While working in the Indiana Department of Corrections the issue that hits home is the cost of using the death penalty from the beginning of trials all the way to the execution of the inmate. “An August 2016 study of the costs of Nebraska 's death penalty by Dr. Ernest Goss, a Creighton University economics professor who founded the conservative think tank, Goss & Associates, found that the state spends $14.6 million per year to maintain its capital …show more content…
How would the excess amount of money being saved by state governments be used? Many police chiefs think reinvesting the money in programs that deter crime would make a huge difference in murder rates. Often people argue that we need the death penalty to be tough on crime, but in recent research from the Death Penalty Information Center the death penalty does not reduce the number murders committed. The statement that most police chiefs identify with according to the 2009 report mentioned previously was “Philosophically, they support the death penalty, but don’t think it is an effective law enforcement tool in practice.” (Dieter, 2009) The one option that would prolong the life of the death penalty would be to lower the cost. One way this could be done would be to reduce the appeals process. However, one issue with reducing the appeals process is that an innocent person could be executed. Another option that could be used to curb the high cost felt by states is to just use the penalty less, and leave it for only the most severe cases. The use of the death penalty is felt by every citizen pocketbook that pays taxes, if the pursuit of the death penalty would somehow become cheaper, it would garner more support to not be abolished. There are pros and cons either way you want to look at the death penalty, but it seems for now that the cons especially the cost is outweighing the pros in