Governors have the power of life and death in Alabama when it comes to granting or denying clemency to Death Row inmates.

Rarely have governors used their power to stop a state execution. Based on interviews with the four major candidates for governor, clemency isn't something any of them is likely to grant over the next four years.

Incumbent Bob Riley, Roy Moore, Lucy Baxley and Don Siegelman all said they support capital punishment. With the exception of Siegelman, they say they would have to be presented with overwhelming evidence to order a moratorium on executions.

Capital punishment is not the only area where the four enjoy broad agreement. All said they support changes in sentencing laws, which they agree tie the hands of judges too often and lead to overcrowding of state prisons with non-violent offenders.

Here are the candidates' answers to questions posed by The Birmingham News. Editor's notes and follow-up questions are in parenthesis.

Do you believe changes are needed in Alabama sentencing law, and if so, how? Baxley: Yes. I really would like to see more alternative sentencing. I believe in locking up violent criminals, and I also believe in punishing crime. But it seems to me, in this drug culture that we're living in, that there are people in trouble with the legal system that aren't necessarily a threat to other people, and I think they ought to be out supporting themselves. I think they ought to be monitored and make restitution, and I think we ought to try to rehabilitate everybody we can because I am not convinced anybody who comes out of the penal system is not in worse shape that when they came in.

Moore: "Yes. As a judge, I know most of the judges try to do a good job, no matter what party. When you get down to being a judge, your best side comes out because it's a very heavy burden to carry to sentence someone to a long prison term. Every case differs. Mandatory federal guidelines have failed. Ask any federal judge, any, if mandatory federal guidelines have worked and they will tell you no. Likewise, with state judges, mandatory sentencing guidelines do not work. They overburden your prison system. They are unfair to defendants. They are unfair to judges who oppose them. And sometimes, many times, judges and district attorneys do things to get around them."

(What changes would you propose?) "Well, what they're doing now under the habitual felony law, many times prosecutors are multiplying the sales of drugs or things to build up for larger sentences. There is some abuse in the habitual felony law, and I think it needs to be looked at. Sentencing needs to be studied.

(Would you drop all mandatory sentences?) "I didn't say that. I would not (drop them all). But sentencing guidelines need to be studied."

(Do you think we need more alternative types of sentencing like community corrections?) "I think so, yes. A lot of people are put into prisons for drug abuse when they need to be treated for drug abuse."

(And, are put into prison because the judge has no choice under the sentencing guidelines?) "I think more choice needs to be given to judge, yes. I have a great respect for judges in this state to do what is right under the law. They have a difficult job, and they know they struggle with it because I know some good judges. But sometimes their hands are tied and they are forced to do things they do not believe in, they do not think is proper, appropriate, and sometimes I agree with them. Sentencing guidelines are often passed in response to public outcries to one specific case."

Riley: "We changed it this year. Now, we couldn't make it mandatory. But for the first time, we have new voluntary guidelines that judges can look at. Does that mean you can absolutely enforce them? It doesn't, but mandatory guidelines bring up a whole other series of problems. But, with voluntary guidelines, at least there is a benchmark all judges can be judged on and it's the same benchmark. Then, if you have certain judges that seem to be abusing this without legitimate reasons, you can go in and look at particular instances. You could never do that before. I was up in Gadsden ... on a drug raid. I went by and looked at a community corrections facility they had set up in the county jail. There were 300 people that had gone through that program, and it's a great program. It is handled locally. It costs the state little if anything. Most community corrections cost us 20 cents on the dollar for what it does if we put them in corrections. There were over 300 people that normally would have come into the Department of Corrections that never did. If we had those all over the state of Alabama, then you reduce the numbers. If we can get to transition centers, a person we have had locked up for 20 years, the old model was give him $20 and a bus ticket. Now, you think how much the world has changed in 20 years. We're setting up a program with the two-year colleges now to bring them (inmates) out four or five months before their end of sentence and give them a legitimate job skill that is tied to a job when they walk out the door. We've got kids, people out there that have been out on parole for several years that all of a sudden they go out and party one weekend and have a dirty urine simple. We put them right back in prison, and once you get them in there it will take two to three years to get them out. What we need is some six-month drug rehab program that will treat the problem they have without putting them back into a system that really does not address the fundamental problem. That's the kind of reform you're going to have to have. We have found out over the years that a lot of the time when you take an 18- or 19-year-old and throw them into hard lockdown that when he comes out he's probably worse off and has a mental attitude that is different from the one he had when he went in, and that's not good for society."

