Resurrection of the Tobacco Tax?

Clarion-Ledger reporter Natalie Chandler (you can find her blog here) reports that the Mississippi House and Senate conferees are close to a deal to raise the State tobacco tax:

Posted 4/28/2009 10:14 AM CDT on clarionledger.com

House and Senate negotiators will meet at 1:30 p.m. to solidify an apparent agreement on the amount of the increase. Speculation is that the agreement will raise the current 18-cent per pack tax to 68 cents per pack. That would be a compromise between the 75 cents the House has proposed and the Senate's 64-cent proposal.

More later.

Now's the time to contact your legislator to express support for an increase in the tax -- to fund Medicaid and to impose an additional economic barrier to the purchase of this disease-causing product. It's not enough, but it's a start.

You can find your State Representative here

And your State Senator here

So what are you waiting for?

Mississippi Republicans: Thanks for the Stimulus, Mr. President!

The Associated Press is running an interesting story today: http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=AP&date=20090320&id=9715786

The AP reports that two influential Mississippi Legislators -- both Republicans -- are grateful for President Obama's stimulus package.

Yes, you read that correctly. The AP reports:

Mississippi is set to receive from about $2.5 billion to $2.8 billion in federal stimulus cash between October 2008 and December 2010. Barbour said some federal agencies are still setting regulations for the money.

Some lawmakers say the federal money will pad the state budget and could help head off the possibility of deep cuts in services or layoffs of workers.

"Without the stimulus, we'd be in one heck of a bind," said Rep. Herb Frierson, R-Poplarville.

* * * *
Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Alan Nunnelee, R-Tupelo, said some of the federal stimulus money will be used to restore budget cuts Barbour made this year to public education.

With the infusion of federal money and the use of some — but not all — of the state's financial reserves, Nunnelee said, "we will be able to limp through the fiscal years that we have in front of us."

Makes you proud to have supported the President, doesn't it?

Stabbed in the Brain, Again . . .

Here's an interesting little story in today's Clarion-Ledger:

http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20090319/NEWS010504/90319020/-1/Nletter03?source=nletter-news

(AP) A bill that would require capital murder convicts to register as sex offenders if found guilty of an underlying sexual offense is headed to the governor. It was one of three bills pushed by Attorney General Jim Hood. All three are headed to Gov. Haley Barbour.

Hood says the sex offenders bill contains retroactive language that would require Douglas Hodgkin and others convicted in similar cases to register as sex offenders upon release. Hodgkin, who will be released next week on parole, was convicted in 1987 of capital murder in the rape and slaying of Jean Elizabeth Gillies.

But wait . . . take a look at

Miss. Code Ann. Section 97-3-21: Every person who shall be convicted of capital murder shall be sentenced (a) to death; (b) to imprisonment for life in the State Penitentiary without parole; or (c) to imprisonment for life in the State Penitentiary with eligibility for parole as provided in Section 47-7-3(1)(f).

Miss. Code Ann. Section 47-7-3 (1)(f): No person shall be eligible for parole who is charged, tried, convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment under the provisions of Section 99-19-101.

Miss. Code Ann. Section 99-19-101 is the sentencing statute that applies to all convictions for capital murder sentencing statute.

So, under existing law, nobody who is convicted of capital murder is ever eligible for parole, unless they were convicted before August 1994, when Section 47-7-3 was amended. I guess that's why it was so important for the new law to be retroactive.

But as you legal eagles know, the registration requirement is probably a component of the punishment that cannot be imposed on people who have already been convicted. That's what the U.S. Constitution's Ex Post Facto clause is about.

It's just another example of how legislators and public officials make a lot of noise passing laws that they know can't be enforced. Oh, you think I mean laws banning abortion? Yep, you're right.

Maybe someday the voters will respond: "We're not that stupid, folks, and we resent that you think we are. Go solve our real problems or we'll throw you out."

Leggo My Embryo

Like many of you, I subscribe to Rep. John Mayo's email list. It is often a useful way to keep up with the Mississippi Legislature; also, the good Representative and his wife are movie buffs, and provide a constant stream of reviews of first-run features.

Sunday's email from Rep. Mayo was a head-spinner. Apparently, the Mississippi House of Representatives has passed a bill that authorizes the adoption of frozen human embryos. Yep, you heard that right. The bill, HB 561, is called "The Mississippi Human Embryo Adoption Act" -- you can find it here: http://index.ls.state.ms.us/isysnative/UzpcRG9jdW1lbnRzXDIwMDlcbm90ZGVhZFxoYlwwNTAwLTA1OTlcaGIwNTYxcHMucGRm/hb0561ps.pdf#xml=http://10.240.72.35/isysquery/irlcca7/1/hilite

According to the bill, there are over 400,000 frozen embryos in the United States. If passed, HB 561 would provide a process for adopting one of them.

