isn't repealing bad laws and practices something that we wished that more politicians did?

"It saves the state money.."

Sure it does.

If he wanted to save the state money he would execute all death row inmates immediately.

He doesn't have the power to do that, obviously

It sure does. Death row is expensive.

I can fix that!

I suspect part of the problem here is that all the lawyers involved get a steady income, if they can keep it going for as long as possible. Self preserving machines form wherever a flow of money exists.

> and in favor of spending more money, not less.

A lot of them still aren't aware that the death penalty costs so much more because of the intense appeals process.

As can be seen with all the people in this comment section who assumed by default that executing people is cheaper.

The apparent contradiction between "pro-life" and "pro-death-penalty", and "anti-spending" and "pro-expensive-appeals" has always been addressed by "tough on crime saves more lives" and "its worth it because the death penalty is a deterrent".

Accusations of hypocrisy generally only work if they're coming from inside the house. Basically, if you know that I already disagree with you on a fundamental level, you're not going to trust that I have a deep enough grasp of your position to point out a real inconsistency.

It permanently protects these people from ever being executed, which the moratorium doesn't.