Now
Fair
32°
High
33°
Low
26°

Death penalty repeal fails

Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

By JoANNE YOUNG / Lincoln Journal Star

Tuesday, Mar 20, 2007 - 06:00:32 pm CDT

The Nebraska Legislature inched close to passing a death penalty repeal on first round Tuesday, but one vote proved fatal.

A 24-25 vote shortly before noon ended the two-day debate of Omaha Sen. Ernie Chamber’s attempt to replace the death penalty with life without parole and an order of restitution.

“Really, I’ve been fighting this issue for three decades so expectations are never high that success will come,” he said after the vote.

Roll call on death-penalty bill

Yes (24)

Greg Adams of York

Ray Aguilar of Grand Island

Brad Ashford of Omaha

Bill Avery of Lincoln

Tom Carlson of Holdrege

Ernie Chambers of Omaha

Abbie Cornett of Bellevue

Cap Dierks of Ewing

Annette Dubas of Fullerton

Gwen Howard of Omaha

Joel Johnson of Kearney

Gail Kopplin of Gretna

Lowen Kruse of Omaha

Steve Lathrop of Omaha

Vickie McDonald of St. Paul

Amanda McGill of Lincoln

Danielle Nantkes of Lincoln

Dwite Pedersen of Elkhorn

Don Preister of Omaha

Ron Raikes of Lincoln

Kent Rogert of Tekamah

DiAnna Schimek of Lincoln

John Synowiecki of Omaha

Norm Wallman Cortland

No (25)

Carroll Burling of Kenesaw

Mark Christensen of Imperial

Pat Engel of South Sioux City

Philip Erdman of Bayard

Deb Fischer of Valentine

Mike Flood of Norfolk

Mike Friend of Omaha

Tony Fulton of Lincoln

Tim Gay of Papillion

Tom Hansen of North Platte

John Harms of Scottsbluff

Lavon Heidemann of Elk Creek

Carol Hudkins of Malcolm

Ray Janssen of Nickerson

Russ Karpisek of Wilber

Chris Langemeier of Schuyler

LeRoy Louden of Ellsworth

Mick Mines of Blair

John Nelson of Omaha

Rich Pahls of Omaha

Dave Pankonin of Louisville

Pete Pirsch of Omaha

Arnie Stuthman of Platte Center

Tom White of Omaha

John Wightman of Lexington

A miss is a miss, he said, no matter how close.

Sen. Mike Flood of Norfolk, speaker of the Legislature and the bill’s most vocal opponent during the debate, said he hadn’t known the senators were so divided.

“It could have gone either way,” he said, but added he would have thought more senators would have voted to keep the death penalty.

Proponents did a good job of making their case, Flood said, although he remained solidly opposed, his stand fortified by a 2002  attempted bank robbery in his home district, which includes Norfolk, that left five people dead.

Chambers said some senators who voted against his bill, LB476, apologized to him afterward, saying they were afraid politically to abolish the death penalty because of cases in their home districts.

The debate and vote were the first on the question since 1988. Many of those who spoke Monday and Tuesday said it was the first time they’d heard the arguments.

Twenty-two new senators were an unknown, and they split on the issue 11-11.

Among Lincoln senators, Bill Avery, Amanda McGill, Danielle Nantkes, Ron Raikes and DiAnna Schimek voted to advance the bill. Sen. Tony Fulton voted against moving it to a second reading.

Fulton said the arguments were persuasive, but he could not vote to advance the bill because society needs a way to defend itself from people who could order destruction from a prison cell.

“In an age of terrorism, in an age when technology advances exponentially, I cannot honestly say the day won’t come when an individual won’t require society to use absolute means to defend itself,” he said.

Senators did pass an amendment to the bill that would remove requirements for extra due process for inmates facing death sentences. Since Chambers’ bill did not advance, the current process involving aggravating and mitigating circumstances will stay intact.

Flood withdrew another amendment that would have substituted lethal injection for the electric chair, saying the issue had had no public hearing this year.

During debate the issue of abortion surfaced when Sen. Tom Carlson of Holdrege tried to make a deal: If Chambers would support an anti-abortion bill next year, Carlson would vote for death penalty repeal now.

“If it’s correct to be concerned about the rights of and the lives of the lowest of the lowest,” he said, “it has got to be even more right to be concerned about the defenseless and innocent of our society — the unborn.”

Death penalty repeal likely will come back next year, Chambers’ last session if term limits remain in place. And Schimek predicted the vote could favor repeal.

“I suspect there were some people who might be persuaded,” she said.

Reach JoAnne Young at 473-7228 or jyoung@journalstar.com.


