South Texas Catholic (Corpus Christi, Tex.), Vol. 32, No. 13, Ed. 1 Friday, June 27, 1997 Page: 4 of 32
thirty two pages : ill.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
COMMENTARY
4—JUNE 27, 1997
Texas Catholic Conference
Legislative Memo
75th Legislature
Legislature Adjourns Sine Die
As required by the Texas Constitution, the 75th
session of the Texas Legislature adjourned sine die
(without another day) on June 2. The last weeks of the
session were marked with the usual frantic activity as
sponsors of bills which were in difficulty attempted to
find other pieces of legislation to attach their bills as
amendments. Legislators who wanted to stop legislation
from progressing were busy finding points of order to be
raised against further consideration of certain bills. The
most noteworthy example of a point of order being raised
against further consideration was that raised by Rep.
Arlene Wolgemulh. R-Burleson, on Memorial Day,
which effectively killed more than 50 pieces of legisla-
tion which were on the calendar for consideration, among
them bills of concern both to the Governor and the Texas
Catholic Conference. Rep. Wolgemuth was reacting to
the apparent demise of two pieces of legislation with
which she was very concerned, the bill to require
parental notification before an abortion could be per-
formed on a minor and legislation to ban same-sex
marriages in Texas. The Wolgemuth point of order was a
topic of much conversation during the final week of the
session and was the cause of a "personal privilege
speech” by Rep. Dan Jubiak, D-Rockdale, in which he
criticized the growing partisanship in the Texas Legisla-
ture and the tendency of members to resort to technicali-
ties in killing legislation.
STATE BUDGET. The conference committee on the
state budget for the 1998-99 biennium worked up to the
last two weeks of the session before sending the $86
billion budget on to the Governor for this signature.
Because of the demise of the Governor’s tax bill (see
below), budget writers had to decide what to do with a $ 1
billion surplus. The final decision was to use those funds
to provide some property tax relief.
GOVERNOR’S TAX BILL. In the final ten days of
the session the members of the conference committee on
the Governor’s tax bill (H.B. 4/HJR 4) finally called a
halt to negotiations and declared the bill dead for the
session. The Senators and Representatives simply were
not able to reconcile the vast differences in the bills
passed by each chamber. The House version provided
significantly more property tax relief but increased taxes
on business. The Senate version was clearly more
business friendly. Throughout the deliberations Rep. Paul
Sadler, D-Henderson, the chair of the House Select
Committee which drafted the House version, refused to
bring a watered down bill to the House for its consider-
ation. Announcing the demise of the bill, the Governor
indicated that he still thought property tax reduction was
a good idea but that he would not call a special session to
reconsider the issue.
REGULATION OF ABORTION. The bill (SB 86 by
Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano) to require parental
notification before an abortion could be performed on a
minor child died in the final week of the session. The bill,
which passed easily in the Senate and clearly had a
majority of votes in the House of Representatives, was
basically killed by the pro-abortion forces on a technical-
ity. They raised a point of order against further consider-
ation of the legislation because some of the scores of
witnesses who testified in support of the legislation when
it had a public hearing before the House State Affairs
Committee in April were not correctly and completely
identified as regards the organizations they represented.
The bill to require stricter regulation of abortion clinics
did pass and has been signed by the Governor.
SCHOOL CHOICE. Debate on the issue of school
choice took place in the House of Representative on
several occasions, including during the final week of the
session when Rep Talmadge Heflin, R-Houston,
attempted to add a school choice amendment to another
piece of legislation. The main vehicle lor school choice
debate was the Public Education Grant (PEG) program
sponsored by Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Larcdo. The PEG
program, passed during the last session, allows students
who attend low-performing public schools to transfer to
other public schools. Rep. Cuellar’s legislation signifi-
cantly expands the scope of the PEG program. During
House floor debate on Cuellars’ bill (H.B. 318), Rep. Ron
Wilson, D-Houston, attempted to add an amendment
See LEGISLATURE, page 12
SOUTH TEXAS CATHOLir
Capital punishment:
A Christian response?
By Mary Christmas
Since the late 1960s “life” issues
have dominated our social conscious-
ness. Humanae Vitae. Roe vs. Wade,
state referendums concerning homo-
sexual rights, euthanasia, physician
assisted suicide, and others have had a
significant effect on our culture and
its values. The success of the book and
movie “Dead Man Walking,” the
record-breaking numberof executions
in ourown state of Texas, and the trial of Timothy McVeigh
have brought the issue of capital punishment to the fore.
Even Christians who have committed themselves to the
protection of human life from conception until natural
death, often find
themselves con-
flicted on the issue
of capital punish-
ment. Do murderers,
those convicted of
heinous crimes, have
the right to life? Does
the state have author-
ity over life and
death? If so, under
what circumstances?
Catholics turn to
the Church for guid-
ance on this and
other moral issues.
