Pubdate: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 Source: Times Union (Albany, NY) Copyright: 2003 Capital Newspapers Division of The Hearst Corporation Contact: http://www.timesunion.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/452 Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?199 (Mandatory Minimum Sentencing) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?140 (Rockefeller Drug Laws) THE HIGH COST OF CRIME More states are reforming mandatory minimum sentencing laws, and so should New York Ever since the 1980s, getting tough on crime has been a popular slogan with politicians, as one candidate after another promised to lock up criminals and throw away the key. And the appeal worked. Voters turned out in large numbers to approve "three strikes" laws that mandated life in prison for anyone convicted of three felonies -- even if, as in California, the third offense was only stealing a slice of pizza. In New York City, then-Mayor Rudolph Giuliani boasted of turning the tide on crime by cracking down on even minor infractions. But that was then. As The New York Times reported last week, now is another story. With nearly every state facing a budget deficit, and many of the country's larger cities in even more dire fiscal straits, the bill is coming due. With rising jail populations sapping their treasuries, one state after another is reforming strict mandatory sentencing laws and searching for alternatives to prison. And parole, which was once the favorite whipping boy of politicians, is now seen as the best way to return many nonviolent offenders back to society. States like Washington, Michigan and Colorado are reforming punitive statutes in favor of early release for select prisoners. Kansas has passed a law requiring treatment for first-time drug offenders instead of prison. All this should be a wake-up call for Gov. George Pataki and state lawmakers. While New York never enacted a "three strikes" law, the Rockefeller Drug Laws set the tone for that trend nearly 30 years ago by mandating harsh prison sentences for anyone convicted of possessing or selling even small amounts of drugs. And as the trend spread, prison populations swelled and taxpayers have been picking up the tab ever since. New York's statutes were intended to get drugs off the street by locking up kingpin pushers. But it didn't work out that way. Instead, drug lords escaped arrest by using low-level intermediaries known as runners to carry out their transactions. Meanwhile, those who were arrested sometimes faced 15 years to life in prison. In an encouraging development, many states are taking a long hard look at mandatory laws. For example, Michigan has repealed its mandatory minimum drug sentencing laws to save $41 million a year. Yet reform of the Rockefeller Drug Laws remains elusive. That's unacceptable. True, there has been some progress. This year, for example, the state Legislature approved programs that enable nonviolent offenders to become eligible for parole without first going before the parole board. And drug offenders who are serving some of the harshest prison terms will now be able to reduce their sentences by as much as one-third, provided they remain model prisoners who take part in education or other programs. While these are only the first steps toward reform, they are hardly negligible. No doubt the lawmakers and Mr. Pataki preferred to approve them without much fanfare out of fear they might be called soft on crime. But it's time for a reality check. The Rockefeller Drug Laws have failed to serve their purpose or justice, and the high cost of crowded prisons is indefensible. When the lawmakers return to Albany next year, they must make reform -- genuine reform -- a priority.