PATAKI MUST BRING REAL DRUG LAW REFORM

IT'S BECOME a dubious annual ritual: Once again in his State of the State
address, Gov. George Pataki urged changing the harsh Rockefeller drug laws.
So far, his calls for reform have produced no results, either because of
Pataki's lack of follow-up or because of the Legislature's inaction, or
some combination of the two.

These statutes are long overdue for correction. The question is why it has
taken so long. Passed in 1973 when Nelson Rockefeller was governor, they
have caused rather than solved problems. The statutes' most severe
provision requires that a judge impose a prison term of no less than 15
years to life for someone convicted of selling 2 ounces or possessing 4
ounces of a narcotic substance. The penalties apply without regard to the
circumstances of the offense or the individual's background.

You would think that in this time of budget deficits, the state would be
motivated to act. It costs New York nearly $700 million annually to confine
more than 21,000 drug offenders, most of whom have no history of violent,
predatory behavior.

The Rockefeller drug laws are widely recognized to be wasteful,
ineffective, unjust and marked by racial bias. Despite studies showing that
the majority of the people who use and sell drugs are white, more than 94
percent of inmates doing time in New York prisons for the sale or
possession of narcotics are people of color.

So why have our politicians not removed the stain of these statutes from
New York's criminal code? Why have they been willing over the years to
build new prisons - at a total cost of about $2 billion - and fill them
with minor drug offenders?

A principal reason is the tangible economic benefits prison expansion
provides. Prison dollars have had a strong appeal as an antidote to factory
closings. Upstate towns and their political leaders have lobbied
aggressively to have prisons built in their districts, and they have succeeded.

Since 1982, New York has opened 38 prisons, not counting annexes, all in
rural, mainly white areas, all represented by Republican state senators. At
the beginning of 2000, 93 percent of all New York inmates were confined in
prisons in Republican state senate districts. Facilities in these areas
receive more than $1.1 billion annually to cover their operating expenses.
They employ almost 30,000 people.

These correctional facilities are not sited in just any Republican
district, but in the districts of the most influential state senators.
Thirty-seven percent of New York's prisons are in just three Republican
senators' districts: the chairmen of the finance, codes and corrections
committees.

In addition, Albany policymakers have been unwilling to take on the state's
district attorneys. The drug laws do not abolish discretion, essentially a
fungible thing; they remove it from the judge's hands and concentrate it in
the prosecutor's office. Whoever sets the charge controls the outcome of
the case.

A coalition of New York's prosecutors has aggressively opposed any
proposal, even those modest in scope, to amend the drug laws because such
measures would curtail their power. The district attorneys are protecting
their preserve and many politicians are understandably wary of the "soft on
crime" tag.

The calls for reform have grown too loud to ignore. Several prominent
former Republican state senators, who helped pass the original laws in
1973, have added their voices to this campaign. And several polls have
indicated that a healthy majority of the voting public favors a return to
judicial discretion in drug cases.

Recognizing the growing popular backing for change, the state's three
principal political leaders, Gov. Pataki, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver
(D-Manhattan) and Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno (R-Brunswick), on
separate occasions, have expressed support for some kind of sentencing reform.

But the devil is in the details. If the governor's plan were enacted, there
would be little if any real change in the prosecution and adjudication of
drug cases. The Assembly bill, which is far better, is marred by a major
defect - it enables district attorneys to maintain their control over the
outcome of far too many drug cases. Other than endorsing the governor's
proposal, the state Senate has not even presented its own reform plan -
perhaps in deference to its committee chairmen.

The governor must assume responsibility for breaking the stalemate. In an
election year, he probably sees the advantage in wrapping himself in the
mantle of reform, a winning issue. But here is his dilemma: How can he
achieve that objective without stepping too far out of the camp of the
prosecutors who are a key part of his constituency?

Gov. Pataki deserves credit for putting his plan - weak as it is - on the
table. A serious proposal that significantly extends judicial discretion
would almost certainly loosen the Albany logjam. Now he must end the
terrible damage these Rockefeller laws have inflicted on individuals and
families, on communities and on the state budget.