What is Church
teaching on capital
punishment? The
Catechism of the
Catholic Church has The lethal-injection chamber at the federal correction facility in
thistosay:“Preserv- Terre Haute, Ind., has never been used. It is where Timothy
the common McVeigh will die if his sentence for the Oklahoma City bombing is
mg
good of society re- carried out. (CNS photo from Federal Bureau of Prisons)
quires rendering the
aggressor unable to inflict harm. For this reason the tradi-
tional teaching of the Church has acknowledged as well-
founded the right and duty of legitimate public authority to
punish malefactors by means commensurate with the grav-
ity of the crime, not excluding, in cases of extreme gravity,
the death penalty.” (#2266) Clearly the Church affirms the
right of the state to protect its citizens from those who would
do harm, but the right to inflict capital punishment is
restricted to cases of “extreme gravity” and “rendering the
aggressor unable to inflict harm.” The catechism goes on to
say: “If bloodless means are sufficient to defend human
lives against an aggressor, public authority should limit
itself to such means.”( #2267) The Church grants the state the
right to execute only in self defense and only if there is no
other way to protect society.
Notice that the Church says nothing about “justice” per se
in its stance on capital punishment. Its emphasis is on the
right of societal “self-defense.” If the state has a secure
prison system, where dangerous men and women can bt
safely incarcerated and removed from society, then execu
tions cannot be justified. Society can defend itself through
“bloodless” means. In Evangelium Vitae. Pope John Paul II
speaks out in what is clearly a development since the
publication of the universal catechism, against capital pun
ishment. “The nature and extent of the punishment ought na
go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cash
of absolute necessity; in other words, when it would noth
possible otherwise to de
fend society.” The death
penalty as a necessity fa
self defense he says, Ss
practically non existent”in
our world today as a result
of steady improvements in
our penal systems. (EV 56)
Most of the developed
nations of the world agree
and have already outlawed
capital punishment. The
United States is one of fa
few holdouts and even »c
are divided. Eleven states
do not allow the death pen-
alty for any reason. Those
who still have it show it-
luctance in carrying it out
While nationwide there «nr
over 3,000 on death tw
only 392 executions hast
actually taken place in the
last twenty years. Califor-
nia, for example, has 474
inmates on death row but
has executed only four in the same time period. While man;
Americans when polled, seem to support the “idea” of
having a death penalty, there also appears to be real aversion
to enforcing it. Texas seems to be an exception to this trend
with a record breaking eight executions in May and 11 mort
scheduled for this month. Texas has an extensive prison
system. By scheduling three or four executions a week, the
state seems almost to have reverted to a frontier mentality
and sense of justice. Are these executions necessary to
See PUNISHMENT, page 12
Capitol Comments
The death penalty in Texas
and tne bishops
By Brother Richard Daly,
Director of the Texas Catholic Conference
AUSTIN, TX—In the early summer an immense
amount of attention was focused on the death penalty in
Texas and throughout the nation. The trial of Timothy
McVeigh in the Oklahoma City bombing case, espe-
cially the sentencing phase of the jury deliberations,
raised the issue of capital punishment nationwide.
The American Bishops took the occasion to once
again reiterate their position in opposition to capital
punishment. In the Catholic tradition, the state does have
the right to take the life of an offender if that is what is
necessary to protect the common good. The Bishops
teach that with the possibility of life imprisonment
without the possibility of parole in the case of heinous
crimes such as the Oklahoma bombing, that is the most
desirable alternative to taking another human life.
As usual, the Bishops had a legion of critics for taking
the position that they do on capital punishment. It is very
difficult to argue in favor of sparing the life of a person
who has committed a crime that “cries to heaven for
vengeance.”
In Texas, the death penalty debate took on an even
greater significance as the slate rushed to execute an
incredible number of inmates on death row at the Ellis
Unit in Huntsville, Texas.
One observer noted that the number of residents just of
Harris County, Houston, Texas, who have been executed
by Texas exceeds the total number of citizens executed ly
any other state.
There is a litany of arguments against capital punish-
ment: it’s not a deterrent, it costs more to execute a
prisoner than to keep one incarcerated for life because of
the mandatory appeals process, and minorities and the
poor have had the death penalty imposed on them far
more often than the privileged.
Despite ail of these arguments, the people of Texas and
the United States by an overwhelming majority support
capital punishment. In Texas, we even refuse to enact
legislation to prohibit the execution of the mentally j
retarded.
The death penalty and the American Bishops opposilk*
to it will continue to be a topic of debate and controvert)-
Just as the discussion on abortion and the use of
weapons of war against civilians, especially nuclear i
weapons, the Bishops will not retreat from their pro-life
position on this issue.
P
! lev, on the ot!
T a great de.
‘ j|er ihe porno
a it is. Overf
J as all marrias
[! preference. Ii
lit it.
his morning a
| -ley suggestec
1 j p„ which has
' in my restra
:<krful. petha
J ofone.it is |
fs. Shirley l
, ii to go ami 1
T ut'foo-foo’’
jw isdanity Bei
pie-listen, pat
: again I have
outers dash i
k that they n<
2 iw-fat cream
I vered with gr
1 kmuchabou
T order also
uddenly then
counter and I
om/ng
Twlamd
11 it feels li|
rt. I’m sure
hraand.
deceiving t)
“gltt things
>’s emotion
otion.
ttitially that
ttlhepnsj
!ul soon-.
“tons. If y
’) about th
ftre are so
Haccep
lrs« you w
"gehism
'y would y,
* with yoi
honest■
wasn't a
n'1 sit arot
after. If h
ntembetu
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Espitia, Paula. South Texas Catholic (Corpus Christi, Tex.), Vol. 32, No. 13, Ed. 1 Friday, June 27, 1997, newspaper, June 27, 1997; Corpus Christi, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth856099/m1/4/: accessed July 6, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; .