(So everything is in place to make these changes? Is community corrections about to spring up everywhere?) "We're going to fund these things all over the state. I think 10 or 11 communities have them today. We're trying to stand them up as fast as we can. ... Now don't get this wrong. They are locked up. But by locking them up in the community, and by them working in the community, there is a certain level of peer pressure from their families and others. But the people who know them best, and the judge has the option to send them into corrections where they will be subjected to a lot of things they won't in community (corrections). You can do it in community (corrections) and do it so much cheaper, and it's so much more effective. I think we have so much in place that in a year, a year and a half, I think you are going to see a drastically different prison system."

Siegelman: "I think we probably do. The objective is to make sure that people who can't change their behavior and are going to be violent criminals never get out. Beyond that, when you're looking at people that committed a crime that they're sorry for and they regret having done it and want to change their life, I think we need to get them in and out as quickly as possible. We want them to have another chance at life. You want them to be productive citizens."

(Would you support shorter sentences or alternative punishments for nonviolent offenders?) "People need to be looked at individually, not as a big bundle, because you don't want to let somebody out who hasn't made a decision to change their life. There are all kinds of crimes that people commit that don't pose a physical danger. But if they haven't made a commitment to change, they wouldn't qualify (for shorter sentences). You might keep them in community corrections, but you wouldn't let them out earlier. If they're going to continue to write bad checks or to steal from people during daylight hours and not hurt anybody, or continue to sell drugs to our children, we don't want to let them out."

The prison system's budget has doubled over the last 10 years or so, but the prisons are still at double capacity. Do you have a plan to fix this?

Baxley: "Sentencing. It goes back to that. When you're talking about long-range addressing it, you go back and try to salvage these kids and try to get them on the right track. Then beyond that, you go to alternative sentencing and say what can we do to punish you for a crime other than locking you up."

Moore: "Yes. First we need to cut the recidivism rate by utilizing a better rehabilitation program, which could include private and even religious organizations to transition them (inmates) back into society. I think we need to work at the work-release program. We want to make sure dangerous prisoners are not released back into society. But for those who are not dangerous, I think we need to put energy back into work release." (You mean expand it?) "Actually, expanding the program is not necessarily what needs to be done. Utilizing what we had before, it's been cut back. We need to revitalize the work-release program. And I believe in working the prisons. I think they owe a debt to society and they can repay that debt by working it out, doing things that the people of Alabama need. That would be a good thing for the prisons as well as good thing for the state."

Riley: Let's walk through prisons. Prisons have been for the large part ignored for decades, and we inherited a system that was about to be taken over by a court. That is one thing I will do everything in my power to keep from happening. We got the backlog in county jails down to zero. Has it gone up from there? Yes it has. Is it better than it's ever been? Yes it is. ... But if the model doesn't work, you have to change the model. That's what we got passed in the Legislature this time. You're going to see a completely different dynamic in prisons and corrections a year from now. Once we can stand up community corrections in each one of these counties that will take it, once we have transportation centers set up, once we have technical violator centers set up, we should be able to not only mange the population but we should be able to reduce it down to the point where it is manageable. But until you change the system, it's not going to happen. We have a new commissioner who is looking at some very innovative things to help the system. We're looking at taking work release to a different level. We have 20,000 people sitting over there every day. There is no reason that they can't be doing work programs that generate dollars back into the system. We're looking at a variety of programs. The four I just mentioned will not only allow us to stabilize the situation, I think it's going to allow us to reduce the population back down to a manageable level and keep recidivism rates low."

Siegelman: Part of it is community corrections. I tell you what I wouldn't do. I wouldn't send female prisoners to Louisiana at a higher cost than you can keep them in Alabama.

Do you favor capital punishment? Why? Under what condition would you support a moratorium? Baxley: I just think there are certain crimes that are so heinous that a person doesn't deserve to live if they've done them. (Would consider a moratorium) only on the condition that someone presented convincing evidence to me that we did not have our system totally free of the possibility of innocent people being executed.

(Are you convinced that everyone on death row was properly tried and sentenced and did the crime for which they are incarcerated?) I'm not going to say yes or no to that. But I am convinced that our legal system has adequate remedies and laws for them to access on appeals. Look how long they stay on death row.

Moore: "Yes." (Why?) "It's the law. I think it's a deterrent to crime. I think it's something you can expect if you do certain crimes. I think we have sufficient safeguards on it. I think it takes too long to implement today. Up to 14 years is way too long. I think appeals should be heard. The problem in the capital punishment system is it's not being executed swiftly. When I talk about swiftly, I'm talking about after appeals have been completed. I think we need to put pressure on the attorney general and the court system to move rapidly, to have some legislation in Alabama requiring time limits for appeals."

