It was not long ago that then-governor Bill Clinton, running for president in 1992, publicly put a mentally ill man, Ricky Rey Rector, to death as evidence that he would be tough on crime. Having previously suffered an electoral defeat in Arkansas to an opponent who accused him of being soft on criminals, Clinton was determined to show his resolve. Two years later, in 1996, Clinton continued this strategy, running a campaign advertisement with the statement: “Expand the death penalty. That’s how we’ll protect America.”
But by 2016, both major candidates for the Democratic party, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, had expressed misgivings about the use of capital punishment, and Sanders specifically had taken a firm stance against it. Indeed, the Democratic Party’s 2016 platform called for the abolition of capital punishment, saying, “We will abolish the death penalty, which has proven to be a cruel and unusual form of punishment. It has no place in the United States of America.” This remarkable change on the issue has been caused by increased public awareness of the risk of killing innocent people, a decrease in crime, and the rise of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.
Though the risk of killing innocent people is at the forefront of the debate over capital punishment today, the death penalty used to be framed largely as an issue of morality and fairness. Leaders either supported putting serial killers to death, or they didn’t. It was therefore easy for supporters of the death penalty to paint opponents as soft on crime, as George H.W. Bush did in 1988; when Michael Dukakis said he could not support the death penalty even if someone killed his wife, Bush made this comment into a major campaign issue. He also he ran his infamous Willie Horton ad, which slammed Dukakis for allowing prisoners’ a furlough program where they could leave prison for a weekend and showcased Bush’s support for the death penalty, to make Michael Dukakis appear weak.
In recent years, however, as DNA evidence has increasingly demonstrated that individuals have been wrongfully convicted of crimes, death penalty opponents have effectively reframed their argument, focusing on the risk of killing innocent people instead of on the immorality of executing a killer. The website of “Yes on Proposition 62”, a 2016 California initiative to abolish the death penalty, for example, significantly discusses the risks of executing innocent individuals, yet does not acknowledge the moral issues of executing people in general.
Furthermore, crime has also decreased significantly since the 1990s. While the annual crime rate peaked at nearly 800 murders and nonnegligent manslaughters per 100,000 people in the ‘90s, this number has dropped to below 400 this decade, marking the lowest rate in over 40 years. This has correlated with a drop in support for the death penalty. In 1996, 78 percent of Americans supported capital punishment, but in 2017, only 55 percent of Americans did. When people are worried about their safety, it is easy for death penalty supporters to stir up fear and argue for the death penalty as a means of removing dangerous individuals from society forever. However, with the decrease in homicides, voters are clearly more willing to consider options like life in prison without parole over the death penalty.
Finally, the Democratic Party’s leftward shift on the issue is tied in with the rise of the progressive wing of the party. In the 1990s, Bill Clinton, responding to Republicans’ success in the 1980s, sought to move the party to the center to regain power, and embraced tough on crime policies. But in recent years, more progressive leaders like Bernie Sanders have risen in prominence and have pushed the party to the left on a range of issues. Exerting pressure on Democratic Party leaders after his surprisingly strong showing in the primaries, Bernie Sanders successfully pushed for the national party platform to call for the abolition of the death penalty. Needing the support of these newly energized progressive voters, the national party has adjusted accordingly.
Given this adjustment, it seems likely that Democrats running for the 2020 nomination will be pressed to oppose the death penalty if they do not already. Especially given President Trump’s recent push to execute drug dealers, this will almost certainly be an issue for Democrats to run on against the president. Long gone are the days of Democrats using executions as an electoral strategy. In fact, unwavering support for the death penalty has now become a liability for leaders in the party.
Image Credit: Flickr/Gage Skidmore