Pubdate: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 Source: Times Union (Albany, NY) Copyright: 2003 Capital Newspapers Division of The Hearst Corporation Contact: http://www.timesunion.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/452 Author: Robert Gangi Note: Robert Gangi is executive director of the Correctional Association of New York DRUG LAW REFORM CAN HELP STATE CASH WOES By ROBERT GANGI Given Governor Pataki's frequent calls for drug law reform, it's disappointing that his state budget proposal makes no reference to the significant savings that would result. The governor's plan does include a recommendation that would result in the early release of up to 1,300 inmates who were convicted of non-violent offenses and had good prison records. Why are reform proponents disappointed? Because the Pataki measure would save only $20 million, a relatively small amount when put up against an estimated $11.5 billion budget deficit. And because the governor's proposal still fails to address the fundamental problem of costly mandatory sentencing laws. We hope that New York's fiscal crisis will lead to the repeal of the Rockefeller-era drug laws. These 1973 statutes have caused rather than solved problems, including draining state resources by fueling skyrocketing prison costs. During the past 20 years, New York's annual prison operating expenditures have jumped from about $450 million to more than $2 billion. The laws' harshest provision requires that judges impose a prison term of no less than 15 years to life for anyone convicted of selling 2 ounces or possessing 4 ounces of a narcotic substance. The penalties apply without regard to the circumstances of the offense or the individual's character or background. Prison terms under these laws are based not on the offenders' role in narcotics transactions, but on the amount of drugs in their possession at the time of arrest. The kingpins know enough not to carry drugs. It is the foot soldiers who get caught literally holding the bag and face long, hard prison time. This provision of the law actually provides an incentive to police and prosecutors to concentrate on low-level dealers and users, rather than on the drug trade's major profiteers. Although studies show that the majority of the people who use and sell drugs are white, more than 94 percent of inmates doing time in New York for the sale or possession of narcotics are people of color. The drug laws and other law enforcement policies that produce this disproportionate outcome have a devastating impact on communities of color -- by uprooting individuals and breaking up families. New York's politicians have ignored all that. Narrow economic and political concerns have blocked reform. Since 1982, the state has opened 38 prisons, all in rural, mainly white, mainly economically depressed areas, all represented by Republican state senators. At the beginning of 2000, 93 percent of all state inmates were confined in prisons situated in Republican Senate districts. Facilities in these areas receive more than $1.1 billion annually for operating expenses. They employ almost 30,000 people. In addition, Albany policymakers have been unwilling to take on the state's district attorneys. The drug laws remove discretion from the judge and concentrate it in the prosecutor's office. Whoever sets the charge, -- the district attorney -- controls the outcome of the case. New York's prosecutors have aggressively opposed any proposal to seriously amend the drug laws because they are protecting their preserve. Many politicians, wary of the "soft on crime" tag, fear speaking out against the self-interested posture of law enforcement officials. Countering these obstacles is the cold hard evidence of the laws' financial extravagance. It costs New York more than $610 million annually to confine more than 19,000 drug offenders, most of whom have no history of violent, predatory behavior. The price of building the prisons to confine them comes to about $2 billion. Moreover, alternatives are available that save money and cut crime. Study after study has shown that treatment is not only much less costly than imprisonment, but also more successful in reducing the crime associated with the narcotics trade. Also relevant to this debate is the strong drug law reform movement that has taken shape in recent years. On wintry days in 2001 and 2002, several thousand people rallied in Albany under the "Drop the Rock" banner, the largest protests on a criminal justice issue at the state capital in memory. For the first time since the laws were enacted, mainstream political figures Andrew Cuomo and Thomas Golisano, while running for governor last year, publicly endorsed repeal. Civic and religious leaders, civil rights organizations and editorial boards of newspapers throughout the state have promoted change. An October New York Times poll indicated that 79 percent of New Yorkers favor a return to judicial discretion in drug cases. So far, however, the political "cover" that facts and public support provide has been insufficient -- the state's elected officials have mustered neither the will nor the wisdom to repeal the laws. We have known the truth about these laws for a long time, that they are unjust, ineffective, racially biased and enormously wasteful. Will the undeniable need and desire to cut the cost of government in this difficult financial period finally lead New York's policymakers to do the right thing and eliminate the state's drug statutes? - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom