Mandatory Drug Sentences May be on Chopping Block in
Congress
By Derek Gilna
For years we
have been advocating a change in mandatory minimum sentences because they are
fundamentally unfair, especially when they are based on hearsay “evidence”
produced by the U.S. Probation Department.
It’s hard to beat the house when the deck is “stacked.” However, the Senate this past week finally
took the first steps to redress the balance by voting out of committee a bill
sponsored by politicians of both parties cutting mandatory minimums in half and
providing a possible path to retroactive relief.
Make no
mistake, much as we saw with the crack law, the “devil will be in the details,”
and Assistant U.S. Attorneys in every jurisdiction will be fighting their own
rear-guard action to limit the effectiveness of this measure. The Prison Guards
Union will object, saying that it will cost jobs. The private prison industry will be lobbying
the recipients of their campaign contributions in Washington
to block full implementation. The bill
still has to pass the full Senate, win approval from the U.S. House of
Representatives, and be signed by the President before it goes into effect.
There will be no automatic approval
of applications for relief. Much as happened with the Fair Sentencing Act, you
will get one shot at relief, and it is in your best interests to make it a good
one.
The one factor that gives us reason
for optimism is what we have been saying for months-that the U.S.
is short on cash, and funding the corrections industry is on few politician’s
wish list. The sponsors may or may not
feel strongly about prisoner relief, and are pursuing their own agenda: some
want to limit the reach of government, and others want the money saved on
prison operations to go into new social programs. We say to all of them, what has taken you so
long to get this far.
