Over the past decade or so, we've been reading about setbacks to the death penalty. Two themes emerge from these stories: (1) some poor slob is set free, right before execution, because DNA testing shows he didn't do the crime, or (2) some malfunction in the death penalty apparatus causes the death row inmate to go into convulsions or prolonged agony.

I continue to wonder if the death penalty will ever be abolished in the United States, and my sense is that the DNA angle will clinch it. Even right wingers don't want to see innocent people put to death, and once you pull the trigger, there's no bringing him back.

The method of execution is a dark horse in this equation. Last week, two events highlighted the problems associated with lethal injection, once deemed a humane alternative to the electric chair. As reported in Saturday's New York Times:

Gov. Jeb Bush yesterday suspended all executions in Florida, citing a troubled execution on Wednesday and appointing a commission to consider the humanity and constitutionality of lethal injections.

Hours later, a federal judge ruled that the lethal injection system in California violated the constitutional prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment.

“Today has been the most significant day in the history of the death penalty in America in many years,” said Jamie Fellner, director of United States programs for Human Rights Watch. “These developments show that the current lethal-injection protocols pose an unacceptable risk of cruelty.

Yes, that Jeb Bush, George W's little brother. Big brother couldn't kill them fast enough as governor of Texas, but maybe Jeb has a conscience. The lethal injection that got under Jeb's skin was particularly incompetent, according to the Times: "Florida started its moratorium two days after Angel N. Diaz’s execution appeared to go awry. Dr. William Hamilton, medical examiner in Alachua County, Fla., said yesterday that the needle with the lethal chemicals that should have gone directly into Mr. Diaz’s veins punctured the veins before entering soft tissue. It took a second dose and 34 minutes for him to die."

At the same time, a Federal judge ruled that lethal injection in California violates the constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

Judge Fogel found that prison execution teams had been poorly screened and had included people disciplined for smuggling drugs and with post-traumatic stress disorder. Moreover, the team members are poorly trained and supervised, he said.

Record keeping is spotty, the judge found, and the chemicals used are sometimes improperly prepared. The death chamber, he added, is badly lighted and overcrowded.

“Defendants’ actions and failures to act have resulted in an undue and unnecessary risk of an Eighth Amendment violation,” Judge Fogel wrote. “This is intolerable under the Constitution.”

Judge Fogel also noted concerns about the chemicals that California, Florida and 35 other states use. The protocols vary slightly, but almost all call for a series of three chemicals. The first is a barbiturate to render the inmate unconscious. The second is a paralyzing agent that makes the inmate unable to speak, move or breathe. The third is potassium chloride, which stops the heart.

Both sides in California agreed that it would be unconstitutional to inject a conscious person with either or both of the second two chemicals. The paralyzing agent would leave the inmate conscious while he suffocated, and potassium chloride is extremely painful.

I am the last person to defend violent criminals. But there is no question in my mind that the death penalty is a school-kid's solution to this serious problem. Execution does not bring the innocent victim back, and eye for an eye is the kind of bumper sticker nonsense that often drives national policy. Why is it OK to execute a common killer but the President can kill thousands in an unjust war? Until someone can answer that question for, me, I'll support any measure to stop the death penalty, even if Jebby Bush spearheads the effort.