Pubdate: Tue, 08 Sep 2015
Source: Columbus Dispatch (OH)
Copyright: 2015 The Columbus Dispatch
Contact:  http://www.dispatch.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/93

POINTLESS PUNISHMENT

Driver's-License Suspensions for Unrelated Drug Crimes Harmful

A"get tough on crime" law sometimes proves harmful in practical 
terms. A 1990s federal law providing an automatic temporary driver's 
license suspension for any drug conviction has been abandoned by the 
majority of U.S. states as being counterproductive and punitive.

State lawmakers now want Ohio to join their ranks. It makes sense.

Current Ohio law follows federal guidelines by providing a six-month 
license suspension regardless of whether use of a vehicle had a role 
in a drug crime. Senate Bill 204, introduced by Sen. Bill Seitz, 
R-Cincinnati, would make that discretionary. Last session, Seitz 
sponsored a resolution laying the groundwork for the bill by 
notifying the federal government of Ohio's intention to opt out of 
the Drug Offender's Driving Privileges Suspension Act. Without this 
formal declaration, Ohio could lose 8 percent of its highway funds.

The move is another example of Republicans trying to adopt policies 
that focus on rehabilitation and helping people continue to be 
productive rather than having a rigid zero-tolerance approach. Said 
Seitz to The Dispatch: "There are hundreds of thousands of people in 
Ohio with suspended driver's licenses for drug convictions, and that 
makes it difficult for them to find gainful employment," as well as 
making them more likely to return to "a life of drugs."

John Murphy, head of the Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association, 
agrees: "It never made much sense to have a license suspension in 
connection with a drug offense unless there is a vehicle involved," he said.

Though some argue that it's a public safety issue to keep drug 
abusers off the roads, experience shows that people often drive even 
when their license is suspended, adding another crime to their tally.

If they do abide by the suspension, many are unable to care for 
family or get to a

job. According to the Clemency Report website, "driver's license 
suspensions have been particularly devastating to the working poor. 
Fortytwo percent lose their jobs following a license suspension."

The site states that Ohio remains one of just 16 states with a 
mandatory license suspension for nondriving drug offenses. The site 
says that nationwide, not surprisingly, most license suspensions are 
for marijuana.

This is another reason Seitz and his colleagues are trying to adopt a 
more sensible approach to drug policy in Ohio: they oppose Issue 3, 
which would legalize marijuana use for any purpose in Ohio while 
carving into the state constitution a potgrowing monopoly for a 
handful of backers.

Ohio long ago eased the penalty for simple possession of marijuana; 
possession of up to 100 grams is a minor misdemeanor, with a maximum 
fine of $150. Doing away with the mandatory license suspension would 
eliminate another argument for voting for Issue 3, which would bring 
a host of greater dangers and ill effects.

There remain a few key opponents in the Senate to the bill, including 
Senate President Keith Faber and his No. 2 leader, Chris Widener. 
Resistance to the idea on principle is understandable, and no one 
wants to appear to be soft on crime.

But faced with the choice of dealing with reality or continuing to 
create collateral damage and encouraging people to vote to allow 
marijuana to flood the state, doing away with mandatory license 
suspensions seems the better option.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom