DEALING WITH DRUG LAWS

A Tale of Two District Attorneys

Albany County District Attorney David Soares is considered a hero by
many for his bold stances and refreshing approaches to delivering
justice. He first laid claim to this title in 2004 when he ran on a
platform that advocated dramatic change in the draconian Rockefeller
Drug laws that stood unchanged for 30 years. His victory over powerful
incumbent Paul Clyne sent shock waves throughout the political
landscape in New York's capital.

Clyne was given a pink slip by voters for his vocal support of the
Rockefeller Drug Laws and his staggering defeat triggered fear within
the Republican Senate that they too might lose their jobs for not
supporting Rockefeller reform.

Unlike many political figures that bob and weave themselves into
office only to step away from the original platforms that brought them
to victory, Soares has stuck to his guns and continues to speak out
against inhumane and ineffective drug policies.

Recently, while speaking at an international harm reduction conference
in Vancouver, British Columbia, he told the audience that his advice
to Canada is to "stay as far away from America's drug law policy as
possible." His comments echoed the criticisms he made of New York's
strict Rockefeller Drug Laws during his election campaign two years
ago by saying "the attempt to engage in cleaning the streets of Albany
one $20 sale on the street at a time is a failed policy." He sticks by
his view that more drug treatment, not more jail time, is the answer.

Only about 50 miles away, but worlds apart in their views, David
Capeless, the Berkshire County District Attorney represents the polar
opposite of Soares' philosophy. He see's the $20 method of policing
his streets as an acceptable policy of law enforcement. Capeless
recently pushed for and received--a mandatory-minimum sentence of two
years for 18 year-old Mitchell Lawrence for the $20 sale of one
marijuana cigarette. It was part of a police sting operation that
netted 19 defendants. Capeless has been harshly criticized by an array
of concerned citizens for his use of utilizing school zone laws that
mandate mandatory minimum sentencing, regardless of the circumstances.
He has refused to use discretion for these first time non-violent
offenders that were involved in small-time marijuana sales, turning
his back on drug rehabilitation and other alternatives to
imprisonment.

We have two District Attorneys with opposing views on how to deal with
the issue of treatment vs. incarceration for drug offenders. Who is
correct?

Recent studies have shown that treatment is the most humane and
cost-effective approach to addiction. In November 2000, California
passed an initiative that allows most people convicted of first and
second-time nonviolent, simple drug possession to receive drug
treatment instead of incarceration. More than 140,000 participants
have entered the treatment program instead of imprisoning them
resulting in the cost savings of approximately $1 billion.

"The financial benefits of Prop. 36 are more massive than expected.
That's the good news," said Margaret Dooley, the Drug Policy
Alliance's Proposition 36 statewide coordinator. "But the great news
is that over 60,000 people have completed treatment and have been able
to rejoin their families and find work. This is the true measure of
Prop. 36's success."

In a recent conversation with Soares, he told me that he desperately
wants to defer drug offenders to treatment rather than jail, but the
powers-that-be cut off his funding to do so. The recent reforms of New
York's drug laws did not include funding for community-based
treatment. Without proper funding, increased numbers of people will be
forced to compete for limited treatment slots. The cycle of addiction
will continue, along with crime and recidivism.

With the defeat of Paul Clyne, voters spoke out against the irrational
method of trying to arrest your way out of the drug problem. In
Berkshire County, residents hope to give the same type of pink slip to
District Attorney David Capeless in the upcoming Democratic primary on
September 19. He is set to run against Judith Knight, a former
assistant district attorney, who is supported by many, including a
group called the Concerned Citizens for Appropriate Justice. They have
openly and repeatedly confronted Capeless for his overzealous position.

With the election of Soares, the voters in Albany wanted more than
outdated tough-on-crime zealots and chose Soares, who has chosen to be
smart on crime. Now the voters of Great Barrington will soon have an
opportunity to make a choice whether or not to re-elect David
Capeless. If he is defeated, it will be part of a growing trend across
the nation rewarding politicians that are smart on crime.

Anthony Papa is the author of 15 Years to Life: How I Painted My Way to
Freedom and Communications Specialist for Drug Policy Alliance.