BILL TARGETS SENTENCING RULES FOR CRACK AND POWDER COCAINE

The Senate's second-ranking Democrat introduced a bill Thursday that
would eliminate the sentencing disparity between crack and powdered
cocaine, an issue that has frustrated judges, civil rights advocates
and drug reform proponents for more than two decades.

Under current law, it takes 100 times as much powdered cocaine as
crack to trigger the same mandatory minimum sentence. Activists say
that disparity disproportionately impacts African Americans.

"The sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine has
contributed to the imprisonment of African Americans at six times the
rate of whites and to the United States' position as the world's
leader in incarcerations," Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.)
said in a statement. "It's time for us to act."

Durbin's bill would also increase the quantity of crack cocaine
required to trigger a mandatory prison term, as well as stiffen
penalties for large-scale drug traffickers and violent criminals.

Some law enforcement officials have advocated eliminating the
disparity by increasing the penalties for possession of powder
cocaine, rather than, as Durbin's bill does, reducing the sentence for crack.

But those calling for a change in the law also cite economic reasons
at a time when budgets are tight, noting that half of all federal
inmates are imprisoned for drug offenses.

Today's sentencing ratio has been in place since 1986, a time when
crack cocaine was ravaging inner-city neighborhoods. Academic
research has since cast doubt on the assertion that rock cocaine is
more addictive and dangerous than the powder.

Durbin's bill, the Fair Sentencing Act, is co-sponsored by Democrats
including Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (Vt.),
Russell Feingold (Wis.), Benjamin L. Cardin (Md.) and Sheldon
Whitehouse (R.I.). "To have faith in our system, Americans must have
confidence that the laws of this country, including drug laws, are
administered fairly," Leahy said in a statement.

A related bill is moving through the House of Representatives and has
already passed one committee, which led Julie Stewart, president of
the advocacy group Families Against Mandatory Minimums, to assert
Thursday that "no institution stands in the way of crack cocaine
changes. Every piece is in place to make this decades-past-due reform
a reality."

Jasmine L. Tyler, deputy director of national affairs for the Drug
Policy Alliance Network, urged Congress to move quickly, saying "23
years is too long to wait for justice to be served."

The idea won support from President Obama and Vice President Biden on
the campaign trail, and Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. has also
been supportive, but the administration has not announced a formal
position on the bills before Congress.

In an interview, Durbin said he was working to enlist Republican
co-sponsors who could help ease his measure's progress through a
divided Senate with a full agenda. He added that he "couldn't ask for
better support" from Holder and other administration officials.

Congress must decide whether to make the sentencing change
retroactive; doing so could present logistical hurdles for the
Justice Department and the court system. Durbin said he hopes to
leave that debate in the hands of the Sentencing Commission, which
has already addressed similar issues.

James Pasco, executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police in
Washington, said Thursday he was still digesting the Durbin bill. In
the past, his members had taken the position that "the best way to
eliminate the disparity would be to raise the penalties for powder to
those of crack." But Pasco said his organization had developed a good
relationship with the Judiciary Committee and that he would "look
forward to the process" in Congress.