FBD
07-29-2011, 04:37 PM
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=579824&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+EditorialRss+%28Editorial+RSS %29
Crack Vs. Meth
Posted 07/28/2011 07:02 PM ET
Crime: Thousands of crack prisoners are eligible for early release now that the Obama administration has cut their supposedly "racist" sentences. Will meth convicts get the same break?
Besides being inconsistent, the U.S. Sentencing Commission's move to shorten prison terms for crack crimes is potentially dangerous.
Half of the 12,000 inmates affected include violent offenders or career criminals. About 6,000 have used weapons or have long rap sheets. Some will be out on the street as early as November.
Why would the administration put the public at risk?
"Justice demands this result," argued the commission's vice chair, Ketanji Brown Jackson, an Obama appointee. Echoing the NAACP, she and Obama think 1980s mandatory minimum sentences for crack-cocaine defendants unfairly target blacks.
They say a large share of young black men have been "warehoused" in federal prisons as a result.
While it's true some 80% of crack cons are African-American, the government didn't put crack pipes in their hands. And Washington's tough sentencing was a response to crack-related gang violence, which by the late 1980s was out of control across America.
The measure was supported by both Republicans and Democrats at the time.
mp3Subscribe to the IBD Editorials Podcast
Obama complains that crack is the only drug carrying such tough penalties. He's convinced the disparity is due to racism in the justice system. Once again, he's either misinformed or shamelessly demagoguing the issue.
In 1998, Congress imposed the same mandatory minimum sentences on methamphetamine users. And they disproportionately affect whites, since most meth addicts and dealers are Caucasian.
Just 10 grams of meth brings a mandatory minimum sentence of five years. Those caught with 100 grams get at least 10 years in the slammer. The tougher prison terms were a response to the explosion of meth labs in rural areas across the country. Meth was becoming known as the "crack of rural America." "Meth babies" replaced crack babies as a media obsession.
Prisons are now teeming with poor whites busted for meth. In fact, about 60% of people sent to the federal pen for meth crimes are white, while just 2% are black.
Given this disparity, and following the commission's logic, meth sentences could also be looked at as racially "unfair." Yet the panel is not releasing meth criminals early from prisons.
The meth factor is completely missing from the debate over crack-sentencing reform. And the debate is still relevant, because the commission's action isn't final until October. Congress has until then to overturn the decision — and we urge it to do just that.
Both crack and meth spawn violent crime. Those who deal with these dangerous drugs should be taken off the streets, not let go out of flawed notions of racism.
Crack Vs. Meth
Posted 07/28/2011 07:02 PM ET
Crime: Thousands of crack prisoners are eligible for early release now that the Obama administration has cut their supposedly "racist" sentences. Will meth convicts get the same break?
Besides being inconsistent, the U.S. Sentencing Commission's move to shorten prison terms for crack crimes is potentially dangerous.
Half of the 12,000 inmates affected include violent offenders or career criminals. About 6,000 have used weapons or have long rap sheets. Some will be out on the street as early as November.
Why would the administration put the public at risk?
"Justice demands this result," argued the commission's vice chair, Ketanji Brown Jackson, an Obama appointee. Echoing the NAACP, she and Obama think 1980s mandatory minimum sentences for crack-cocaine defendants unfairly target blacks.
They say a large share of young black men have been "warehoused" in federal prisons as a result.
While it's true some 80% of crack cons are African-American, the government didn't put crack pipes in their hands. And Washington's tough sentencing was a response to crack-related gang violence, which by the late 1980s was out of control across America.
The measure was supported by both Republicans and Democrats at the time.
mp3Subscribe to the IBD Editorials Podcast
Obama complains that crack is the only drug carrying such tough penalties. He's convinced the disparity is due to racism in the justice system. Once again, he's either misinformed or shamelessly demagoguing the issue.
In 1998, Congress imposed the same mandatory minimum sentences on methamphetamine users. And they disproportionately affect whites, since most meth addicts and dealers are Caucasian.
Just 10 grams of meth brings a mandatory minimum sentence of five years. Those caught with 100 grams get at least 10 years in the slammer. The tougher prison terms were a response to the explosion of meth labs in rural areas across the country. Meth was becoming known as the "crack of rural America." "Meth babies" replaced crack babies as a media obsession.
Prisons are now teeming with poor whites busted for meth. In fact, about 60% of people sent to the federal pen for meth crimes are white, while just 2% are black.
Given this disparity, and following the commission's logic, meth sentences could also be looked at as racially "unfair." Yet the panel is not releasing meth criminals early from prisons.
The meth factor is completely missing from the debate over crack-sentencing reform. And the debate is still relevant, because the commission's action isn't final until October. Congress has until then to overturn the decision — and we urge it to do just that.
Both crack and meth spawn violent crime. Those who deal with these dangerous drugs should be taken off the streets, not let go out of flawed notions of racism.