DRUG TALKS MUST LEAD TO ACTION

Some state lawmakers are pleased with themselves for having the guts to
meet in public to talk about their failed efforts to change New York's drug
laws.

This passes for progress in Albany.

But it's not good enough for those who realize it borders on insanity to
lock up nonviolent, first-offense offenders for decades, sometimes life,
for possessing a few ounces of drugs. In some instances, rapists and
murderers are doing less time.

It's not enough for those serving in prison because they got caught in
someone else's web of deceit. There are people like Lance Marrow, given 15
years to life after a guest brought drugs into his house -- drugs found by
police.

It's not enough for the countless judges who have criticized the drug laws
as they were forced to impose mandatory sentences on defendants. Retired
New York City Supreme Court Judge Jerome Marks once called the so-called
Rockefeller drug statutes "the most unjust law enacted in my time."

It's not enough for those who profoundly believe many of these convicts
should be in drug treatment programs.

And it's not enough even for those who disregard all those social and
fairness arguments and just look at the cold, hard numbers from the
taxpayers' standpoint: Drug treatment can cost less than $15,000 a year;
incarceration twice that.

Over the years, Gov. George Pataki's own actions have demonstrated that he,
too, knows the drug laws are out of kilter. Each holiday season, he grants
a certain number of clemencies, and the large majority of them are
drug-related cases. In some cases, like in 2000, all the governor's
clemencies have gone to prisoners convicted of nonviolent, drug-related crimes.

Give judges discretion

Nobody is talking about opening up the prison doors and letting all the
drug convicts out. But certain revisions, such as doing away with mandatory
minimums, must occur. It's common sense to let a judge take into account
whether someone is a first-time or repeat offender. It's common sense to
let judges consider mitigating factors, such as the actual role a person
played in a drug transaction. Sentences shouldn't be strictly based on the
weight of the drugs sold or in someone's possession when apprehended.
Small-time drug carriers shouldn't be doing more time than the drug
kingpins bankrolling these illegal operations.

At the recent meeting, 10 lawmakers representing the Assembly and Senate
talked about these failed reform efforts and essentially agreed to continue
to disagree. Traditionally, the Democratic-controlled Assembly has sought
broader reforms than either the Republican governor or the GOP-controlled
Senate are willing to support.

Over the years, the governor has shown some flexibility, suggesting, for
instance, that judges should be given more authority to impose treatment
rather than incarceration in some instances. Reform advocates say the
governor's proposals don't go far enough. Pataki also wants to increase
penalties when a gun is involved in drug transactions -- an idea the
Democrats should quickly embrace in exchange for getting more nonviolent
offenders into drug treatment programs.

A compromise can, and should, be reached; the two sides have been close at
times. They should keep talking -- but a wary public has every reason to
refrain from even faint praise until an agreement is sealed.

--Original Message----- From: Tony Newman
[mailto:tnewman@drugpolicy.org] Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 5:42 PM To:
Penney, John Subject: Rockefeller Reform: EDITORIAL NEEDED!

Dear John Penney/ Poughkeepsie Journal Ed Board---

We know that your newspaper has been a leading advocate in calling for
reform of the Rockefeller drug laws. Today, as Rockefeller reform is at a
standstill, we ask you to please weigh in again. As you know, this year,
the state legislature created an unprecedented opportunity for Rockefeller
reform by convening a conference committee to reach an agreement for
changing these drug laws. But four weeks after its initial meeting, the
committee has been terminated without accomplishing reform. An editorial
call for action from your publication could prove crucially helpful at this
moment.

Longtime advocates are clear about what real Rockefeller reform means:
sentence reduction, judicial discretion, retroactivity, and treatment
options outside of prison. The Senate Republican leadership has only been
willing to talk about sentence reduction for a small minority of
Rockefeller cases, and has resisted serious consideration of the other
three components of real reform as well.

Despite their finger-pointing, the Senate Republicans are clearly
responsible for walking away from the conference committee negotiating
table. Perhaps their cozy relationship with the state DAs explains their
aversion to real reform. Perhaps it's due to their political investment in
the booming prison business. Two of the Senators on the conference
committee, Dale Volker and Mike Nozzolio, have a combined 14 prisons in
their districts -- a whopping 23% of the state's total prison population.
For them, more humane and effective drug policies -- real reform -- could
threaten a steady flow of taxpayer dollars to their districts.

An editorial questioning and highlighting the Republicans' underlying
political motives for resisting reform -- i.e. DAs and prisons -- would
help send an essential message to Albany: that the people of New York
understand the political game, the players and the stakes.

Thank you so much for your consideration. If you would like more
information, please visit www.realreform2004.org
(http://www.realreform2004.org/ . We have just launched a one minute flash
animation that explains the issue: www.realreform2004.org/flash. For more
information on the current status of Rockefeller reform please see the
following articles: The Times Union (Albany, NY)

June 9, 2004 Wednesday

DRUG LAW DEBACLE;

A conference committee reaches a dead end in a long overdue attempt to
agree on reform

State lawmakers appear on the verge of once again walking away from a long
overdue reform of the harsh Rockefeller Drug Laws. This is shameful and
cruel, and the Senate's leaders must bear full blame for becoming an
obstacle to progress.

For seven years the Legislature has failed to reach an accord on a more
just and humane system of punishment for those who sell or buy drugs. This
year, there was hope that reform would be achieved. Those hopes were buoyed
when the Senate and Assembly took the rare step of trying to reach an
agreement in an open conference committee. Advocates for drug law reform,
which include nearly everyone except the state's prosecutors, were heartened.

But on Monday, those hopes appeared dashed when senators on the conference

committee walked away without reaching an agreement with their Assembly

counterparts and without any further public meetings on the agenda. The talk is

that the Senate will continue its deliberations behind closed doors and likely

pass a measure later this month. But without the Assembly on board, the

one-house bill will be meaningless.

The impasse comes down to this: Senate negotiators favor reducing sentences

for the most major drug offenses, which are now punishable by mandatory
terms of

up to life in prison. Assembly negotiators want more liberal sentencing

guidelines to extend beyond that, down to low-level offenses. And, most

importantly, they want judges to have the discretion to send offenders to

treatment programs rather than prison.

The Assembly's position is a blueprint for genuine reform. Under the

Rockefeller statutes, even first-time offenders can face a prison term of 15

years to life for selling as little as four ounces of a controlled substance.

Drug users are also liable for long prison terms, even though most experts on

addiction agree that they can be better rehabilitated through treatment

programs.

Reform also would save taxpayers money and ease the strain on the state

budget. One watchdog group, the Correctional Association of New York, estimates

that overhauling drug laws could save some $250 million a year, based on a

$60,000 annual cost to keep a single offender behind bars.

Those costs must be weighed against the demonstrated failure of the

Rockefeller statutes over the last three decades. They have never stopped drug

crime in New York, as originally intended. Instead drug kingpins avoid justice

by using youngsters to ply their trade, and then suffer the consequences if
they

are caught. Drug users, meanwhile, aren't helped by a system that leaves no
room

for treatment as an alternative to jail.

The only staunch defenders of these draconian laws are the state's district

attorneys, who use them to wring plea bargains from suspects. But what a huge

cost New York is paying for that kind of strong-arm law enforcement -- a cost

that must be measured not only in dollars but in far too many shattered
lives as

well.

Newsday

Drug laws' rocky road After years, lawmakers in Albany still haven't
achieved essential reforms

June 14, 2004

State legislators have been talking about reforming the Rockefeller drug
laws for almost a decade. Unfortunately, it's still mostly just talk.
Worthwhile changes have been made at the margins, but a wasteful core of
long, mandatory prison sentences for minor drug offenses remains stubbornly
in place.

Albany should step up to the plate and return sentencing discretion to
judges. That's the best way to ensure that punishment will fit individual
crimes and that the public will get as much security for its prison dollars
as possible.

There was cause for hope last month. For the first time, reform was debated
in public by a conference committee with members from both the Senate and
the Assembly. In the past, Rockefeller reform - like most other state
issues - was left to New York's three men in a room, a dysfunctional system
in which the governor, Senate majority leader and Assembly speaker call the
shots. That's an important step forward on process but, unfortunately, it
hasn't ended the stalemate.

The committee, chaired by Assemb. Jeffrion Aubry (D-East Elmhurst) and Sen.
Dale Volker (R-Depew) met six times before calling it quits - at least for
now. It made progress on agreeing to reduce some prison terms. But
Republicans balked when it came to the heart of the matter: eliminating
mandatory prison sentences. When prison is mandatory, prosecutors dictate
who will land behind bars when they decide what charges to file. Think of a
baseball game in which one team is allowed to umpire.

That's just not how things should work. Prosectors should prosecute,
defense lawyers defend and judges judge, which includes meting out punishment.

Mandatory prison sentences waste money and lives. They should no longer be
the law in New York.

The Daily Record of Rochester (Rochester, NY)

June 11, 2004 Friday

SECTION: NEWS

ROCKEFELLER DRUG LAW REFORM URGED BY FORMER NEW YORK prosecutors,

judges

BYLINE: Staff

With discussions to reform the Rockefeller drug laws at an apparent impasse
in the joint legislative conference committee, the New York State Bar
Association has released a statement endorsed by former prosecutors and
judges urging legislators to continue working toward an agreement.

The statement says: "We, the undersigned, have had firsthand experience
with enforcing and implementing the Rockefeller drug laws. We have felt our
hands tied by the unduly harsh, mandatory sentencing requirements of these
laws. Too many people have been warehoused who might have been returned to
productive, law-abiding lives through drug treatment. Too many families
have been destroyed. Too much time and money have been wasted carrying out
a failed policy. Our legislative leaders should not miss this opportunity
to enact a much needed reform; a failure now might well push back any hope
of reform for many years."

"Three decades of experience under these laws have shown that they have
failed to achieve their goals," said Kenneth G. Standard, NYSBA president.
"They have not eliminated the drug trade while they have filled New York's
prisons with low-level, non-violent offenders and addicts who receive
unduly harsh prison terms. It is a widely held belief that the Rockefeller
drug laws have had a deleterious effect on public trust and confidence in
the legal system."

The statement continues, "For many years there has been a general
recognition that New York's draconian 'Rockefeller drug laws' must be
reformed. Enacted in 1973, these mandatory sentencing laws were intended to
deter drug use by sending drug 'king pins' to prison for very long periods
of time. While we believe in prosecuting drug 'king pins' to the fullest
extent of the law, three decades of experience under these laws have shown
that they have failed to achieve their goals. They have not eliminated the
drug trade and have filled New York's prisons with low-level, non-violent
offenders and addicts who receive unduly harsh prison terms. This approach
has wasted money and lives. It also is inconsistent with the current
recognition that drug prevention and treatment, rather than incarceration,
are more effective means of dealing with the 'drug problem.' It is widely
believed that the results of Rockefeller drug laws have had a deleterious
effect on public trust and confidence in the legal system.

"Bills have been proposed to enact much needed reform of these laws.
Although the members of the Legislature and their staff are to be commended
for their serious and responsible attempt to resolve differences between
bills and reach agreement, the recently-established Joint Conference
Committee has to this point been unable to break the stalemate that has for
years prevented much-needed reform. The New York State Legislature's most
recent effort to reform the Rockefeller Drug Laws appears to be close to
failing."

The state urges the legislature to reform the Rockefeller drug laws and was
signed by:

* Judge Leslie Crocker Snyder, former Supreme Court judge, New York County;

* Judge Richard J. Bartlett, former chief administrative judge, Unified
Court System;

* Judge Stewart J. Hancock Jr., former associate judge, Court of Appeals;

* Judge Richard D. Simons, former associate judge, Court of Appeals;

* Judge Betty Friedlander, former Tompkins County Court judge;

* Judge Burton Roberts, former administrative judge, Supreme Court, Bronx
County;

* William Murphy, former District Attorney, Richmond County;

* Judge Michael Kelly, former assistant District Attorney, Erie County;

* Peter Gerstenzang, former assistant District Attorney, Albany County;

* Mark Weinstein, former assistant District Attorney, Bronx County; and

* Lawrence S. Goldman, former assistant District Attorney, New York County.