Simple solution: Don't sell crack

WILLOWBROOK Your Aug. 14 editorial "A policy gap that demands closing,"
regarding the sentencing disparity for various cocaine dealers, poses an
obvious question that must be answered before we can intelligently deal
with the issue.

You note that the sentencing guidelines punish crackcocaine dealers 100
times as severely as powdercocaine dealers. You also indicate that this
disparity is unwarranted as the drug is equally insidious in either form.
Having read of this issue on numerous occasions, I am waiting in vain for
someone to explain why in the world anyone would continue to market the
crack version.

If you have a choice between alternate courses of action and you know that
both courses would result in the same "reward" but, if caught, one course
will be punished by a slap on the wrist while the other will earn you 10
years in prison, I cannot understand why any sane person would choose the
latter. Frankly, anyone that dumb probably should be taken off the streets
on general principle.

Now we find that not only are people by the hundreds choosing the dumb
course, but they apparently have a great lobbyist. They have recruited
several members of Congress to champion their right not only to be criminal
but also to be criminally stupid.

Some people have claimed that this is a race issue since an inordinate
number of blacks are being sentenced for the more serious offense. No one
is suggesting that the blacks in prison are innocent, merely that they are
numerous. Until the reason for the crack dealers' actions are explained, we
must conclude that the race card should not be played in this game.

The penalty legislation was passed before the criminal acts were committed,
or else it would not be applied. Thus, to believe that the statute was
racist, one must believe that Congress knew in advance that blacks would
ignore the law and would choose to commit the act that would be punished
the most severely.

Congress, reacting to a problem that afflicts all communities, had devised
a program to counter the problem. Right or wrong, it is the law of the
land. We now have an attempt to nullify this program, not to benefit the
community but to ease the pain of our street criminals. If we are going to
grant drug dealers the lineitem veto to pick and choose the penalties that
they are willing to pay, we should at least require that they explain
themselves. What is the overwhelming attraction for crack? Perhaps if we
understood, we could deal with it.

We might also ask our congressmen to explain why we should shift our
emphasis from deterrence to compassion for the pusher. Is any community
well served when its congressmen insists that drug dealers are victims of
racism? Will the promise of equitable sentencing convince dealers to go
straight? Will users stop buying if we assure them that all pushers receive
equal protection? Will your community through a welcomehome party for the
dealers whose sentences are reduced?

If you continue to view the sentencing disparity as a problem, consider
this solution: Stop selling the crack! End of problem. Now, let Congress
get to work rebuilding our communities.

William A. Broderick