New York governors come and go (some more swiftly than others). State lawmakers tend to hang around longer, but most of them eventually move on as well. For true endurance, the statutes known as the Rockefeller-era drug laws are hard to beat. The same may be said about attempts to scrap those laws, which came into being in 1973, so long ago that disco was just beginning to be hot.

Nelson A. Rockefeller was governor then. Drug criminals had New York by the throat in one of the city’s periodic heart-of-darkness phases. Rockefeller wanted to show he could be tough as nails with dope dealers. The result was statutes that eternally bear his name in common idiom. Their essence was to send drug felons to prison for very long stretches, with sentences made mandatory and leniency rendered unacceptable even for first-time offenders.

The laws were amended in 2004 and 2005, to ease some of the most severe sentences. By then, they had been deemed overly harsh by most New Yorkers, save perhaps those with portraits of Torquemada on their walls. Occasional polls, like one for this newspaper in 2002, show that New Yorkers overwhelmingly would grant judges more of a free hand in sentencing. That includes a chance to send drug-addicted small fry into treatment rather than to prison.

We are now in a moment when the laws are being scrutinized again, in public hearings organized by a consortium of six New York State Assembly committees. A first round was held in Manhattan last Thursday, on the 35th anniversary of the laws’ signing by Rockefeller, and a second round is planned for Rochester on Thursday.

Judging from the remarks of Assembly members at last week’s session, they want major change, in particular to expand “judicial discretion” over the fate of convicted drug offenders. “We’re on the precipice of real Rockefeller law reform,” said Assemblyman Joseph R. Lentol, a Brooklyn Democrat. Mr. Lentol is among half a dozen lawmakers who were in the Legislature back in 1973. He voted against the laws then, and doesn’t like them any better now.

But it is far from clear what, if anything, lies beneath that precipice. The State Senate, dominated by Republicans, albeit with a weakened grip, has not been eager to join the Democratic-led Assembly in tossing the Rockefeller laws over the edge.

Indeed, positions have shifted little over the years.

Those who raise cries of “drop the Rock” say that mandatory sentences are mindless and unfair to nonviolent offenders, that they give too much power to prosecutors and not enough to neutral judges, that they steer too many low-level schnooks away from relatively inexpensive rehab that would serve them (and the state treasury) well, and that they are directed disproportionately hard toward African-Americans and Latinos.

A leading critic of the laws, the Correctional Association of New York, says that their effect is to give elected officials from 35 years ago, many of them dead, more power over today’s narcotics cases “than the judges who currently sit on the bench and hear all the evidence presented.”

In the same camp, you would probably find the present governor, David A. Paterson. He has not spoken up on the subject of late, but he got himself arrested in an anti-Rock protest six years ago, when he was a state senator.

On the other side are those, including many of the state’s district attorneys, who say that the threat of tough sentences is enough to induce some addicted drug violators to seek treatment. And don’t kid yourself, prosecutors say; street-corner dealers, even if not necessarily “drug kingpins,” are violence-breeding menaces. Neighborhoods, they say, are well rid of these lowlifes.

On the laws’ 35th anniversary, each side went to the hearing armed with anecdotes and statistics. A figure that stood out, though, was one that went unmentioned.

Bridget G. Brennan, the special narcotics prosecutor for New York City, noted that in 1970 there were 1,146 homicides in the city. (Police records put the number at 1,117, but that’s not the point.) In 2007, that figure had been sliced to 496. The implication was that we could thank the Rockefeller laws for this marvelous result.

Unmentioned was another number: 2,245. That’s how many homicides the city recorded in 1990, our most blood-soaked year.

So for 17 years, starting with 1973, the murder rate grew and stayed implacably high, even with the Rockefeller laws. Then, over the next 18 years, the rate dropped sharply. The roller-coaster statistical ride is enough to make one wonder, at least in regard to murder, if the Rock really had anything to do with the numbers going up or down.

E-mail: haberman@nytimes.com

Flash!   May 8th   35th Anniversary of the Rockefeller Drug laws

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhYUZ5o9dx8

Anthony Papa interview on RNN /Rockefeller Drug Laws

Anthony Papa Communication Specialist for the Drug Policy Alliance on RNN talking about the 35th anniversary of the Rockefeller Drug Laws...RockefellerDrugLaw DrugPolicyAlliance cocaine drugwar ondcp mandatorysentencing

Flash!   Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Program  Must Go!!!