Oh, but not everybody can try. Line 215 of the bill states, "Adoption by couples of the same gender is prohibited."

I suppose the argument is that "adoption by couples of the same gender" is not "natural" or "traditional" -- but then, neither is "human embryo adoption," is it?

Representative Mayo, while supporting the bill, objected to this language. As he said in his email:

I find it repugnant that when we get a chance to make a point on this topic we take the opportunity to demean, either intended or unintended, another person who’s not like us, we go ahead and do it.

I moved to amend and remove the language. “It’s already state law,” most said. “If it is, why do we need to take another opportunity to say it?”, I replied.

I do not know why we take every opportunity to say, “You’re not wanted,” especially when we allow children to live with dope head, miscreant single, straight parent mothers at least until the live-in boyfriend shakes the baby to death because it disturbed him at the wrong time.

That's what I call a down-to-earth argument!

But putting aside the gay adoption issue, it's not at all clear that human embryo adoption is a good thing. The Bush Administration gave seven-figure grants to religious organizations that promoted this practice. But over five years ago, Arthur Caplan, Ph.D., director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, exposed the serious problems with the practice. Dr. Caplan started by explaining the embryo surplus:

The woman takes fertility drugs that cause her to produce far more eggs than the one she normally would release during her monthly cycle. These eggs are then surgically removed from her ovaries and fertilized in a dish with either her husband’s or a donor’s sperm.
Often many embryos are created through this process. But since multiple-pregnancies — quadruplets, quintuplets, septuplets and the like — produce premature and often unhealthy babies, doctors will only put two or three embryos back into the woman’s body to try and help her become pregnant.

The clinic chooses to implant the embryos that look the healthiest and asks the couple if they want to freeze the rest. The couple also has the option of having the remaining embryos destroyed, donated to other couples, or donated for embryonic stem-cell research.

So what's wrong with using the 400,000 unused embryos? Dr. Caplan explains further:

[M]ost frozen embryos are not healthy enough to ever become babies. The chance they will grow to full term is about one in 10 for those frozen less than five years, and even less for those that have been frozen longer.

Moreover, using terms like “adoption” encourages people to believe that frozen embryos are the equivalent of children. But they are not the same. In fact, infertile couples who want children can frequently make embryos but they cannot make embryos that become fetuses or babies. . . . .
The inability to make embryos that become babies is why couples turn to donor eggs or donor sperm.

* * * *

“[E]mbryo adoption” . . . . is a nice way to score points with those who advocate the view that embryos are actual babies and should not be used for research purposes. But it is not the best way to help couples who want to have actual babies.

[The money spent on embryo adoption] would be far better spent matching fertile couples willing to make embryos with infertile couples, rather than trying to get them to use unhealthy frozen ones.

Dr. Caplan concluded that the only explanation for a movement to allow embryo adoption is ideology, not medicine. By allowing adoption of embryos, legislatures cater to the ideology of those opposed to stem-cell research (which is conducted with unwanted embryos). And it affirms a reductio ad absurdum of the anti-abortion definition of a fetus as "human life," which will get them points from the Pro-Life League when re-election time comes. But as Dr. Caplan proves, it will NOT help people who want to become parents.

In that context, it makes sense that HB 561 excludes gay and lesbian Mississippians. While you're sucking up to the fundamentalist Right, you might as well go all the way. So to speak.

Republicans Don't Go Both Ways -- Goodbye to Bi-Partisanship in the Mississippi Legislature

This morning's Clarion-Ledger reports on the House of Representatives' deliberations and vote on the Voter ID bill. The story is here: http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2009902120340

Natalie Chandler reports:

The bill received 77 votes of support, and 44 votes in opposition after an hours-long debate that ended with several lawmakers removing their authorship of the legislation. It could be debated again before advancing in the 2009 regular legislative session.

* * * *
Voter ID measures have repeatedly failed in the Democrat-controlled House, and Wednesday's debate showed a lingering racial divide on the issue. Several Legislative Black Caucus members who had authored House Bill 1533 in its original form removed their names from the revised version.

The original bill allowed voters to show various forms of identification that do not include photos, such as utility bills or paychecks. House Judiciary B Committee Chairman Willie Bailey was one of several caucus members who signed onto it.

"I thought we could at least try to come to some kind of common ground to get this issue behind us," said Bailey, D-Greenville.

But in a narrow vote, Republicans successfully led efforts to change the bill to require state-issued photo identification.

