PARDONS CAN RIGHT SYSTEM'S WRONGS

The nomination of Eric Holder as the next U.S. Attorney General has
renewed concerns about the end-of-term clemencies granted by President
Clinton.

High-profile names such as Marc Rich grabbed headlines at the time, but
many other people with no political influence benefited from the
president's mercy.

I am one of those people. If I had not received a commutation, my
first-time conviction for a nonviolent offense would have kept me in
prison until 2016 (with good behavior) because of the harsh mandatory
sentencing laws for crack cocaine. My 1994 prison sentence grew out of my
boyfriend's trafficking in crack. After he was murdered, the government
charged me with conspiracy to distribute the crack that his drug ring
distributed. During my court hearings, prosecutors acknowledged that I
never sold, handled or used any of the drugs involved in the conspiracy.

Today, I could be in federal prison still serving my 24-year sentence.
Instead, I've been raising my now 13-year-old son, graduated from college
in 2002 and completed a year of law school. I own a home and speak to
youth about the importance of their choices and the consequences that can
affect their lives forever. My own experience led me to create a nonprofit
foundation that focuses on providing children of incarcerated parents with
a mentor, and collaborates with other organizations on justice-reform
initiatives.

My story of redemption does not need to be an anomaly. Thousands of
petitions for executive clemency are pending before President Bush with a
month left in his term. The majority of those are unknown to him or the
public. Many are people of color caught up in the war on drugs and serving
long mandatory minimum sentences, often for low-level offenses. The
president should expedite such applications and grant them clemency.

The guidelines for the Office of the Pardon Attorney state that the
excessive nature of a sentence and associated sentencing disparity are
appropriate considerations when granting a petition for commutation. The
federal sentencing policy for crack-cocaine offenses is a case in point.

The mandatory five-year sentence for a defendant convicted with 5 grams of
crack cocaine - the weight of two sugar packets - is the same as that for
a defendant convicted with 100 times that amount of powder cocaine, even
though these are two forms of the same drug. Defendants convicted with 50
grams of crack cocaine, about the weight of a candy bar, receive a minimum
sentence of 10 years. A powder-cocaine seller must have at least 5
kilograms to receive the same sentence.

For decades criminal justice experts, civil rights leaders and lawmakers
have called these sentences unjust. More than 80 percent of people
convicted of crack-cocaine offenses are black, even though two-thirds of
crack-cocaine users are white or Hispanic.

Indeed, President Bush raised concerns about the issue before taking
office, saying the crack-powder disparity "ought to be addressed by making
sure the powder-cocaine and the crack-cocaine penalties are the same."

I agree, but despite significant changes made to the federal sentencing
guidelines for crack cocaine in the past year, the harsh mandatory
sentences remain. The president still has time to make good on his
promise. His clemency power should be used with thoughtful deliberation.
Even so, it should be utilized because clemency is sometimes the only
possible response to unfair and excessive penalties.