Flash:  April 24, 2008:   Assembly Hearings on Rockefeller—May 8 in NYC, May 15 in Rochester

ASSEMBLY STANDING COMMITTEE ON CODES

ASSEMBLY STANDING COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

ASSEMBLY STANDING COMMITTEE ON CORRECTION

ASSEMBLY STANDING COMMITTEE ON HEALTH

ASSEMBLY STANDING COMMITTEE ON ALCOHOLISM AND DRUG ABUSE

ASSEMBLY STANDING COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL SERVICES

NOTICE OF JOINT PUBLIC HEARING

Oral Testimony by Invitation Only

SUBJECT:     The Rockefeller Drug Laws – 35 Years Later.

PURPOSE:     To explore the impact of the “Rockefeller Drug Laws” on drug addiction, drug-related health problems and drug-related crime; to examine the impact of the 2004 and 2005 reforms of these drug laws in addressing drug abuse and the illegal drug trade; to examine the effectiveness of substance abuse treatment services as an alternative to incarceration and as a means to address offender recidivism; to determine the adequacy and effectiveness of existing substance abuse treatment services and resources; to explore whether the current criminal sentence structure should be continued or whether judges should have additional discretion to divert drug abusers into treatment as an alternative to incarceration; to examine access and barriers to social services for persons with a history of substance abuse released from incarceration.

May 8, 2008, is the 35^th anniversary of the enactment of New York’s “Rockefeller Drug Laws.”   The stated purpose of these laws was to deter the use and sale of drugs by imposing harsh mandatory prison sentences on drug offenders.   There have been a number of amendments to those laws over the years.  Recently, in 2004, New York amended the drug laws recognizing that a drug policy which focused purely on inflexible criminal sanctions was ineffective.  At the time, both the Executive and the Legislature recognized that while significant, the 2004 reforms, as well as a 2005 amendment, represented just a first step towards meaningful reform and that other major changes to the drug laws were urgently needed.  However, since 2004 only the Assembly has passed legislation to further reform New York’s drug laws.   

Despite sentencing reforms, large numbers of drug offenders continue to be incarcerated in New York State prisons.  As of January 1, 2008, 13,425 drug offenders were in state prison representing more than 21% of the male prison population and more than 33% of the female population.  Statistics show that a large majority of this population has never been convicted of a violent offense and up to 40% are incarcerated for drug possession rather than for selling drugs.  Notably, the Rockefeller Drug Laws have disproportionately impacted communities of color – more than 90% of all drug offenders in New York State prisons are Black or Latino.  

After 35 years of a drug policy focused on punishment with concomitant spending of billions of dollars to put people in prison, the question raised is whether the effort has been worth it and if not, whether New York’s laws should be amended.  Indeed, many argue that it may be time to broaden New York’s approach to addressing drug addiction. 

Unquestionably, drug abuse is a serious public health problem that affects families and almost every community.  Each year, even under the current scheme of drug law enforcement, drug abuse results in an estimated 40 million serious illnesses or injuries in the United States.  Drug addiction is a treatable disease, so among issues raised is whether a system that focuses on  preventing and treating drug addiction rather than simply incarcerating individuals will result in a reduction in the use and sale of drugs – something mandatory imprisonment laws have failed to accomplish.

In addition, another issue raised over the 35 years of experience New York has had under its drug laws is whether authorizing judges to sentence drug-addicted persons convicted of crimes to treatment as an alternative to incarceration would help break the cycle of addiction and crime and make our streets, homes and communities safer.  Furthermore, more effective prison-based drug treatment programs may reduce the rate of recidivism among formerly incarcerated substance abusers and improve their prospects for successful reentry into the community.   Such reforms may also produce significant fiscal savings by reducing correctional costs and the dependence on public assistance dollars thereby allowing the state to invest necessary resources in community-based alternative to incarceration and drug treatment programs.  

This hearing will provide an opportunity to take a fresh look at New York’s drug laws and examine how the criminal justice, social service and health systems treat drug abusers.   

Persons wishing to present pertinent testimony to the Committees at the joint public hearing should complete and return the enclosed reply form as soon as possible.  It is important that the reply form be fully completed and returned so that persons may be notified in the event of emergency postponement or cancellation.

