CLINTON SHOULD CONSIDER LETTING THE LITTLE FISH GO

It's never too late to be fair. In the last few weeks of his presidency,
Bill Clinton should give serious thought to the thousands of Americans who
have lost five years or more of their lives for trifling drug offenses.

The injustice is rooted in federal drug laws from the mid-1980s, which
punish possession of crack cocaine 100 times more harshly than possession
of powdered cocaine.

As a result of this and other unfair drug policies, the federal prison
population has tripled in the last 20 years, and drug offenders now
comprise nearly 60 percent.

Perhaps the worst part of the problem is the topsy-turvy standard that
rewards drug kingpins who know how to play the system, winning shorter
sentences by turning in associates, street-level "mules" and even wives and
girlfriends. That's what happened to Pedro Riviero, whose boss asked him to
deliver drugs. Riviero soon quit and cut all ties to the drug business.
Four years later, his former boss was arrested and started naming names --
including Riviero's -- in exchange for leniency.

The boss got a 16-month sentence. Riviero -- who had no information to
trade -- was sentenced to eight and a half years.

Riviero was relatively lucky. Dorothy Gaines was dating a man involved in a
crack ring in Mobile, Alabama. When police broke the operation, Gaines was
implicated, but denied any knowledge of drug use. The only evidence against
her was testimony from several other ring members seeking leniency, and
even those accounts -- some of which have been recanted -- portrayed her
involvement as slight.

Because she knew little or nothing, Gaines was the only person accused who
couldn't make a deal. Her 19-year sentence was the longest given to anyone
in the operation.

President Clinton understands the problem. In December, he commuted the
sentences of Gaines and a few others who have become national poster
children for the inequities in federal drug law.

But Riviero and thousands of others remain in prison for crimes so minor
that they would probably merit only probation in state court.

Clearly, reform of federal drug-sentencing laws is needed. Recent
Congressional hearings have revealed a philosophical shift away from
minimum mandatory sentences, a move that's long overdue.

But President Clinton should also give thought to people who have been
locked up for years, and face years more. Families Against Mandatory
Minimums, a group seeking reform of sentencing laws, has identified nearly
500 prisoners who would have already been released, had they been convicted
after a 1995 "safety valve" law that allows judges to be more lenient on
first-time offenders. At the least, Clinton should commute those sentences.

There are thousands of other cases. A coalition of more than 600 religious
leaders has signed a letter asking for the paroled release of low-level,
nonviolent drug offenders who have served at least five years, a move that
could cut the federal prison population by as much as 10,000. It's a good idea.

These people aren't high-profile, like the 12 Puerto Rican terrorists
pardoned last year. They aren't well-connected in the Democratic Party,
like former U.S. Rep. Dan Rostenkowski, who was pardoned last week along
with Gaines.

But locking these people up has done nothing to win the war on drugs, or
heal the devastation addiction causes. Before he leaves office, President
Clinton should recognize that they've spent enough time behind bars.