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Politics > Back to Top of Story

All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Deb wrote on March 20, 2007 9:44 am:
" Ernie Chambers in my opionion is always wrong on this occasion trying to repeal the death penalty once I again I strongly disagree, how many more people can the prisons hold (life without parole) and at what cost to the citizens/taxpayers should violent prisoners be allowed this luxury. What deterrent would there be for a violent criminal if he knows we have no death penalty? "

Brian wrote on March 20, 2007 10:34 am:
" Perhaps we should be adressing the factors that contribute to an increase in the number of prisoners we have, instead of simply looking to make the penalties more severe. If we continue to increase the stiffness of penalties without addressing the system that drives people to commit crimes we will continue to see an escalation in criminal justice costs. "

Jeremy wrote on March 20, 2007 11:31 am:
" Most studies I have seen have shown that executing a prisoner is more expensive then a life sentence. "

AB wrote on March 20, 2007 12:58 pm:
" Go Ernie! We are going to miss you (though I'm not so sure they've rid themselves of you yet!) "

Leeann wrote on March 20, 2007 1:11 pm:
" I have to disagree with Jeremy and whatever studies he's seen, for example we just sentenced 2 "KIDS" yesterday with 2 consecutive life sentences, "young healthy adults", you think that one days worth of execution is more than their life's worth of food, healthcare, lawyers with appeals and everything else we as taxpayers provide to them...save the taxpayers money! As for it being "cruel and used "disproportionately on the poor", did the murderers in our society "un-cruelly" kill their victim(s), and just because your poor you have to be murderers to make a life for yourself...I don't think so! If we ALL teach our children right from wrong we wouldn't need to worry about the over population of our prisons or making penalties more severe. "

Bob wrote on March 20, 2007 1:28 pm:
" Jeremy, please cite your references. I've heard this before but have been unable to find the data to back it up. I'm undecided on this issue and would like to see the numbers supporting your statement. "

Mark wrote on March 20, 2007 1:56 pm:
" Senator Chambers please keep up the fight to end once and for all the expensive and needless death penalty. "

Nebraskan wrote on March 20, 2007 2:07 pm:
" Criminologists argue that for a punishment to be an effective deterrent, the punishement must be severe, swift, and certain. Nebraska's current death penalty is severe but fails to be swift or certain. If the current penalty does not deter a criminal, then why kill? Does Nebraska kill for revenge? To rebalance good vs. evil? Does Nebraska kill just because it is politically popular to be tough-on-crime? "

Lauren wrote on March 20, 2007 2:12 pm:
" Once again we seem to have elected some who lack the moral courage to say NO to state sponsored killing and they seek to make us all complicit with their need to satisfy those who promote hate and revenge over caution and the desire to be assured that innocent persons are not subject to the ultimate penalty for something they did not do. Now we not only have to pray that God will have mercy on the soul of the guilty but that God will have mercy on the one or two votes that could have potentially assured that a judicial mistake made on behalf of Nebraska citizens could have the possibility of being corrected. It is a sad day for Nebraska. "

Kyla wrote on March 20, 2007 2:41 pm:
" So what if it costs more to execute a prisoner rather than giving them a life sentence. When did their victims get a chance? An eye for an eye. The Norfolk case is a great example that the death penalty should be used. But I believe fetal injection would be the best. "

Krae wrote on March 20, 2007 11:14 pm:
" Jeremy is right, when I was a junior in college I wrote a paper on capital punishment and in comparrison between letting them live and putting them to death the cost is in sane. In 2000 when I wrote the paper, and if I could find the paper I would give you references I used in writting it, it cost nearly 1.5 million dollars to execute an individual versus roughly 29 thousand dollars to keep them alive. Keep in mind this information is over 7 years old so the cost has probably risen, basically what drives the cost up is the appeals, appeal after appeal after appeal, yes due process but in capital cases it costs us dearly. Did I change my mind on how I veiwed the death penalty, no, I still believe an eye for an eye. "

Jan wrote on March 21, 2007 7:21 am:
" What a difficult decision!! Although I believe the death penalty is a deterrent for violent crime, I do believe the electric chair is inhumane and should be replaced with lethal injection. That being said, I certainly would not want to the be person who carries out the death penalty. I think I would be haunted forever by that. "

John Wayne wrote on March 21, 2007 7:39 am:
" Would Jesus have voted for the death penalty? It's interesting to see that some of the most vocal defenders of so-called christians values vote in favor of the death penalty. Since they are not really christians, then they should stop cloaking themselves with a christian label. "

concerned wrote on March 21, 2007 8:34 am:
" We need a death penalty for guys like David Dunster. He's in prison in Montana for murder. He murders a guy in prison there. They transfer him to a Nebraska prison. He murders a guy there. Now he is sentenced to the death penalty. For all of you who say it doesn't deter. It will now. David Dunster will never murder again! "

Ugly American wrote on March 21, 2007 10:15 am:
" If you take another persons life in an act of violence what good to you bring to humanity? If you rape a child what good do you bring to humanity? Convict these miscreants and follow through on their executions in a quick and brutal manner, yes...even child rapists! Make it known on a widespread scale that the taking of ones life means taking your own when it is all said and done. All you hippies who would rather re-habilitate these pieces of garbage should establish a line of credit with the Nebraska Corrections Department and pay for these murders and rapists room and board because I am sick of paying for the electricity that keeps them warm, the food that keeps them nourished, and the cable television that keeps them informed on the outside world. It is the people that believe in compassion and second chances for people like child rapists that have allowed these criminals to move in next door to elementary schools and be allowed the opportunity to destroy a young child’s life...all over again. Compassion and second chances at the cost of a child’s innocence, what a great trade. Kill these people upon conviction or establish a line of credit from those who believe they deserve comfort for the rest of their days because I am tired of harboring murders and rapists in the confines of our prisons. "

Kyla is right wrote on March 21, 2007 10:19 am:
" I love this girl, she wants to kill the murders offspring as well by the means of "fetal injection"...that's the spirit!!! "

Legislature Coverage