MISPLACED PRIORITIES

Attorney General John Ashcroft responded to the Justice Department's latest
figures on drug prosecutions by claiming that they prove that "federal law
enforcement is targeted effectively at convicting major drug traffickers and
punishing them with longer lockups in prison."

The data the department released show almost the opposite: that the nation's
tough drug sentencing regime is, to a great extent, being used to lock up
comparatively low-level offenders who could easily be prosecuted in state
courts.

The data, far from affirming that the federal drug effort is a success,
raise real questions about the federal government's prosecutorial priorities
in the war on drugs. The growth in federal drug prosecutions over the past
two decades has been prodigious.

Between 1984 and 1999, the number of suspects referred to federal
prosecutors in drug matters tripled, to more than 38,000 - of whom 84
percent were prosecuted. Drug cases during that time went from 18 percent of
the total federal criminal caseload to 32 percent.

This growth is not, as the attorney general suggests, largely the result of
locking up major traffickers. In 1999 only about one-half of 1 percent of
criminal referrals were for the most serious drug cases - those involving
what are known as continuing criminal enterprises - and these led to only
116 actual prison sentences. Two-thirds of drug defendants could not afford
to hire their own lawyers, a good indication that they were hardly
high-level traffickers.

It is simply wrong to argue that the focus of the federal drug effort has
been kingpins. Rather, in many jurisdictions, federal drug investigations
and prosecutions seem to run parallel with efforts of state prosecutors and
local police forces.