California could have saved millions of dollars if it had accepted Ted Kaczynski's plea a year ago, when it was first offered. Studies of cases prosecuted since capital punishment was restored in 1973 show that the state pays millions of dollars more when it pursues the death penalty rather than life in prison. PNS associate editor Michael Kroll specializes in criminal justice and death penalty issues.

Taxpayers should be relieved to learn the government has finally agreed to forego a death penalty trial in the "Unabomber" case.

The agreement, which keeps Ted Kaczynski in prison for the rest of his life, will save millions of dollars. Indeed, had the government accepted this arrangement when the defense team first offered it a year ago, taxpayers would have been spared a host of unnecessary expenses, such as the costs of an investigation that had dozens of FBI agents in the field for months, the costs of moving Kaczynski's log cabin, the fees for private investigation and private attorneys on behalf of the defense.

Every capital punishment prosecution costs far more than any non-capital prosecution -- even considering the costs of keeping the convict alive for a lifetime. For one thing, capital prosecutions require two separate trials -- the first to determine guilt, the second the fix the penalty. With the stakes a matter of life or death, the losing side is bound to appeal, substantially increasing the costs.

A study completed in 1993 by Duke University's School of Public Policy found that cases ending in execution cost the state of North Carolina at least $2.16 million more than cases ending in a life term. As the vast majority of death penalty cases are in state courts, these figures suggest that states have spent more than $750 million -- three quarters of a billion -- for the privilege of executing 350 individuals since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976.

Every state study has come to the same conclusion. In California, work on the death penalty adds at least $90 million to the costs of running the justice system. Florida spent $57 million to execute 18 individuals over 15 years. And Texas -- which executed 36 in 1997 alone -- spends three times more on capital cases than non-capital prosecutions, even if one includes the expense of keeping a convict in a one-person cell in the highest security prison for 40 years.

Costs on the federal level are even higher. The Justice Department insists on adequate funding to guarantee the constitutional mandates for a fair trial and effective assistance of counsel. Thus each one of the 15 men on death row in federal facilities (only 3 of whom are white) has cost three or four times as much as even the most expensive case at the state level.

Not all the costs of death penalty prosecutions can be counted in dollars and cents. The decision to continue the prosecution of Kaczynski gave him many opportunities to grab headlines, disrupt the trial, and, as a center of attention, keep the painful memories and visceral emotion stirring in the soul of victims' families.

The enormous costs of the death penalty provide no benefits to society beyond those provided by life in prison -- except to elected politicians who have come to use a pro-death penalty position as shorthand for being "tough on crime" which translates into votes. That is why it is no surprise that among those opposed to accepting a Kaczynski plea that would avoid a costly death penalty trial were California governor Pete Wilson and president Bill Clinton.