PATAKI'S DRUG-LAW PLAN IS A BUST

AFTER GEORGE PATAKI became governor, he announced that the time had come to
revamp New York's draconian drug laws-a legacy of another famous Republican
governor with national aspirations. He said that the "Rockefeller drug laws
have filled New York's prisons and have not increased public safety."
Communities would be better served, Pataki told the State Legislature in
1995, if nonviolent drug offenders were sentenced to drug rehabilitation,
community service or house arrest. Many observers at the time believed that
he was about to launch a major overhaul of the drug laws. Like Nixon's visit
to China, they thought it would take a Republican to break through
resistance to a change in policy.

Five years later, Pataki is enjoying his second term as governor and gaining
national attention as a possible contender for the White House. Until last
week, he hadn't addressed this issue again and advocates of reform were
beginning to wonder whether the governor had forgotten his promise.

After all, our state prisons are operating at 130 percent of capacity. The

operating budget has increased from about $450 million in 1982-83 to more
than $1.8 billion today. The cost of incarcerating one drug offender in New
York's prisons is approximately $30,000 per year compared to residential
drug treatment, which costs about $12,000-$15,000 per year. Out of a total
prison population of 70,000 inmates more than a third (22,000) are
nonviolent drug offenders, at least 7,000 are first-time offenders.

But last week, as part of the governor's proposal to end parole for all
nonviolent felons, he unveiled his much anticipated version of drug-law
reform.

Unfortunately, his plan is modest in the extreme. He would reduce the
sentences of fewer than 383 top-level felons-those convicted of possessing
more than four ounces of an illegal drug-who are serving time under the
harshest provisions of the law requiring a mandatory sentence of 15 years to
life. Those lucky felons without prior convictions might get five years
knocked off their sentences.

This week after five years of inaction on this issue, Governor Pataki
unveiled his version of drug law reform as part of his proposal to end
parole for all non-violent felons. Unfortunately, this version falls far
short of the comprehensive reform suggested by his 1995 pronouncements.
Pataki's new version of reform is modest in the extreme. It would allow
possible reduction of a mere five years in the sentences of a fraction -
less than 383let's get her to explain what these 383 have in common--what
group pataki's move would matter to. and is this really all the reform would
mean--are there more minor changes that she's not Pataki would do nothing to
restore the ability of judges to fashion sentences appropriate to the
offender and the offense, nor would he substantially expand programs to
divert drug addicts into treatment. Under Pataki's proposal, district
attorneys would still have the exclusive power to determine whether a repeat
drug offender is eligible for drug treatment. And so, New York's archaic
drug laws, which have led to an unprecedented boom in prison building over
the past two decades, would remain unchanged. Indeed, according to Pataki's
criminal justice adviser Katherine Lapp, significant reform of the state's
drug laws is no longer necessary.

Which leads one to wonder what has happened between then and now that
justifies such a significant retreat on this issue. Our prisons aren't any
less crowded.

The cost to taxpayers of locking up nonviolent drug offenders hasn't
significantly decreased. Nor has drug treatment become more widely
available, decreasing the demand for illegal drugs. So what's going on here?
Almost every study of drug treatment has arrived at the same conclusion:
Whatever the type of program or the drug involved, treatment produces
impressive reductions in both drug consumption and criminal activity at
relatively low cost. Unfortunately, the lack of treatment programs and the
barriers to entering them prevent many drug abusers from benefiting from
treatment. State polls have consistently demonstrated that the public does
support diverting drug offenders into treatment as an alternative to
incarceration and restoring the ability of judges to craft appropriate
sentences for drug offenders.

And just a few years ago, so did Gov. Pataki. How can he characterize the
feeble proposal he made last week as constituting real reform of drug laws?
I suppose that when one is trying to court Sunbelt support political
considerations require a retreat from any position that may be construed as
being "soft on crime." But perhaps Pataki should spend more time in Arizona,
where voters have adopted a "smart" approach to drug offenders. He might be
surprised to learn that Arizona is the first state to begin treating all of
its nonviolent drug offenders instead of sending them to prison. A recent
report by the Arizona Supreme Court estimated that in its first year of
operation, the program had achieved more than $2.5 million in savings to the
state. Imagine what that kind of program might do for the Empire State.

Pataki's political posturing on this issue does a disservice to all New
Yorkers-especially the more than 22,000 drug offenders in our prisons and
their families. The governor should get smart on crime and stop
incarcerating nonviolent drug offenders.