A NEW PLAN TO ROLL BACK DRUG TERMS

Assembly Democratic leaders offered their proposal to loosen New York's
stringent drug sentencing laws today, calling for the expansion of treatment
options for drug offenders, for a reduction in the range of mandatory
minimum sentences and for more discretion for judges to decide which drug
felons should be given treatment rather than prison.

The proposal, drafted by Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver's office and shared
with the Democratic conference this afternoon, goes considerably further
than the legislation Gov. George E. Pataki offered Friday. The new plan lays
the groundwork for a battle expected to unfold over the rewriting of New
York's Rockefeller-era drug laws. By all accounts, the chances of amending
the laws are better this year than ever before, in large part because of
Governor Pataki's pledge to do so.

The differences between his proposal and the Assembly's are substantial, and
the main sticking point will probably be over the scope of judicial
discretion. The governor's bill would allow judges to decide whether some
low-level drug offenders, those convicted of C-, D-, and E-level felonies,
could receive treatment instead of being imprisoned. The Assembly bill would
extend judicial discretion to Class B felons, by far the largest batch of
drug criminals.

"We returned discretion to the judges in a significant way, in contrast to
what's been proposed by the governor," said Assemblyman Jeffrion L. Aubry, a
Queens Democrat who has repeatedly and unsuccessfully introduced legislation
to overturn mandatory- sentencing laws. "I think judicial discretion is
going to be the heart of the battle."

Less politically fraught is the Assembly's proposal to expand drug treatment
options. It would set aside savings from the state's declining prison rolls
to create 2,000 new treatment beds. Roughly 9,300 such resident treatment
beds exist now, but they are not all for drug offenders. The governor's bill
does not specifically set aside money for treatment; his aides have said
such financing would come later.

Moreover, the governor's bill seeks to eliminate the parole board's
authority over early release and proposes stiffer penalties for marijuana
charges; the Assembly said nothing about marijuana, and is unlikely to
countenance either of those pieces, Mr. Silver said.

Mr. Pataki's bill includes the most significant reductions for drug felons
facing the most serious charges. Those convicted of A-1 felonies, for
instance, for the possession of four or more ounces of a controlled
substance would see their mandatory sentences reduced to 8 1/2 years to life
from a minimum of 15 years to life. The Assembly bill, meanwhile, would
raise the threshold for the harshest penalties: possession of eight ounces
would result in an A-1 felony charge, and the minimum sentence would be
reduced to 5 to 15 years.

Like the governor's bill, the Assembly speaker's proposals for treatment
alternatives would apply only to nonviolent felons. In an apparent effort to
appeal to moderates, the proposal would also increase penalties for certain
kinds of drug felons: those who are dubbed "major drug traffickers" would
face stiffer penalties, though it is unclear how they are to be defined. It
will take at least a couple of weeks for the proposal to be drafted into a
bill.

"It's going to be a smart program in that it will reduce sentences and
mandate treatment on the less serious crimes," Mr. Silver said. "It will
increase sentences on the most serious crimes."

New York's so-called Rockefeller drug laws, enacted in 1973, largely apply
to hard drugs, like heroin and cocaine, and sentencing is based solely on
the quantity of drugs and the defendant's felony record. Critics say these
laws have crowded prisons with low-level drug dealers and addicts who need
treatment. While those critics have pressed for greater judicial discretion
over sentencing, the state's prosecutors have vigorously opposed it. The
current law gives prosecutors far greater control of cases, allowing them to
use the threat of long mandatory sentences to squeeze plea bargains from
some prisoners and to force others into drug treatment.

Until this year, the Assembly leadership had not backed substantial drug law
changes. Mr. Silver had nary a word to say about the issue publicly, and
some upstate Democrats in particular feared that addressing it would put
them at risk of being perceived as soft on crime. The political calculations
changed when the governor took the first step earlier this year. But the
speaker was pressured from within the Assembly as well. Mr. Silver's silence
about drug law reform was one of the issues raised in attempts last year to
unseat him as speaker. The attempted coup was unsuccessful, thanks in some
measure to the support of black lawmakers. Revamping drug laws is one of
their chief legislative priorities.