| | |  Health & Beauty | May 2009 
Fairness in Drug Sentencing
 New York Times
go to original
The US Congress’s decision to mandate longer prison terms for people arrested with crack cocaine than those caught with the powdered form of the drug was both irrational and discriminatory.
The theory behind the law, that crack — cocaine cooked in baking soda — was more addictive and led to more violent crime was soon proved false. But by then, the country was locked into a policy under which the mainly minority drug users arrested with small amounts of crack were getting harsher sentences than white users caught with far larger amounts of powder.
The United States Sentencing Commission, which sets sentencing guidelines for the federal courts, reports that in 2006, 82 percent of the people convicted under the federal crack statute were black and only 9 percent were white. Many of the people given those harsh sentences were also first-time offenders who could have been rehabilitated through community-based drug treatment programs. In addition to ruining countless young lives, the policy undermined trust and confidence in the criminal justice system.
Congress has repeatedly ignored calls to equalize sentencing, partly because Justice Department officials in previous administrations have argued against it. This week, however, Lanny A. Breuer, the new chief of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, told lawmakers that it was time to revisit the crack/cocaine disparity.
Mr. Breuer argued that the sentencing disparity was “difficult to justify based on the facts and science, including evidence that crack is not an inherently more addictive substance than powder cocaine.” The law was especially problematic, he continued, “because a growing number of citizens view it as fundamentally unfair.”
Mr. Breuer is right. Instead of perpetuating this discrimination, Congress should quickly move to equalize the penalties for the possession of crack and cocaine. |
|
| |
Vallarta Weddings
Tell a Friend
Site Map
Print this Page
Email Us