General Assembly Post-Game Wrap-Up: Week of March 17-19, 2015
That was quite the dust-up between Sen. Karen Peterson and Speaker Pete Schwartzkopf this week. The argument? Why won’t Schwartzkopf allow a floor vote on legislation eliminating the death penalty? Both legislators make legitimate points.
Pete Schwartzkopf by and large does control the fate of the bill. As Speaker, he not only decides what committee receives the bill, he determines the members of the committees. Put the bill in a committee in which the majority does not support death penalty repeal, and the bill isn’t coming out unless petitioned out. Going against the Speaker to petition a bill out has its own set of perils. So Peterson is correct there. Pete has taken steps to stop the bill, his protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.
However, Schwartzkopf has offered a compromise:
Schwartzkopf has said that he would oppose any repeal legislation that did not include exemptions for those inmates convicted of killing members of law enforcement, including correctional officers.
Not including those exemptions would endanger every correctional officer working in the state’s prisons, he said. He added that he offered amendments to repeal legislation last year, but those requests “fell on deaf ears.”
He said that compromise is needed on the bill. Peterson, he said, is not willing to compromise.
“This building is bigger than one bill,” Schwartzkopf said.
This raises two questions: (1) Would Schwartzkopf take steps to ensure the bill’s consideration if this compromise was accepted; and (2) is it worth it to have a repeal bill with these exceptions?
My answers? (1) Probably. He’s a man of his word and Peterson’s a savvy negotiator. (2) I don’t know. When you build exceptions into anything, at least legislatively, the instinct is to add more exceptions, not eliminate the ones on the books. I can see how any legislator with demagogic tendencies (about 40% of them, by my count) could use the terrible crime du jour to carve out yet more exceptions by threatening political extinction for the namby pambys who oppose them. Your thoughts?
One final point. Sen. Peterson says:
“”I can tell you that in the Senate if the majority members of our caucus wanted a bill out of committee, it would be out of committee,” she said. “Leaders are supposed to facilitate, not dictate.”
That is true. Now. Previous President Pro-Tems DeLuca and Adams? Not so much. BTW, here is this year’s bill. Props to all sponsors, special props to R sponsors Simpson, Cloutier, Miro and Ramone.
Jack Markell blinked on his proposal to cram health care increases into the orifices of state workers. At least for now. Actually, he and the legislators just kicked the can down the road for a few months. Until or unless this state generates a greater revenue stream, which we can easily do by restoring some fairness to the state income tax, prospects will just get bleaker for state employees. Hey, Jack, now that we have empirical evidence that ONLY the state’s 1% benefited from our so-called recovery, the only fair thing to do is stop the ongoing transfer of wealth to the wealthy from everybody else.
Speaking of everybody else, we got a real good minimum wage bill introduced this week. The minimum wage would increase by 50 cents each for four consecutive years beginning in 2016. The response from the Markell folks was predictable and pathetic:
Kelly Bachman, a spokeswoman for Markell, said the governor has not discussed the new legislation with Marshall or other lawmakers. Bachman would not say whether Markell supported an additional minimum wage increase.
“He was proud to support a $1 increase in the minimum wage last year and looks forward to talking with the senator and his colleagues about this bill,” Bachman said.
Actually, he was proud to have emasculated the original bill with, according to Tom Carper, considerable help from Sean Barney. BTW, where is Barney pursuing his progressive principles these days? Is he back with Jack, The Third Way or…somewhere else? But, I digress.
For all of you completists, here are the Session Activity Reports for this week:
Highlights and lowlights:
Hunters may soon take (legal) aim on Delaware’s Wildlife Animal, the gray/grey fox. The House voted to legalize the hunt by a 31Y, 8N, 2NV roll call.
The Senate approved the nominations of Collins Seitz, Jr. and Jeffrey Clark to the Delaware Supreme Court and and Superior Court respectively. I would be remiss in not also congratulating Mary McDonough for her reappointment as a Commissioner to the Court of Common Pleas. Before her appointment, Mary was instrumental in protecting residents of nursing homes, other facilities, and home health care. She is an empathetic public servant who has done immense good for many people who don’t even know her name. Words can’t adequately describe how much I admire her.
You know, that’s a rare nice positive way to end a post. I’m done ’til Tuesday.
