Pubdate: Tue, 13 Nov 2007
Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Copyright: 2007 Los Angeles Times
Contact:  http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/248

CRACK SENTENCING NEEDS ANOTHER FIX

Retroactively Shortening Sentences Would Make The System More Equitable.

Congress probably didn't set out to pass racially discriminatory laws 
20 years ago when it first began clamping down on crack cocaine. The 
intention was to stem a drug epidemic that was rapidly tearing 
inner-city neighborhoodsapart -- driving gang warfare, splitting 
families and, it was feared, creating a generation of "crack babies" 
too hopelessly damaged to ever become productive members of society. 
The result was federal sentencing guidelines that imposed much 
harsher terms on dealers in crack than in powder cocaine.

Regardless of the intention, those guidelines proved not only 
discriminatory but ineffective -- as well as unjustified by 
scientific research. More than 80% of those serving time in federal 
prison on crack charges are African American. This has justifiably 
fueled distrust and disrespect for the law in black communities. Why 
should a black crack addict get more time than a white cocaine 
addict? Especially when research has shown that the two drugs are 
pharmacologically identical? Moreover, 20 years of harsh crack 
sentences have done nothing to stem the drug trade.

As of Nov. 1, the sentencing disparity has been eased, and Congress 
did the right thing by allowing the changes to take effect. Today, 
the U.S. Sentencing Commission, a panel created by Congress in 1984 
to ensure fair terms for those convicted on federal charges, will 
discuss whether to make the reduction in sentences retroactive -- a 
move that would shave an average of at least two years off the terms 
of nearly 20,000 inmates.

The Justice Department argues that returning all those convicts to 
the streets represents a potential danger to the community. Perhaps, 
but then the release of any inmate represents a potential danger; 
anyone eligible for release has already served ample time for his or 
her crime. Because the Sentencing Commission has already ruled that 
the crack guidelines were unfair, it would be inconsistent to keep 
inmates in prison simply because they were sentenced before the rules 
were changed. What is unfair now was unfair then.

It's abundantly clear that the get-tough-on-crime approach didn't 
work with crack cocaine -- the epidemic is alive and well and still 
takes a daily toll in Los Angeles. The sentencing changes should 
signal the start of a new approach, one that focuses on 
community-based treatment, job training and other forms of 
rehabilitation for addicts.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman