Pubdate: Fri, 06 Mar 2009
Source: Times Union (Albany, NY)
Copyright: 2009 Capital Newspapers Division of The Hearst Corporation
Contact: http://www.timesunion.com/forms/emaileditor.asp
Website: http://www.timesunion.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/452
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?140 (Rockefeller Drug Laws)

N.Y.'S CHANCE FOR DRUG REFORM

So here are the state Senate Democrats, only barely in the majority,
and under siege for the mere possibility that they'll follow the
Assembly and reform New York's infamous Rockefeller-era drug laws.

"This is the beginning of the end," proclaims Sen. Martin Golden,
R-Brooklyn.

His point is unmistakable. To support drug law reform is to be soft on
crime. The Senate Democrats would have to fight to keep their majority
with that hanging over their heads.

They could, of course, turn the argument around. To resist reform is
to cling to policies that have been a failure by almost every measure.

The bill the Senate ought to pass, and might well pass, is about
giving judges the discretion that they've been denied under these
draconian and inflexible laws. Discretion, that is, to sentence
nonviolent drug felons to treatment rather than prison. New York could
take a very different approach toward between 50 percent and 60
percent of the roughly 12,000 people serving long mandatory prison
sentences for drug offenses. That's about 5,900 to 7,200 lost lives
that might yet be salvaged.

Incarceration doesn't work. No longer should it be the first resort in
fighting the drug crime that hasn't subsided during the 36 years the
Rockefeller laws have been in effect.

Rehabilitation doesn't always work, either. But, as advocates of drug
law reform point out, a Rand Corporation study a decade ago found that
treatment is more successful than incarceration in reducing drug use
and 15 times more effective in reducing serious crime rates than
mandatory prison time.

The bill the Assembly passed on Wednesday would increase drug
treatment and rehabilitation programs and provide more state oversight
of those programs. Senators genuinely concerned, as opposed to
politically intimated, about such a sweeping shift from punishment to
treatment could insist that the new drug laws contain provisions that
Governor Paterson favors.

Drug offenders would be required to plead guilty and be certified as
addicted as a condition of being sent to treatment. That's a tougher
approach than the Assembly prefers, but it's not unreasonable -
especially if it enhances the prospects of this becoming law.

The issue here isn't being soft, on crime or anything else. It's
overcoming the hardheadedness that won't recognize failure. For
certain drug law offenders, nothing changes under the reforms that now
have a possibility of passage. They include people convicted of
possession or sale of large amounts of hard drugs, adults who sell
drugs to minors and anyone with a violent felony conviction within 10
years.

The Senate should be proud, and utterly undeterred, to embrace
reasonable drug law reform.

The issue:

Revisions of the Rockefeller laws are up to the Senate.

The Stakes:

Does the state possess the courage to try something new?
- ---
MAP posted-by: Larry Seguin