REFORM DRUG ASSET SEIZURE

In the war on drugs, law-enforcement bodies ranging from the US Justice
Department to rural sheriffs have themselves become terribly addicted to an
intoxicating substance. It's not crack or heroin they're strung out on.

It's the money and property these enforcement groups seize each year from
thousands of Americans under the often false assertion that the wealth is
connected to the drug trade. In truth, these seizures have as much to do
with padding department budgets as with keeping streets safe. And they
trample fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Constitution in the process.

Rep. Henry Hyde (R) of Illinois wants to rehabilitate our law-and-order
officials. Mr. Hyde, no dove on crime issues, led the fight in Congress in
June for passage of the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act.

The bill, now under debate in the Senate, would help prevent police and
others from such acts as wrongfully seizing entire homes on little more
than hearsay of drug involvement.

It would stop the confiscation of cash and automobiles on suspicions of
narcotics sales that are never proven and the taking of boats on discovery
of a couple of marijuana joints brought on board by a guest without the
owner's knowledge.

As outrageous as these seizures are, they happen regularly in America under
antinarcotics statutes gone awry. Innocent people suffer great pain and
loss without ever being accused of a crime.

Yet this desperately needed reform bill is in trouble in the Senate.
Ranking members of the Senate Judiciary Committee - Joseph Biden (D) of
Delaware and Strom Thurmond (R) of South Carolina - have vowed to kill it.

They claim it would rob antidrug efforts of a tool that hobbles dealers by
taking their ill-gotten gains.

But the Hyde bill permits civil forfeitures and recognizes their importance
in the drug war while simply adding safeguards for the innocent.

Currently, people whose property is seized must prove their innocence at
their own expense - and without necessarily being charged with any crime.
The Hyde bill would simply place the burden where it belongs: on
prosecutors who must provide "clear and convincing" proof that seized
property or money is involved in wrongdoing whenever such seizures are
challenged in court.

So reasonable is the Hyde bill that it passed the House by a vote of 375 to
47, and was co-sponsored by key ideological opponents in the Clinton
impeachment battle. This unlikely coalition of supporters also includes
consumer and trade organizations, the American Civil Liberties Union, and
the National Rifle Association.

Nonetheless, the Senate Judiciary Committee threatens to derail the bill,
thanks primarily to intense pressure from the Justice Department and the
International Association of Chiefs of Police. They say the reform bill
would allow dealers to file frivolous claims of innocence, hobbling
prosecution efforts.

But, as one House Judiciary Committee spokesman explained, this is highly
unlikely given that any court challenge would expose a real dealer to legal
"discovery" procedures that can be overwhelmingly damaging to guilty
parties with something to hide.

Yet the Senate objections persist, suggesting that it's the seized wealth
itself - which departments are routinely allowed to keep - that is the real
issue. Enforcement groups, frankly, are showing signs of addiction. Last
year, the Justice Department seized $449 million, dramatically up from $27
million in 1985.

Steven Kessler, a trial lawyer who once headed the asset forfeiture unit of
the Bronx district attorney's office, recently told the Associated Press:
"Forfeiture laws have run amok. The focus is no longer on combating
crime.... It's on fund-raising."

It's time to break this dependency and stop eroding the rights of innocent
citizens and debasing the Constitution. The Senate Judiciary Committee
should send the Hyde bill to the Senate floor where most observers agree it
would pass easily. Few bills in recent memory have enjoyed so much support
from so many Americans for so just a cause.