CYNICISM AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE

For years, liberal Democrats have been complaining about the harshness of
the Rockefeller drug laws, how they lock up minor drug offenders for much
too long. This year, Republican Gov. George Pataki responded by proposing
reforms that would keep some drug offenders out of jail and allow others out
of prison sooner.

Some liberals responded by saying Pataki's reforms did not go far enough.
They also opposed the governor's bid to abolish parole for felons, which he
linked to his drug proposal. Those objections, whether or not they should
prevail, amounted to a reasonable political position.

But now it appears that Sheldon Silver, the Assembly's Democratic speaker,
may decline to act on Pataki's proposal because it goes too far - the
opposite complaint that the liberals had been making.

According to Thursday's New York Times, Silver has no plans to take up
Pataki's or anyone else's proposals this year to reform the Rockefeller
laws. Why not? Because doing so could put some of his Democratic members -
especially those from suburban and upstate districts - on the defensive in
next year's election.

Silver, in other words, is outflanking Pataki on the right. While most
Assembly Democrats are liberals from New York City, they are also the ones
who generally have the safest seats. It's the more conservative members,
from outside the city, who are more vulnerable to Republican campaigns, and
so need Silver's protection. By nixing Pataki's effort to liberalize drug
laws, Silver is hoping to protect those Democrats from Republicans raising
the law-and-order issue. Good public policy is the last thing on his mind.

But that's hardly unusual in Albany. Even the brightest-eyed of political
Pollyannas would turn skeptical when contemplating the New York State
Legislature. Examples of its craven political calculations abound, from the
perennial stalemate over the state budget to this year's rapid and wretched
repeal of the New York City commuter tax.

On another criminal justice issue, reforming the treatment of young
offenders, the Senate and Assembly passed bills last year. Each had good
points, and there were considerable similarities. But no conference
committee was scheduled, no settlement negotiated, and no law passed.

This year there are conflicting bills on youth crime, DNA testing, weapons
control and other issues. Will reasonable compromises pass? Not if the
politicians follow Silver's example on drug laws.