Rave Radio: Offline (0/0)
Email: Password:
Anonymous
New Account
Forgot Password
Title:Crack vs. Powder
Published On:1997-05-05
Source:Dallas Morning News. (5597)
Fetched On:2008-09-08 16:20:03
Drug sentences
There should be parity in punishment

Federal uniform sentencing guidelines were established to mete out equal
justice for equal crimes. For the most part they have succeeded in
making race, ethnicity and class less of a factor in the punishment
process.

However, there is one glaring exception. It involves the disparity
between sentences for crack cocaine and powder cocaine. Under current
law, an offender must have 100 times as much powder cocaine as the
crystalline "rock" crack to warrant the same mandatory minimum sentence.

Since crack is cheaper and more prevalent in innercity neighborhoods,
the 100to1 ratio has put a disproportionate number of minorities and
poor people behind federal bars. Conversely, nonblacks and middle to
upperincome people get probation for powder cocaine.

Crack is a national scourge. Given the violence it produces, there is
some merit to the argument for a sentencing disparity. But a 100to1
ratio is completely out of line.

The U.S. Sentencing Commission promulgated the guidelines for federal
courts. But it was Congress that imposed the sentence disparity as part
of the 1986 AntiDrug Abuse Act. The Sentencing Commission opposed the
disparity and recommended in 1995 that the punishment for all cocaine
crimes be equalized. The Republican Congress and President Clinton
rejected that recommendation.

To its credit, the Sentencing Commission this week proposed a much more
sensible ratio, 5 to 1. It recommended fiveyear sentences for
trafficking amounts of between 125 and 375 grams of powder, and for 25
to 75 grams of crack. It also recommended equal sentences for possession
of equal amounts of crack and powder.

Mr. Clinton supports the change. He rightly stated that the sentencing
guidelines should reflect crack as "a more harmful form of cocaine." But
equally important, he recognized that the existing gap "has led to a
perception of unfairness and inconsistency in the federal criminal
justice system." Reducing that discrepancy, he said, is "warranted as a
matter of sound criminal justice policy."

Congress should endorse the Sentencing Commission's recommendation.
05/05/97
Member Comments
No member comments available...