State Rep. Herb Frierson, a Republican from Poplarville, offered the revised bill.

So, here's what happened. In the Mississippi Legislature, a committee chair is omnipotent. He or she can block any bill referred to the committee simply by never "calling the measure" up for a committee vote. Voter ID has been killed by Reps. Bailey and Blackmon for years in this manner.
This year, proponents of voter ID asked House Democrats, including the Legislative Black Caucus, to offer a compromise solution to the voter ID debate to get the measure out of committee. Representative Bailey did so. He mitigated the many concerns about the use of voter ID to intimidate older and minority voters.

But when the bill got to the floor, as if by pre-arrangement, a Republican offered an amendment that stripped away all of Mr. Bailey's protections.

That may be "politics as usual," but it isn't very smart. If I were a House Democrat, I wouldn't give the Republicans ANY more deals this session, PERIOD.

And I'd also tell my colleagues in Washington to roll the SOB's (oops, I mean GOP's) in Congress this session. If Repubs won't work both sides of the aisle in Jackson, why should Dems work both sides in DC?

Uncle Tom's Courtroom

Folo collects two stories about the new Assistant District Attorney in Lafayette County:

http://www.folo.us/2009/01/24/colorful-court-talk-in-oxford/

Tom Levidiotis was formerly the part-time Public Defender in that county. He was also formerly a staff attorney at the Mississippi Office of Post-Conviction Counsel (MOCPCC), toward the end of the years that Robert Ryan was Executive Director. Ryan's tenure marked some of the most shameful mis-representation of clients that has ever been seen in Mississippi death penalty jurisprudence.

Note: the JFP story I wrote about the execution of Earl Berry, and Ryan's woeful work, is at
http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/index.php/comments/the_execution_of_earl_wesley_berry/

The JFP's Ronni Mott did her own excellent reporting on the subject of MOCPCC:
http://www.jacksonfreepress.com/index.php/site/comments/dereliction_of_duty_070908/

But back to the land of Faulkner. Folo connects us to the Oxford Eagle's website (http://www.oxfordeagle.com/archives/2009/0109/011909-012309/012309/news1.html), where we experience this bit of courtroom drama:

The trial against the man accused of murdering University of Mississippi track star Rodney Lockhart has been postponed for an undetermined amount of time after the state announced it would be seeking additional charges against Christian Bonner during a pre-trial hearing Thursday.

Bonner was indicted for capital murder in December 2007 for allegedly shooting Lockhart in the head on Sept. 29, 2007, during a robbery.His trial has been postponed several times. The case was set for trial Monday, but Bonner’s attorney, Kevin Camp of Jackson, filed a motion asking for a continuance because he had other trials pending in Jackson.

* * * *

[Circuit Judge] Howorth said he would continue the case for a short period of time but was interrupted by Assistant District Attorney Tom Levidiotis who announced the state’s intent to supersede the indictment with new charges — which apparently took everyone by surprise. What the exact charges are or whether they were related to the state seeking the death penalty against Bonner were not being released by the District Attorney’s Office.

The state had announced last year it was not seeking the death penalty in the case, but Thursday Levidiotis hinted that could change and that decision would be up to the grand jury on Feb. 9 — not the state.“If the grand jury says that Mr. Bonner needs killin’ then by God, I will prosecute it that way,” he said in court.

Of course, as an experienced criminal lawyer should know, the grand jury does NOT decide whether the defendant in a capital case "needs killin." It is the prosecutor's prerogative to seek either death or life without parole when a grand jury indicts a defendant for capital murder.

One wonders whether this latter-day "Uncle Tom" had this much killer instinct when he was supposed to be defending capital murder defendants. Maybe that explains the poor performance of MOCPCC?

Too bad the original Uncle Tom didn't have this one's flexibility. He would have enlisted in the Confederate Army.

An Encouraging Sign

From the Mississippi Criminal Defense Law Blog http://www.mscriminallawblog.com/, an interesting article about proposed legislation to ban racial profiling in the State:

http://mscriminallawblog.com/2009/01/14/new-racial-profiling-law-in-mississippi.aspx

As Kevin Frye, editor of the blog, describes the bill, it would "impose a fine up to $1,000.00 and/or prison sentence up to 1 year upon officers who engage in racial profiling and would require law enforcement agencies to keep accurate records of all traffic stops and detentions identifying the reasons for the stops and the race of the person being stopped or detained."

Police chiefs of both races testified that profiling is a problem. Frye says "[T]he Legislature should be commended for discussing this critical issue."

Damn straight.

