For more than 14 years, Prison Fellowship’s reform arm, Justice Fellowship, has worked to make sentences for drug crimes fairer. We have been part of a large number of groups working to narrow the disparity in sentences between crack and powder cocaine. I am pleased to report that Congress has responded to this reform effort by passing the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010.
With a strong bi-partisan majority, the House of Representatives addressed the injustice of the current 100:1 disparity between crack- and powder-cocaine sentencing by narrowing it to 18:1. While I wish that they had eliminated the disparity entirely, the changes that they made to the law will make the penalties much fairer. It is the first time in 40 years that Congress has repealed a mandatory minimum sentence.
Conservatives and Liberals on Board
This was not a harebrained liberal scheme to set loose a horde of drug traffickers on the streets. Instead, both liberals and conservatives voted to undo an injustice in the law and correct the imbalance in sentences. It was co-sponsored by some of the most conservative members of the Senate, including Republican Sen. Tom Coburn, a physician from Oklahoma, and Republican Sens. Jeff Sessions and John Cornyn, former attorneys general of Alabama and Texas, respectively.
These legislators know that the current disparity in sentences for cocaine is horribly unjust, and they and their Democratic colleagues have acted to correct a mistake Congress made in 1986. That mistaken policy mandates a 10-year minimum sentence for a drug dealer with only a candy-bar-size amount of crack. Yet the same dealer would have to have a briefcase full of powder cocaine to receive that same 10-year sentence. The law clearly is unjust. The Senate voted unanimously to reform the disparity earlier this year. Now, as a result of the House passage, the bill is headed to President Barack Obama to be signed into law.
The sentencing disparity was written into law in 1986 based largely on the assertion that crack cocaine was more dangerous than powder cocaine, that it was instantly addictive and that it caused violent behavior. Since then, copious scientific evidence and U.S. Sentencing Commission analysis have shown that these assertions, which were not supported by sound data, were exaggerated or even false. In the meantime, the disparity resulted in a hugely disproportionate number of black Americans being sentenced under this mandatory-minimum law. Although the intent was not to single out one racial group over another, the impact of these laws amounted to discrimination.
Unclogging Courts and Prisons
The harsh crack penalties have fallen mostly on low-level cocaine offenders, many with no previous criminal history. According to an analysis by the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation, just seven percent of federal cocaine cases are directed at high-level traffickers. Instead, federal authorities squander huge amounts of resources on small cogs in the cocaine distribution network: One third of all federal cocaine cases involve an average of 52 grams—the weight of a candy bar. This is a terrible misuse of the time and talent of federal law enforcement and prosecutors. Plus, it has clogged the federal courts with cases that can be handled easily by the states. If we are to stop the flood of cocaine coming into the country, federal law enforcement should be focused on high-level traffickers.
The current law is partially to blame for the nation’s enormous prison population and the United States’ position as the world’s leader in incarcerations. It’s been an utter failure, and that is one reason the Fair Sentencing Act was supported by the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, the National District Attorneys Association, and the International Union of Police Associations. It also had the support of religious groups such as Prison Fellowship, the National Association of Evangelicals, and CitizenLink of Focus on the Family. In addition, many conservative leaders, such as David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union; Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform; former U.S. Rep. J.C. Watts; and former U.S. attorney and former head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, Asa Hutchinson, support this reform.
Despite the substantial cost to taxpayers and society, the crack-powder ratio has resulted in no real impact on the cocaine trade and has diverted precious federal resources from stopping drug kingpins to chasing after low-level local offenders. The truth is that crack cocaine dealers are at the lowest end of the cocaine distribution chain. These small dealers are easily replaced with other young people gullible enough to think they can get rich quickly dealing crack.
Fortunately Congress saw fit to fix the disparity. The new law will reduce the 100:1 crack-powder disparity to just 18:1. It will eliminate the five-year mandatory minimum for simple crack possession. Finally, it will address concerns about violence associated with crack use by recommending a guideline increase for drug crimes involving violence.
Our federal laws should reflect our shared values—values that include liberty, equality, and compassion. Enactment of this law will advance all of these values. It will put an end to excessive deprivations of freedom by treating drug offenders more equitably. It will demonstrate compassion for those who commit minor offenses and yet deserve a second chance to fulfill their responsibilities to family and community.
What a great day! But it is no time to rest on our laurels—and we aren’t. We will continue to work with the coalition that passed this bill so that the fairer sentences will apply to those who were convicted under the old law.