Gov. Rick Perry’s Death Penalty Dilemma

Photo by Bee Free Photography under Creative Commons

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Despite a significant reduction in capital punishments in the past decade, the United States continues to pour a lot of money into the controversial practice, according to a study by the Death Penalty Information Center. Citing the report, “Smart on Crime,” Jim Ridgeway writes that “this is no small consideration for cash-strapped state governments.”

Tell that to Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who proved his fiscally conservative credentials in March when he refused $555 million in stimulus funds that would have covered unemployment benefits. The move backfired four months later, when Perry asked the federal government for a $170 million loan to cover his state’s dwindling unemployment funds.

And by continuing his whole-hearted embrace of capital punishment, Perry continues to misspend Texas’ badly needed cash. As the “Smart on Crime” study proves, Perry could save Texas a bundle by scaling back its execution program. Reducing executions could also divert criticism of Perry spawned by mounting evidence that Cameron Todd Willingham, who was executed in 2004, was actually innocent.

But the swashbuckling politician—who in April suggested that Texas could secede from the Union—has only reaffirmed his embrace of the death penalty. “Our process works, and I don’t see anything out there that would merit calling for a moratorium on the Texas death penalty,” he said on Tuesday. As Zack Roth notes, Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, Perry’s top challenger for governor in 2010 and a strong supporter of the death penalty, has criticized Perry on the issue. Still, she hasn’t commented on the death penalty’s economic or ethical dimensions, instead charging that Perry’s handling of the Willingham case is “giving liberals an argument to discredit the death penalty.”


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend