No one is surprised to learn that California’s death penalty is a broken and dysfunctional system. After all, you don’t have to go far in California to find any government bureaucracy that’s broken or dysfunctional – it’s finding a functional government program that might take a while. The question is: How do we fix it? How do we punish the worst criminals in a way that maximizes public safety without bankrupting the budget?
A new bill in the California State Assembly, SB 490, has a shockingly simple solution: give voters the facts and let the voters decide. (The shock is that it’s taken 30 years to figure that out.)

In 1978, when California voters first reinstated the death penalty, no one knew how much it would cost. No one knew how long executions would take, how many attorneys would be required to prosecute and defend the appeals, how large a facility would be needed to house death row inmates – in short, no one knew what a big, expensive mess it would be.
Thirty-three years later, we know. We now know that the death penalty is a hollow promise to victims’ family members. These families wait 25 years-- on average-- for resolution to a death sentence. 99% of those sentenced to die are never executed and die from old age or sickness instead.
And we know from empirical research that the death penalty costs vastly more than the alternative of life without parole – $184 million every year. We also know from common sense that public safety improves when money is used for real solutions, like law enforcement officers on the street or violence prevention and education in schools.
Don Heller is the man behind the 1978 initiative to reinstate the death penalty. The Don Heller of 2011, however, acknowledges that he simply didn’t know enough 33 years ago. No one in California, including him, had the experience or foresight to predict such a dismal failure. In 2011, even Don Heller supports SB 490 to replace the death penalty. He thinks California voters will too -- once they know the facts.
SB 490 will give voters the option of replacing the death penalty with life without parole. If passed, it will save us $1 billion over the next five years. It’s often assumed that voters strongly support the death penalty, but people are rarely asked if they really think it’s worth a billion dollars. With the real-world costs and real-world solutions laid plainly on the table, California voters must decide once and for all if the death penalty is really the most efficient use of those dollars.
Here are some other things California could invest in. For the cost of one execution ($308 million), California taxpayers could afford to:

• Provide a complete K-12 education, including food and transportation, for 2,865 kids.
• Pay for a four-year Cal State education for 14,569 college students.
• Cover the average middle-income cost of raising 1,385 children from birth to age 18.
• Sign Alexander Rodriguez to the Dodgers for 11.2 years.

For the annual cost of the death penalty system ($184 million per year), California taxpayers could afford to:

• Hire 3,579 new police officers.
• Hire 3,407 new fire fighters.
• Shut down and remodel the 405 freeway a la “Carmageddon” every five years.

Sign the petition to tell the California legislature it’s time the people had all the facts to make an informed decision about the death penalty.

Bato Talamantez Urges Support for SHU Reform. Via San Francisco Bay View.

On July 26, ACLU/SC Executive Director Hector Villagra joined "Which Way, LA?" to discuss the destructive effects of the Secure Housing Units on public safety.

"Imagine how bad conditions have to be there that people would risk starving themselves to death. I could cite to you any number of studies showing the negative effects of prolonged isolation but I think there's just one simple fact that will show you how desperate these inmates are. In 2005, here in California, inmates in solitary confinement were only 5% of the total prison population, but they were 70% of the suicides among the prison population. That is people who are incredibly desperate, and for whom life has become intolerable."

Via KCRW's "Which Way, LA?"

Full Transcript:

Warren Olney, KCRW: "Also with us is Hector Villagra, who is Executive Director of the ACLU of Southern California. Thank you for being on our program."

Hector Villagra: "Thank you, Warren."

KCRW: "How concerned are you about the conditions I just discussed with Scott Kernan?"

Hector Villagra: "We are very concerned. Imagine how bad conditions have to be there, that people would risk starving themselves to death. I could cite to you any number of studies showing the negative effects of prolonged isolation but I think there's just one simple fact that will show you how desperate these inmates are: In 2005, here in California, inmates in solitary confinement were only 5% of the total prison population, but they were 70% of the suicides in the state that year among the prison population. That is people who are incredibly desperate, and for whom life has become intolerable. And it’s because of their prolonged confinement and they're being cut off from all human interaction."

KCRW: "What about what Scott Kernan said about the misery that they have caused to other people, as what he describes as 'the most dangerous criminals in California?'"

Hector Villagra: "There's no question that we have forms of punishment that we mete out against people who deserve them, on the basis of their criminal actions. But there are lines that we have drawn as a society and our constitution forbids cruel and unusual punishment. So it’s not enough to say 'they are the worst of the worst' and act as if there were no bounds of decency with respect to how we treat them."

