want the death penalty to play in
their criminal justice system. Texas is long overdue for such a debate.
If it is unwilling to abolish the death penalty, which all states
should do, Texas should at least take a hard look at a system that
still produces so many executions and is so wildly out of step with the
rest of the country.