This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Does the status of Oregon’s death penalty factor in to your decision on how to vote in the upcoming gubernatorial election?

For me, it doesn’t.  For some others, it might.

The reason is that what Oregon’s governor thinks about the death penalty affects whether that penalty will go into effect here.

Though the death penalty is law in Oregon, no individual has been put to death here for about 25 years.

The reason:  Two governors – John Kitzhaber and Kate Brown – have declared a moratorium on use of the most extreme penalty under law, death.  Both were unalterably opposed to the death penalty and expressed their view with the moratorium.  They just said they would not preside over implementation of the law.

So, the question arises, with a new governor taking office in 2023, what will happen to the death penalty?

For the answer, I rely on one of the best journalistic enterprises in Oregon, Oregon Public Broadcasting (OPB).  In the spirit of full disclosure, I represented OPB when I worked as a lobbyist and it was a pleasure to do so.  My old firm still holds OPB as a client.

So, what did OPB write in its on-line edition?  This.

“For more than a decade, Oregon governors have placed a moratorium on capital punishment, despite a long-standing, voter-approved constitutional amendment that allows the state to kill people convicted of the most serious crimes.

“Oregon’s next governor has the power to decide whether to maintain the moratorium of their predecessors, or revoke it, opening up the possibility of the state carrying out death sentences once more.

“’As long as the death penalty remains a possibility, there’s always the possibility of an execution,’ says Jeff Ellis, director of the Oregon Capital Resource Center, which assists attorneys representing people sentenced to death.

OPB asked all three gubernatorial candidates:  If elected governor, would you continue or repeal the current moratorium on the death penalty?  Why?

The three candidates responded in writing. Their complete, unedited answers were carried by OPB and are reprinted below.

Former Oregon House minority leader Christine Drazan, the Republican candidate for governor, indicated she would lift the moratorium, but not approve every execution:

“I am personally opposed to the death penalty, but the death penalty was put in place by Oregon voters.  I will follow the law by reviewing cases on a case-by-case basis, which is my duty as governor.  Rather than setting aside the law, I will act based on the facts and fulfill my duty within the confines of my conscience.”

Former speaker of the Oregon House, Tina Kotek, who is running as a Democrat for governor, said she would keep the moratorium in place:

“Oregon has not followed through on the death penalty in over 25 years, and as governor, I would continue the current moratorium.  I am personally opposed to the death penalty because of my religious beliefs.”

Former Democrat State Senator Betsy Johnson, who is running as an unaffiliated candidate, said she would allow the state to carry out executions:

“As governor, I will enforce Oregon’s death penalty in cases where a judge or jury deems it appropriate for a heinous crime.  Oregonians have twice voted on and affirmed our death penalty.  It’s time for liberal politicians to stop trying to overturn it or subvert it by letting dangerous criminals out of prison.”

Recent changes by the Legislature and rulings by the Oregon Supreme Court have resulted in fewer people on Oregon’s death row. Since 2019, the number of people sentenced to die in Oregon declined from 28 to 20, according to the Oregon Department of Corrections.

Oregonians, based  on voting records, have mixed views on capital punishment.  It has been both banned and approved over the years.

Voters approved a constitutional amendment in 1984, once again adopting capital punishment.  Since then, two people in Oregon have been put to death.  Others have waited for execution dates that never came.

In 2019, Oregon lawmakers voted to re-define and narrow the types of offenses that constitute aggravated murder, the only charge that carries a death sentence.  As a result, capital offenses are limited to people convicted of murdering a law-enforcement officer, carrying out a terrorist attack that kills at least two people, murdering a child younger than 14, or killing someone in prison while serving time for a murder conviction.

Even if the moratorium in Oregon was lifted, experts say executions would not resume immediately because, in the cases of prisioners now on death row, appeals have not run their course.

Finally, my view:  I do not support the death penalty because, over the years around the country, mistakes have been made – and, obviously, there is no way to recover from those mistakes.  True, gruesome crimes deserve a severe punishment, but, for me, life in prison without parole constitutes that just punishment.

A friend of mine, who once served as Oregon’s chief justice added weight to this view when he said that the cost of keeping someone in prison for life did not add up to what the cost would be of appeals in death penalty cases. 
There are reasons other than money to hold views on the death penalty, but the former chief’s analysis was compelling for me.   

Now, as for voting for governor later this fall, positions on the death penalty, at most, will be a secondary or tertiary issue for me.  As I decide how to vote, I’ll care about the entire records of the three candidates, not any “single issue.”