October 16, 2000

Study: Texas Death Penalty System Flawed
Clinton's Cyber Corps May Not Make It
Minimum Wage Hiked, Prescription Drugs Spiked

Study: Texas Death Penalty System Flawed

The Washington Post reports today that a comprehensive new report of the death penalty describes Texas's vigorous capital punishment process as "a thoroughly flawed system" marred by "racial bias, incompetent [defense] counsel, and misconduct committed by police officers and prosecutors."

The report, to be released today, is based on a review of hundreds of death penalty cases in the nation's busiest execution state. Relying on an array of statistical and anecdotal evidence, the study alleges numerous inequities in the system. Titled "A State of Denial: Texas Justice and the Death Penalty," the study portrays "a system in desperate need of reform" -- a system in which capital murder defendants, most of them indigent, receive token legal representation during their life-or-death trials, then are thwarted in their appeals by rules meant to limit their arguments and hasten their dates with the executioner.

"In this report we have assembled an unprecedented volume of objective evidence that raises profound questions about the fairness of how and when the death penalty is applied," wrote the authors, who are affiliated with the nonprofit Texas Defender Service.

The Cato Institute recently hosted the forum "Should the Death Penalty be Abolished?" featuring Judge Alex Kozinski of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Cato Adjunct Scholar Jarett Decker and others.

In "Are You Death Qualified?" Clay S. Conrad writes about the unique jury selection procedure for capital cases known as "death qualification," in which any citizen with qualms about inflicting death can be disqualified from jury duty. As a result, Conrad writes that "of the over three thousand people on death row in America (the overwhelming majority of whom are guilty), not a single one has received a trial before a jury representative of the community in which they were tried. In each and every case, the juries who tried these prisoners were biased against them." Women and minorities are removed from the panels at a much higher rate than are white males.

Clinton's Cyber Corps May Not Make It

The Clinton administration is hoping a last-minute lobbying drive can save its ambitious $138 million cyber-security program before Congress adjourns soon, having watched committee after committee in both chambers fail to fund a dozen key initiatives, according to The Washington Post.

President Clinton unveiled the program with fanfare in January, proposing the creation of a national scholarship program to build a "cyber corps" of computer security experts to defend federal government computer networks against hackers and full-fledged cyber-attacks "so that America can be more secure."

But with possibly as few as three legislative days remaining before Congress adjourns for the November election, Senate committees have approved just $40 million of the administration's request, and House panels only $15.5 million.

In "Electronic Pearl Harbor? More Hype Than Threat," David Isenberg argues that fears of information warfare are misguided. He writes that despite some mishaps with viruses or websites being shut down, "most of those incidents have been merely garden-variety nuisances -- not the work of a rogue state or a hostile terrorist group." He warns that security proposals might do more harm than good as civil liberties might be trampled in the rush to protect information.

Minimum Wage Hiked, Prescription Drugs Spiked

As Congress heads into what is expected to be its last week before adjournment, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott predicted yesterday that lawmakers will increase the minimum wage by $1 an hour but won't approve a prescription drug plan for seniors, according to USA Today.

"I doubt that we will get the overall prescription drug benefit done because there's not an agreement yet exactly how to do that," Lott (R-Miss.) said on NBC's Meet the Press. He said an increase in the minimum wage, to $6.15 an hour from $5.15, likely would be attached to legislation giving tax breaks to small businesses.

In "Minimum Wage Myth," Cato Institute President Edward H. Crane explains that the Law of Demand cannot be repealed by government and "increasing the minimum wage by government edict means fewer low-income workers will be hired." Senior Fellow Doug Bandow concurs in "Minimum Wage Redux," and suggests that rather than surrender to Democratic calls for a wage increase, "the GOP should push to allow states to decide whether to accept any increase, thereby tailoring the minimum to their own unique economic circumstances."

In "Tough Pill to Swallow," Peter Ferrara asserts that expanding Medicare to include prescription-drug coverage would substantially harm seniors and that there are better ways to proceed. If the federal government were to pay for retirement drug coverage, some employers and the 13 states already providing drug coverage would have an incentive to drop it. In "Preventive Medicine, Placebo or Poison Pill?" Director of Health Policy Studies Tom Miller criticizes the GOP prescription drug bill.

		Palm Computing and Windows CE users: now you can read the Cato Institute's Daily Commentary and Daily Dispatch while you're on the go.

Sign-up and get the Cato Institute's Daily Dispatch in your email every weekday morning.