2009 Legislation on Capital Punishment Issues

From Mississippians Educating for Smart Justice (http://www.mesj.info/):

2009 Legislative Update: Capital Punishment

The United States Supreme Court has said that any criminal punishment, including the death penalty should reflect the “conscience of the community,” and its application should be measured against society’s “evolving standards of decency.” Events in our state in 2008 should trouble the consciences of Mississippians. In the past year, we have seen:

· the exoneration of Kennedy Brewer, an innocent man who spent 13 years on death row;

· the exoneration of Levon Brooks, another innocent man who was convicted of murder and imprisoned for 16 years;

· the execution of Earl Berry, a mentally retarded man;

· the execution of Dale Bishop, a mentally ill man who was merely present during a killing while the actual murderer received a life sentence; and

· the forced resignation of Dr. Stephen Hayne, the de facto State medical examiner whose testimony has been crucial in condemning many of the prisoners on Mississippi’s death row.

Thoughtful Mississippi must contemplate the absurdity of continuing a system that has delivered such horrific injustices. Proposals expected to be introduced in the 2009 Legislative Session address these issues.

Compensate the Innocent. More than 120 people have been freed from death row since 1973, after their innocence was vindicated by DNA analysis and other proof. Polls show that the American public is deeply concerned by the prospect of sending more innocent men and women to their deaths. Many are skeptical of such claims, but in the wake of the State’s admission that Kennedy Brewer was innocent of the charges that held him on Death Row for 13 years, we are faced with the likelihood that there are others like him in Parchman.

State Representative Willie Perkins has introduced House Bill 189 and House Bill 200. These bills would compensate people wrongly convicted of crimes. Mississippi is one of the few states without such a system; we send wrongly incarcerated people home with only an apology. To be certain, compensation will never fully redress the wrong inflicted on innocent prisoners and their families, but it will reflect a measure of repentance for that wrong. It may also serve to hold the State’s agents – whether prosecutors, law enforcement officers, or appointed defense counsel – accountable for their misconduct.

Both of Rep. Perkins’ bills have been referred to the House Corrections and Appropriations Committees. They can be followed at:

http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2009/pdf/history/HB/HB0189.xml

http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2009/pdf/history/HB/HB0200.xml

Stop the Executions of Those Who Do Not Kill. The bipartisan outcry against the unfairness of executing Dale Bishop, a mere accomplice, while the actual killer in the case was sentenced to life, proves that Mississippians do not support the arbitrary application of the death penalty. Of the over 1,100 prisoners executed in the United States Since 1976, Bishop was only the eighth person to be executed who was not either the actual killer or the payor in a murder-for-hire.

As the Clarion-Ledger reported in July 2008, neighboring States such as Louisiana or Alabama would not permit a mere accomplice to be executed. Representative John Mayo has introduced House Bill 29, which would adopt this rule in Mississippi. It has been referred to the House Judiciary En Banc Committee. It can be followed at:

http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2009/pdf/history/HB/HB0029.xml

Moratorium. These two proposals, of course, are merely the beginning of a moral response to capital punishment in Mississippi. Those who work with Death Row prisoners know that capital punishment does not deter crime; most persons who commit murder are seriously mentally ill, high on drugs or alcohol, or desperately impoverished. They do not undertake a “cost-benefit” analysis before killing their victim.

The death penalty is not needed to prevent repeat murders. Society is more than adequately protected by incarcerating murderers for life without parole. In that event, if later proof shows the prisoner is actually innocent, he would be alive and could be released and compensated. That is certainly not the case today. And the families of prisoners sentenced to life imprisonment can continue to visit their loved ones; when a prisoner is executed, his or her family suffers as well.

If deterrence and the protection of society are insufficient to justify the death penalty, why keep it? Some argue that the families of victims deserve retribution. This is doubtful both factually and morally. Although the cost per execution varies from state to state, the fact that prosecuting, appealing and inevitably executing those sentenced to death costs much more per case than that of those given a life without parole sentence is indisputable. With 64 death row prisoners in our state, can we afford to continue such a costly and fallible practice?

Spending that same money on assisting the families of murder victims, such as college funds established for minor children of murder victims, low interest mortgage loans, retribution payments, would be a far more Christian response than fostering revenge.

The fact is that more study of these issues is desperately needed. Representative Mayo has sponsored House Bill 145, imposing a moratorium on executions pending such a study. The bill has been referred to the House Judiciary En Banc Committee and can be followed at:

http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2009/pdf/history/HB/HB0145.xml

Conclusion. These bills should be important to Mississippians who seek to “do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly before [their] God.” Micah 6:8. They are commended to your further study and support.