December 18, 2007

Ending sentencing inequity

Because of federal guidelines, defendants possessing 50 grams of crack have been punished as harshly as those with 5,000 grams of powder cocaine. This, despite crack and powder cocaine having the same effects.

Unfair sentencing is worse for African-Americans and Hispanics. People of color are disproportionately affected by the penalties for both types of cocaine, according to the Sentencing Project.

A Supreme Court ruling last week addresses this disparity. Federal district judges can now issue more reasonable penalties to people convicted of crack possession. And nearly 20,000 federal inmates convicted of crack possession can apply for small sentence reductions.

But focus is also needed on what often leads to incarceration—drug addiction.

In New York, half of state prison inmates are drug offenders, many of whom committed non-violent crimes to support their habit.

To address addiction, prosecutors like Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes promote strict treatment programs as alternatives to sentencing in some cases. Federal legislation like the Second Chance Act would support this intervention model and enhance drug treatment in prisons.

The legislation is critical. Releasing prisoners who are drug free, and connected to supportive services, lowers their chances of returning to prison.

Congressman Charles Rangel has pointed to $1 billion in prison costs that will be spared with the recent changes. That’s funding that can be re-invested in proposals like the Second Chance Act.

Congress must also adjust mandatory sentencing. Possession of five grams of crack automatically yields a five-year prison term. Powder cocaine in the same amount can result in just probation.

Harsh crack penalties may please crime and punishment zealots. But stacking people in prisons is not a long-term strategy for preventing and deterring crime.