Bill Overview
Title: Death Penalty for Dealing Fentanyl Act of 2022
Description: 2022 This bill authorizes the death penalty for certain fentanyl-related offenses that result in death.
Sponsors: Rep. Gosar, Paul A. [R-AZ-4]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in or affected by the fentanyl trade
Estimated Size: 2000000
- The bill directly targets individuals involved in the distribution and dealing of fentanyl, specifically those whose actions lead to a death.
- It indirectly impacts families and communities where drug-related activities and deaths occur, potentially by acting as a deterrent or through its implications on community members involved with such activities.
- Legal professionals, such as defense attorneys and prosecutors, will be involved in cases potentially leading to the death penalty, impacting their workload and potentially public perception of drug-related criminal justice.
- The bill could affect inmates currently serving sentences for drug-related offenses if their cases can be revisited under new laws.
- Families of drug dealers might also be affected emotionally and economically.
Reasoning
- This policy directly impacts individuals involved in the distribution of fentanyl and potentially results in harsher sentencing for those whose dealing leads to fatalities.
- Individuals indirectly affected include family members of those involved in fentanyl distribution and those in communities hit hard by opioid use.
- Legal professionals, including defense attorneys and prosecutors, will see changes in workload and case types due to the potential increase in death penalty cases.
- This policy could potentially deter some from participating in fentanyl dealing due to the severe consequences, though the efficacy of deterrence through harsh penalties is debated.
- Families of convicted dealers may experience emotional and economic impacts, either from loss of a family member due to sentencing or through increased involvement in legal processes.
Simulated Interviews
Unemployed (West Virginia)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think making the penalty so harsh might scare some people from selling fentanyl.
- It won't necessarily stop the addiction, but it could slow down the supply.
- I worry about the families who'll lose a loved one to the justice system. It's another tragedy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Defense Attorney (Arizona)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The bill adds immense pressure on defense attorneys handling these cases.
- Many argue it's a tough-on-crime stance that may not effectively reduce the crisis.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Police Officer (New York)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This legislation provides an extra tool to deal with major dealers.
- There's concern about sentencing without addressing root causes of drug trade.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Social Worker (Kentucky)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The threat of death penalty might not tackle the addiction crisis itself.
- More focus should be on rehabilitation and prevention rather than punitive measures.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Fentanyl Dealer (Convicted) (California)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I know it sounds harsh, but the new penalties are scary and might stop some.
- I worry about being rehabilitated and reintegrated without a sustainable future.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Mother of addict (Ohio)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Anything to stop dealers is welcome, but I'd rather see support for addicts.
- Death isn't a deterrent if the system doesn't fix underlying issues.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Judge (Texas)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While harsh, this law provides a strong legal framework against dangerous individuals.
- However, care must be taken to ensure justice is fairly administered.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
University Student (Florida)
Age: 21 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The idea is definitely well-intentioned, but I'm worried about fairness and potential abuses.
- The discussion should include more about reform and education.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Policy Analyst (Washington D.C.)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While dramatic, history shows that death penalty laws do not effectively deter crime.
- Policy should focus on broader solutions, not just punitive.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Community Organizer (Colorado)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Punitive measures like the death penalty don't address the reasons why people sell drugs.
- Efforts should be made on community support and economic opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $20000000 (Low: $15000000, High: $25000000)
Year 2: $22000000 (Low: $16000000, High: $28000000)
Year 3: $24000000 (Low: $17000000, High: $30000000)
Year 5: $27000000 (Low: $20000000, High: $34000000)
Year 10: $32000000 (Low: $24000000, High: $40000000)
Year 100: $50000000 (Low: $40000000, High: $60000000)
Key Considerations
- There is potential for significant legal and ethical challenges to the implementation of the death penalty based on constitutional grounds.
- The actual deterrence effect on fentanyl distribution and related deaths may vary significantly, affecting the policy's overall efficacy.
- Consideration must be given to human rights perspectives and the international view on the use of the death penalty for drug-related offenses.