MANDATORY MINIMUM DRUG BILLS NEED REFORM

As governor, I signed a bill the so-called 650 Lifer Law that created
mandatory minimum drug sentences that are among the most harsh in the
nation. I believed then that it was the right response to an insidious and
growing drug problem. I have since come to realize that the provisions of
this law have led to terrible injustices and that signing it in the first
instance was a mistake an overly punishing and cruel response which gave no
discretion whatever to a sentencing judge, even for extenuating circumstances.

Under that law people like Karen Shook, a mother of three, are serving a
mandatory minimum of 20 years. Police called Karen an "easy mark" for their
sting operation because she was so heavily addicted at the time. Karen,
whose crime involved introducing undercover officers to her supplier, was
charged with both delivery and conspiracy to deliver cocaine. Each charge
carried an automatic 10-year mandatory minimum sentence, to be served
consecutively.

By the time she came to trial, Karen had successfully completed substance
abuse treatment, assisted police, and was so remorseful that the arresting
officer urged the judge to impose a lower sentence. The judge tried to
depart below the mandatory sentence, but the sentence was reversed on
appeal to the 20-year mandatory minimum. Michigan residents will spend over
a half million dollars to keep Karen in prison while her children grow up
without her. She has already been incarcerated 9 years.

While some reforms were made to the infamous "650 Lifer Law" in 1998, most
mandatory minimums remain in effect. Recently, discussion of drug law
reform has focused on the merits of a far-reaching statewide ballot
initiative. It has now been barred from appearing on the November ballot.

Too little attention has been given to an important package of bills
sponsored by Rep. Bill McConico (D-Detroit) that would give the legislature
and governor a chance to finally correct the mistakes made in 1978.

House Bills 5394 and 5395 repeal mandatory minimum drug sentences and
replace them with sentencing guidelines. Sentencing guidelines, which are
used for all other serious offenses, allow judges to consider a number of
factors, including criminal history and the role the accused person played
in the offense, when imposing sentences. Importantly, the bill retains
tough penalties for the most serious and repeat offenses. The legislation
would make current low-level drug offenders, like Karen, eligible for an
earlier review by the parole board.

The Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan, the Michigan Association
of Drug Court Professionals, and Families against Mandatory Minimums are
among the organizations endorsing these carefully crafted bills, which have
significant bipartisan support. This broad support echoes national polls
that found a majority of citizens oppose mandatory minimum sentences for
drug offenses.

At a time of looming state deficits and the state grappling for ways to cut
expenditures, taxpayers are presently being called upon to pay millions of
dollars to warehouse non-violent individuals who pose no threat to public
safety.

This Tuesday, Sept. 17, the House Criminal Justice Committee has scheduled
the bills for consideration. I urge legislators to support this
long-overdue reform.