KCRW: "Do you agree with Nancy Kincaid that the health situation in the prisons has improved?"

Hector Villagra: "You know, I don’t know enough about that to say. I do know that the crush of overcrowding makes it difficult for inmates to receive medical care on a timely basis in many instances. I’d be surprised if substantial change has occurred in the time that the receiver has been in effect, but I have no doubt that some change has occurred."

KCRW: "And Miss Kincaid, back to you. You said that the health conditions have improved -- does that mean that prisons are less crowded or is that a health issue?"

Nancy Kincaid, California Prison Health Services: "No, the overcrowding does continue to be an issue. The receiver would tell you that the one thing that it is keeping us from achieving the absolute that the court is requiring is overcrowding. But on our website, and the OIG website, there are public reports that show the substantial improvement that has been made in every one of the prisons.

Do we still have work to be done? Yes. Once the construction that has been authorized by the legislature is funded and we're able to move forward on what will give us the capacity, we will be able to finish the last of the work that needs to be done regarding medical care."

KCRW: "Hector Villagra, with the ACLU, do you think that will also ease the situation at Pelican Bay, or is it going to be policy for the state of California to have this single cell treatment that you say is so damaging to people?"

Hector Villagra: "More needs to be done to address this issue. We have to revisit whether it is in the interest of the public to be treating inmates this way. Because even though these may be 'the worst of the worst', we have to recognized that the great majority of these men will be released into the community at some point in time.

And what we know is that breaking them off from all social interaction, and sort of breaking their minds down, leaves them incapable of reintegrating back into society and makes them more likely to recidivate. So we have to be very careful that it might be nice to mete out vengeance against these worst of the worst, but we may be paying the price in the long run with higher crime rates."

KCRW: "They're not all serving life terms."

Hector Villagra: "That's right. That's right. I think I've seen studies that suggest that 95% of the inmates at the SHU in Pelican Bay will be released at some point in time and some, in fact, are actually released directly from solitary confinement into the community. They're completely unprepared to reintegrate into society."

KCRW: "Ok, I'm sorry Scott Kernan didn't want to talk with us. We'd like to be able to raise that issue with the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. We'd like to make an effort to do that on a future program. In the meantime, thanks to you all for being with us. Once again, Hector Villagra, Executive Director of the ACLU Southern California. Nancy Kincaid, Director of Communications for the California Prison Health Services. And our earlier guest Scott Kernan with the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. We'll be right back with Which Way, LA?"

This is the last in a series of posts written by our summer LGBT Project legal interns. The other posts are "LGBT Human Rights Gone Global", “The Roots of Homophobia“, and “Calling It ‘Marriage’ Isn’t the End of the Story."

The first step is admitting we have a problem. And we do: students that stand by and allow bullying to occur, as well as teachers that either don’t know how to -- or choose not to -- respond to anti-LGBT bullying. Most LGBT students say they’ve experienced bullying behavior in school, but don’t report it. We have to change the widespread attitude that “bullying is just part of growing up”.

As an ACLU/SC intern, I get to help figure out how schools can improve. A recent study by the National Education Association (NEA), Findings from the National Education Associations’ Nationwide Study of Bullying (.pdf), shows that teachers and school staff are not receiving the training necessary to implement anti-bullying policies effectively. Although a majority of teachers and staff report the existence of an anti-bullying policy at their school, about half of all teachers and staff reported received no training on that policy. Both groups also reported feeling most uncomfortable intervening in bullying when the bullying is based on sexual orientation or gender issues. How can we expect teachers and staff to respond appropriately to incidences of bullying unless we teach them how to do it?

Providing this essential training signals to students, parents, and citizens that schools take bullying seriously. The NEA study shows that campus culture really matters: when teachers and staff know that their schools take bullying seriously, and that other school employees would step in if they observed bullying, they are more likely to intervene or respond to reports of bullying. When teachers and staff set a tone on campus that bullying is not tolerated, the climate will improve for all students, especially LGBT students.
Schools cannot post an anti-bullying policy in the main office and call it quits. They have to provide adequate, comprehensive training, specifically addressing bullying related to sexual orientation. Once schools train teachers and staff on how to address bullying - including how to do so while effectively protecting students’ free speech rights - the campus climate should begin to change dramatically. With well- trained teachers and staff leading the way, we can transform hostile school environments into engaged school communities.

Kelsey Williams is a rising 2L at Loyola Law School Los Angeles and a summer legal intern at the LGBT Project of the ACLU of Southern California. This fall, she will join the staff of the Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review and serve as a vice-chair of Loyola’s ACLU chapter.