Capital Punishment And Legislative Unfairness
PA Governor Rendell Supports Death Penalty : If It's Applied Fairly
Mar 17, 2009
Rendell opposed the reasonable proposal on the grounds that "he supports the death penalty, but wants to make sure it's applied in a manner which is fair," according to aides from the governor's office.
What Is Rendell's Idea of 'Fair'?
Not to split hairs over semantics, but there is a fundamental flaw with Rendell's concept of what is "fair." Governor Rendell does not have a very good track record demonstrating a desire or ability to be fair where laws that have a disparate impact on the poor are concerned.
Rendell Not Fair in Areas Affecting the Poor
In November 2004, Pennsylvania legislators passed Act 201 which abolished the moratorium on winter utility shut-offs for severely poor people unable to afford their bills. This happened while Congress passed a budget with significant cuts to LIHEAP in order to fund tax cuts for the rich. Rendell and the Pennsylvania lawmakers responsible for passing Act 201 didn't care about being fair to Pennsylvania's most vulnerable citizens. Rendell's signing Act 201 was signing a death warrant for the poorest Pennsylvanians.
Pennsylvania utility cartels raised their rates by 41% after Hurricane Katrina, pricing out the poorest of the poor. Governor Rendell and lawmakers allowed this. Poor residents could not afford these rate hikes. Many get less help than ever before from LIHEAP, due to draconian budget cuts aimed to punish those who aren't lucky enough to be society's "winners."
Being poor should not mean a death sentence due to eviscerated safety nets and gutted legal protections of a moratorium on winter utility shut-offs. That's not fair to Pennsylvania's poor on very low fixed incomes: the disabled and the old. Governor Rendell refused to repeal Act 201, even when he was shown that it was unfair to the poor.
Governor Rendell also eliminated Medicaid eligibility for poor adults who are under age 65 and without children who have fallen on hard times.
Being fair to poor and vulnerable constituents has never been a priority in the Rendell administration.
Those most likely to be poor are those most likely to face job discrimination for good jobs: middle-aged women and minorities from the bottom socio-economic rung. In economic downturns, women and minorities fare the worst in the job market - especially those over age 40 who have suffered a lifetime of social and economic exclusion in our allegedly classless society.
Governor Rendell Is Consistently Unfair to the Poor
Pennsylvania lawmakers and Governor Rendell exhibited no desire to be fair to poor citizens that were not ensnared in the criminal justice system. They were not fair when they allowed utilities and auto insurers to charge the poor 35% more than everyone else for mandatory auto insurance and utilities. This is done through credit scoring and class-biased rate tiering. Rendell was not fair to the poor with passing Act 201 and then refusing to repeal it.
But the poor remain society's untermentchen. They're disposable, labeled as "trash", and no one cares.
According to Barry Scheck of the Innocence Project, over 90% of all death row inmates are indigent. They couldn't afford a lawyer. And although blacks are over half of all homicide victims, rarely are their killers sentenced to death. In 8 out of 10 capital cases, the victims were white and middle class.
GIven this abysmal record of governing in a manner that has been anything but fair, there is no way the death penalty can be applied fairly. The only way the death penalty can truly be fair is if it is abolished and consigned to the ash heap of history.
 |
 |