(Are there too many avenues of appeal?) "I don't think there are too many avenues of appeal; I think there are too many frivolous appeals. I think sometimes these appeals are frivolous and should be ruled on very quickly. There are some on death row right now (that) we tried when I was an attorney, and that was a long time ago."

(Under what conditions would you support a moratorium?) "I haven't thought of any." ("What would someone have to present to you, what type of evidence?) "You can bend statistics all over the place. Mistakes can be made. Man is not perfect. But that doesn't diminish the need for capital punishment in the commission of heinous crimes, and we have some pretty heinous crimes. I don't support society keeping somebody up for the rest of their lives when they've committed heinous crimes and been found guilty."

Riley: "Absolutely. ... I think there are some crimes so heinous that they deserve that level of punishment. I think it is a deterrent. Other people debate that. But I still think that it is something that in the back of some minds, some would have an absolutely horror or fear of. And as long as I think it's a deterrent, I will continue to support it. If as governor of the state I was faced with overwhelming evidence that someone who was not guilty had been put to death and it was not a rare occurrence but something that was standard, then I would (favor a moratorium) until you could correct the system, would have a review of all the cases."

(Are you comfortable with the system now?) "You know, I really am. Everybody is going to debate this and everyone is going to have a different opinion. I was reading some articles about the disproportional amount of minorities on death row. But since I've been governor there have been more whites executed. This is something every governor takes very seriously. It's amazing to me how often this does come up. There is no one, unless you've been in the governor's chair, knows what these executions mean to a governor. It's not something anyone takes lightly."

Siegelman: "I do support capital punishment. I've set a lot of execution dates and sat through a lot of clemency hearings as governor. I think we need to ensure that when a governor makes that final decision to deny clemency, that every chance has been taken to ensure that what's about to take place is something that should take place. It's probably the most solemn and serious duty a governor has. So I would want to utilize every possible tool. Certainly, if it took a moratorium to do that, I would consider that as well.

(What would be the circumstances to make you support a moratorium?) One of the things is looking at the DNA testing that either has been or could be done. If that is not being done as a safety measure, that certainly is one thing that would need to be looked at. This prosecution that I am currently going through has awakened me to the realization that the criminal justice system can be abused by the government. Because of that, I am going to approach the issue of certainly the death penalty and the criminal justice system with a different point of view, having experienced the abuse by prosecutors myself. I can tell you this, an unemployed steel worker wouldn't be able to face these people, wouldn't have been able to stay in the arena with them. He would have been gone.

"I'm just as tough on law and order as I've always been. But I can tell you my attitude today is significantly different than it was four years ago."

Do you support expanded use of private prisons? Baxley: "The thing I feel most strongly about is the state needs to get their prisoners out of the county jails at the time prescribed by law. Otherwise, it is an unfunded mandate from the state to the counties. ... I would rather our state have its own prisons. But in the short term if we have more prisoners than we can house, I think it's an appropriate way to do it. This (prison crowding) didn't happen overnight. We obviously dropped the ball when it comes to alternative sentences and knowing that the number of prisoners is growing."

Moore: "I think it needs to be studied, but I don't think it can be completely a private deal. I think the state has to retain control. It's something that can be studied. But I haven't studied that before."

Riley: "They will only expand under my administration if it's on an as-needed basis. We have people out there who will go out and build a prison and then they will go out and use several states or the federal government. It makes more sense to me to go out and have the flexibility to incarcerate in a private prison as long as we can do it at relatively the same cost and then when we don't need it, then pull them back into our facilities. We are looking long term at building some new prisons. If you look at ours today, we're going to have to start phasing out the older facilities. They are not efficient. They are not cost effective."

(How long before we build new prisons?) "That will depend on a number of factors, including how quickly community corrections spring up in counties, how closely judges follow the new voluntary sentencing guidelines, how quickly the state can bring on line transition centers."

Siegelman: "No. Absolutely not. Private prisons have no control over prisoners. Only a sheriff or a public law enforcement officer has legal control over prisoners. I don't even think it's legal to put prisoners in private facilities. We need to get the female prisoners closer to their families. If it's possible, put female prisoners in county jails so they maintain a relationship with their families.

(Why would you treat female prisoners differently than males?) "I think females ought to be treated differently. I think a female that's got a family and children, we ought to try to keep them closer to their families. I think it's good for rehabilitation. One of the problems we have is Tutwiler (prison for women) is way overcrowded. We need to do something about that. Those who are candidates for a community corrections program could in some cases be moved to county facilities as long as the state is willing to pay for it and the sheriff is willing to take them.

Back to News