Tags: Delaware death penalty, Delaware General Assembly, Delaware minimum wage, El Somnambulo, Karen Peterson, Pete Schwartzkopf, Steve Tanzer Delaware
Pete Schwartzkopf is saying that prison guards and police are not killed because the threat of the death penalty discourages would be murderers. That is pure nonsense on its face. So, is it worth it to have a repeal bill with these exceptions? No. I agree that building exceptions leads to adding more exceptions.
Turn the heat up on Pete Schwartzkopf’s utter bullshit.
I can see an argument for prison guards and even prisoners. If you’re serving life already, what’s the deterrent for killing?
Exempting law enforcement from the death penalty bill should be a non starter. That is not “equal protection” as outlined in the 14th Amendment:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
No. Fucking. Way. Americans should not stand for different values being artificially placed on people’s lives depending on their fucking career path. No. Fucking. Way. No exceptions.
No. No. No.
NO.
To extend such an exception is ludicrous. Once the door is opened to exceptions, the judges and lawyers and all of their support staff will line up…then the spouses and children of anyone remotely connected to law enforcement. The bill is not about someone’s chosen career path, it’s about the fact that killing is just plain wrong. It was wrong when the felon committed it and it’s wrong when the state commits it. Murder is murder…sanctioned or unsanctioned.
What about the cops and prison guards in the 18 states with no death penalty? Why haven’t they all been killed?
Pete Schwartzkopf is the biggest asshole in the General Assembly.
“Americans should not stand for different values being artificially placed on people’s lives depending on their … career path”
Article 88 of the UCMJ
Still, there is no evidence that the death penalty serves any purpose. Sure killing is wrong (except when it’s not), but aside from the moral objections, it simply serves no purpose except retribution. Additionally, people are put to death for crimes which they did not commit. Until we can be assured that there is no one who suffers the ultimate penalty and is innocent of the crime, we have no business exacting that penalty.
Dave you can remind me about Article 88 of the UCMJ when we all join the military.
“Comrades!’ he cried. ‘You do not imagine, I hope, that we pigs are doing this in a spirit of selfishness and privilege? Many of us actually dislike milk and apples. I dislike them myself. Our sole object in taking these things is to preserve our health. Milk and apples (this has been proved by Science, comrades) contain substances absolutely necessary to the well-being of a pig. We pigs are brainworkers. The whole management and organization of this farm depend on us. Day and night we are watching over your welfare. It is for your sake that we drink the milk and eat those apples.”
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
Exceptions lead to more exceptions. Pregnant women? Children? People in a wheelchair? We know where this will lead.
Welcome to Delaware
A Dystopian Society Where Law Enforcement Has the Final Say on All Laws.
@NFW ” join the military.”
It is a career path and 88 is a constraint. There are roles that people play in public service that may warrant special treatment because of the unique circumstances, high risk, or whatever. For example, prison guards especially are exposed to significant risk. Capital punishment may act as a deterrent in that circumstance. I don’t know of any studies or research in that regard, but it’s worth considering. My point is that there are no absolutes. There may be a logical rationale for exceptions.
However, I remain opposed to the death penalty because the justice system makes mistakes and the death penalty is an absolute from which there is no reclama and because there is no objective other than retribution.
This obsession with the death penalty by liberals has always confused me. What about the more than 1 million innocent babies that are snuffed out every year in this country. Don’t give “a woman’s right to choose”. 50 % of the fetuses are future women who never got the right to choose.
I fully agree that the death penalty should be repealed. However, it puzzles me why no one proposes an alternate punishment for those criminals convicted of heinous crimes that now make them eligible for death. “Three hots & a cot” is simply a vacation or right of passage for most criminals. Getting life is a badge of honor. Here are a few suggestions.
Permanent solitary confinement.
Whoops, there seems to be a movement to ban this too.
Hard labor. (16 hours a day would be nice)
Productive work with proceeds used to benefit victims or pay the State for their stay would be nice. A rock pile would be sufficient. Why aren’t prisoners required to grow their own food?
Banishment (never to be seen again)
A small island off the coast of French Guiana comes to mind.
Of course it might be too cruel to not ever let them see their families.
Those who commit the worst violent & heinous crimes need to be punished. They don’t deserve to die nor should they spend of their lives watching cable TV & working out twice a day.
How come conservatives believe medical malpractice juries are easily swayed by emotion, often get it wrong, and impose excessive penalties, but steely-eyed capital juries get it right every time?