On February 21, the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee of Maryland approved (6-5) a bill to replace the death penalty with a sentence of life without parole. In prior years, the effort to end capital punishment was often blocked in this committee. Senator Robert Zerkin was one legislator who changed his mind this year, "As heinous and awful as these individuals [on death row] are, I think it's time for our state not to be involved in the apparatus of executions," he said. The bill outlaws future death sentences and recommends that current death sentences be commuted by the governor to life without parole. There appear to be sufficient votes for repeal in the Senate and the House, and Governor Martin O’Malley has pledged to sign the bill. A final vote in the Senate is expected by Feb. 26. The bill garnered support from a coalition of murder victims’ families, communities of color, law enforcement officials, faith leaders, civil rights leaders, and other prominent individuals, including Kirk Bloodsworth--who was freed from the state’s death row--Vicki Schieber--a Maryland resident whose daughter was murdered in Philadelphia in 1998--Catholic Archbishop William Lori of Baltimore, and Ben Jealous, President of the NAACP. The governor has pledged to use some of the money saved from not having the death penalty to support victims' services. If Maryland repeals the death penalty, it will become the sixth state to do so in the past six years. Other states considering repeal of the death penalty, include Montana, Colorado, Kentucky, Oregon, and Delaware.
A recent column in The Economist examined the growing number of governors and other political leaders in the U.S. who are challenging the death penalty. In Arkansas, Governor Mike Beebe (pictured) announced in January that he would sign a death penalty abolition bill if the legislature sent him one. In Maryland, Governor Martin O'Malley has led a push to repeal the death penalty. Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper said he is reconsidering his support for the death penalty as that state considers its repeal. New Hampshire's new governor, Maggie Hassan, indicated she would sign a repeal bill if it reaches her, after two previous governors vetoed such actions. In Oregon, Governor John Kitzhaber suspended executions for the remainder of his term and asked legislators to review the issue. The Republican governors of Ohio and Kansas also have reservations about the death penalty. Governor John Kasich of Ohio has granted four commutations in capital cases, citing the need for fair trials, and Governor Sam Brownback of Kansas said capital punishment should be reserved for figures like Osama bin Laden. The author in The Economist contrasted these developments with Arkansas' former governor, Bill Clinton, who flew home from campaigning for president in 1992 to oversee an execution. The article stated, "[T]he death-penalty debate has changed in ways that go beyond day-to-day politics. It is less loud and more sceptical, giving thoughtful governors room to question a policy that causes them anguish—because they think it arbitrary, ineffective and costly, and because they impose it."
Jerry Givens spent 17 years as the correctional officer in charge of Virginia’s electrocutions. During his tenure, he carried out 62 executions. He now strongly opposes the death penalty. The thought that he might execute an innocent person was a major factor in his change of heart. “The only thing I can do is pray to God to forgive me if I did,” Givens said. “But I do know this — I will never do it again.” The pending execution of 
On February 19, Georgia is scheduled to execute Warren Hill, a death row inmate who has been diagnosed with mental retardation (intellectual disability). Over a decade ago, in Atkins v. Virginia, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional to execute the mentally retarded. However, Hill continues to face execution because Georgia requires proof of retardation beyond a reasonable doubt, the strictest such standard in the country and one almost impossible to meet in mental health evaluations. In a recent op-ed in the Huffington Post, Eric Jacobson, the Executive Director of the Georgia Council on Developmental Disabilities, wrote, “State law requires that individuals prove they have intellectual disability ‘beyond a reasonable doubt,’ a powerful legal concept that does not translate into the way individuals are assessed to determine if they have an intellectual disability. So, while Georgia never contested Mr. Hill's intellectual disability or I.Q. of 70, he was not able to meet the burden of proof.” Since the trial, several of the jurors now say the appropriate sentence for Hill is life without parole, which was not an option at the time of his trial. In addition, the family of the victim in the case supports life without parole instead of death for Hill. According to Jacobson, a family member said, “I and my family feel strongly that persons with any kind of significant mental disabilities should not be put to death.”
In a recent op-ed, the father of slain Colorado corrections officer Eric Autobee (pictured) explained why he no longer supported the death penalty and is working for its repeal. Writing in the Pueblo Chieftain, Bob Autobee, himself a veteran corrections officer, said the pursuit of the death penalty in his son’s case caused an "unspeakable emotional toll" on his family. He wrote, “Given what I know now, I can no longer support Colorado’s broken death penalty system. What’s more, I will work to end it to ensure that our resources are better used and no family ever has to go through what my wife and I have endured.” A sentence of life in prison, he wrote, would have been a better option: “If the ultimate punishment in our case had been life without parole, my wife and I could be focusing on more important things like our healing and working to stop violence in our prisons.” He suggested using the money spent on the death penalty to make prisons safer for corrections officers: “As a victim’s father who has been trapped in the labyrinth of the death penalty, and after seeing the real misuse of resources, I am begging our elected officials to do away with our broken death penalty system. Colorado can do better by our corrections officials, and we can do much better by victims.” Read the op-ed below.
A recent editorial in the Great Falls Tribune in Montana outlined some of the key problems with the death penalty as the state legislature considers its repeal. The editors expressed concerns about the risks of mistake with executions: “There is no way to take back an execution. That reason alone provides good cause to eliminate the death penalty in Montana.” The paper also noted that victims' families wait for decades for executions to be carried out, with the defendants receiving most of the attention: "[D]uring the long periods before their executions, these men received regular publicity and notoriety for their crimes. If they had been simply locked up for life without possibility of parole, people could have forgotten about them." The editorial concluded, “Our bottom line is that it’s risky to execute people when they might not be guilty. In addition, the cost and trauma of court cases that drag on for years is not worth the satisfaction some people receive from the finality of executions. We simply cannot afford to spend millions of dollars each on future death penalty cases.” Read the editorial below.
A bipartisan group of legislators in Montana will introduce a bill to replace the state's death penalty with a sentence of life without parole. The sponsors include two Republicans and two Democrats. A coalition of conservative lawmakers, religious groups, and human rights groups support the repeal of capital punishment. Republican Sen. Matthew Rosendale (pictured), a member of Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty, said his stance on the death penalty did not cost him votes. “People know where I stand on the death penalty and I still got elected by a wide margin....[I]f you stand up and say, ‘I’m against the death penalty,’ you will not lose conservative votes.” He added that conservatives, many of whom are concerned about abortion, have a variety of reasons for opposing the death penalty: “Everyone has their own reasons why they support ending the death penalty. For some folks, it’s for fiscal reasons, and other folks oppose it for moral issues.” 
Ohio Supreme Court Justice William O’Neill recently voted to strike down the death penalty, when he dissented in an order setting an execution date for Jeffrey Wogenstahl. Justice O’Neill wrote, “I would hold that capital punishment violates the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and Article I, Section 9 of the Ohio Constitution. The death penalty is inherently both cruel and unusual and therefore is unconstitutional. Capital punishment dates back to the days when decapitations, hangings, and brandings were also the norm. Surely, our society has evolved since those barbaric days....To date, 17 states and the District of Columbia have eliminated the death penalty altogether. It is clear that the death penalty is becoming increasingly rare both around the world and in America. By definition it is unusual.” He concluded, “The time to end this outdated form of punishment in Ohio has arrived. While I recognize that capital punishment is the law of the land, I cannot participate in what I consider to be a violation of the Constitution I have sworn to uphold.”