Legislature, Take Note

IOWA SHOULD FOLLOW THE US HOUSE LEAD IN CURTAILING FORFEITURE LAWS.

What do the NRA, the ACLU and U.S. Chamber of Commerce have in common?
Ordinarily very little, but on June 24 they were part of an amazing
coalition in support of legislation passed by the U.S. House of Representatives.

The House, by a lopsided 375-48 vote, approved legislation that would make
it tougher for the federal government to seize assets from citizens using a
civil-forfeiture statute.

The vote was a victory for Illinois Congressman Henry Hyde, who has worked
for years to end abuses permitted by the civil forfeiture statute. Hyde was
joined by an unlikely cast of cosponsors - Michigan Democrat John Conyers
Jr., Georgia Republican Bob Barr and Massachusetts Democrat Barney Frank -
who just months ago were bitterly divided over the Clinton impeachment.

The forfeiture statute empowers prosecutors to seize money, real estate,
cars and other personal property used for criminal purposes even though the
owners of the property may themselves never be accused or convicted of any
crimes. Because these are civil, not criminal, proceedings the standards of
proof are lower, and defendants are not shielded from government abuses by
the array of constitutional protections.

Law-enforcement agencies love the statute, not only because it is a powerful
tool in their crime-fighting arsenal, but because it is a lucrative source
of revenue: Last year alone, law-enforcement agencies collected $449 million
through the civil-forfeiture process. This, by itself, is troubling, as it
gives the government a financial incentive to trample civil liberties.

There is no shortage of anecdotal evidence that the law has been abused,
such as yachts being seized because of one marijuana stub in an ashtray.
Congress heard about some of them, including the Houston hotel confiscated
by federal agents who alleged the owners "tacitly approved" drug activity
by, among other things, charging cheap rates. Or, take Willie Jones, who was
accosted by agents at the Nashville airport because he was carrying $9,000
in cash, which they assumed was drug money. In fact, Jones, a landscaping
contractor, was carrying the cash to buy nursery stock in Houston, but he
had to prove his innocence before getting it back.

This is antithetical to American principles of justice. It turns on its
head the concept of presumption of innocence, and it gives the government
the power to punish persons convicted of no crime by taking their personal
property. To get it back, defendants go to court, post a 10 percent bond
and they must mount a defense at their own expense.

The bill does not repeal the civil-forfeiture statute, but it would shift
the burden of proof to the government, eliminate the bond requirement and
would require the government to provide lawyers to property owners who
cannot afford one.

It's not certain how well these reforms will be received in the Senate, but
the overwhelming support in the House is encouraging. This correction is
long overdue. It should be copied by state legislatures - including lowa's
that have similar civil-forfeiture laws.