SENTENCING GUIDELINES NEED COMMON SENSE

Mandatory prison sentences have helped crack down on crime. But they have
also resulted in needlessly overcrowded prisons and continued racial
disparities -- which is why lawmakers are wisely rethinking them.

The mandatory-minimum movement took hold nearly two decades ago, when
Congress set fixed, required sentences for various federal crimes as part
of the Sentencing Reform Act in 1984. States soon followed -- including
Kansas, which passed its sentencing grid in 1993.

In most cases, the goals of the guidelines were good: to fight crime and to
make sentencing more consistent. But in recent months, prominent lawmakers
and politicians -- including President Bush -- have expressed concerns. And
with good cause.

They note that the required punishments have led to an explosion of
prisoners, many of whom are nonviolent offenders. In California, mandatory
sentences have resulted in a 25-fold increase in the number of drug
offenders behind bars. Nationally, the number of people in U.S. prisons for
all crimes quadrupled to 2 million from 1980 to 2000.

The sentences also have failed to meet the goal of eliminating racial
disparities. In Kansas, 34 percent of people in jails and prisons are
black, even though African-Americans make up only 5.7 percent of the
state's population.

Part of this disparity is caused by the guidelines. For example, users of
crack cocaine -- who tend to be minorities -- receive much, much harsher
mandatory sentences than users of powder cocaine -- who tend to be white.

So what needs to happen?

Lawmakers should return some discretion to judges, so they don't have to
send a first-time drug offender to prison for seven years just because she
had two prior and unrelated misdemeanors -- which happened recently in
Minnesota.

Lawmakers also need to review the guidelines to make sure they are fair
(crack versus cocaine) and aren't excessively harsh. To its credit, a panel
of Kansas lawmakers is meeting this fall to consider creating a drug court
that emphasizes treatment, not just punishment.

Mandatory sentences need not be completely abandoned. But they do need more
fairness, flexibility and common sense.

- --For the board, Phillip Brownlee