Oral testimony will be accepted by invitation only and limited to ten (10) minutes’ duration.  In preparing the order of witnesses, the Committees will attempt to accommodate individual requests to speak at particular times in view of special circumstances.  These requests should be made on the attached reply form or communicated to the Committees’ staff as early as possible. 

Twenty (20) copies of any prepared testimony should be submitted at the hearing registration desk.  The Committees would appreciate advance receipt of prepared statements. In order to further publicize these hearings, please inform interested parties and organizations of the Committees’ interest in receiving testimony from all sources.

In order to meet the needs of those who may have a disability, the Assembly, in accordance with its policy of non-discrimination on the basis of disability, as well as the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), has made its facilities and services available to all individuals with disabilities.  For individuals with disabilities, accommodations will be provided, upon reasonable request, to afford such individuals access and admission to Assembly facilities and activities.

SELECTED ISSUES TO WHICH WITNESSES MAY DIRECT THEIR TESTIMONY:

1.      Has New York’s drug policy over the last 35 years reduced drug use, drug-related health problems, and drug-related criminal behavior?  If not, how should it change to more effectively reduce drug addiction and related problems?

2.      Are mandatory sentences of imprisonment an effective part of a drug policy strategy?  Should judges have discretion to sentence class B or above drug offenders and second felony drug offenders to drug treatment programs as an alternative to incarceration?  Would expanding the number of drug offenders eligible for court ordered drug abuse treatment as a potential alternative to incarceration help break the cycle of addiction and crime and make our streets, homes and communities safer? 

3.      How many drug courts are currently operating in the state?  Are there sufficient community-based treatment programs available to serve individuals participating in the drug court program?  How are the community-based programs utilized by drug courts funded and what additional resources, if any, are necessary? What changes, if any, should New York’s court system make to better address drug abuse and drug abuse related crime?

4.      What role should prosecutors and judges play in determining which offenders are diverted into alternative to incarceration programs?

5.      How effective is substance abuse treatment at reducing the rate of recidivism among persons convicted of crimes?  What kinds of programs, supervision and resources would most effectively reduce the incidence of drug use and drug-related crime? 

6.      How effective have existing programs (for example, Drug Treatment Alternatives to Prison and “Road to Recovery”) been in addressing substance abuse and dependency?  Are there other prosecutor-sponsored and non-prosecutor sponsored initiatives that are as, or more effective? 

7.      What substance abuse treatment services exist within New York State’s prisons and jails and do they sufficiently meet the needs of inmates with a history of drug and alcohol abuse?

8.      What pre-release procedures used by the Department of Correctional Services and the Division of Parole help ensure successful community integration of persons released from prison who have a history of substance abuse?  What steps are taken to ensure that there is a continuity of treatment between prison and community substance abuse treatment?

9.      What substance abuse treatment programs and resources are currently available in the community for persons released from jail and prison, and do they adequately meet the needs of the tens of thousands of persons released from jail and prison in New York each year?

10.  What are the barriers faced by formerly incarcerated individuals with a history of substance abuse in obtaining public benefits, medical assistance, and affordable, suitable and stable housing?    Is specific legislation needed to improve the process and assist these individuals in applying for and obtaining public benefits?   Are employment, training, and/or educational programs available through local Departments of Social Services for formerly incarcerated individuals with a history of substance abuse? What impact do such programs have on drug abuse relapse and recidivism? What can be done to improve employment and training opportunities for this population?

11.  What is the cost to taxpayers of the current mandatory incarceration laws? Are there potential cost savings that can be derived from diverting more defendants into substance abuse treatment as a potential alternative to incarceration?

12.  Two proposals have been offered recently that proponents say are designed to encourage addicted persons to seek treatment.  One would decriminalize the possession of a small, residual amount of a controlled substance in a hypodermic syringe when the syringe is given to an authorized needle exchange program pursuant to section 3381 (1) of the Public Health Law (A.6337).   A second proposal would encourage addicted persons and others to seek emergency assistance for persons seriously ill from a drug overdose (A.8740).  This proposal would restrict the use in criminal court of evidence concerning the possession of a controlled substance when such evidence is obtained as a result of the person seeking or receiving health care services.   Are these proposals meritorious? 

_____________________

Flash:  March 28, 2008

http://www.theithacajournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080328/NEWS01/803280350/1002/NEWS01

ALBANY — Advocates at the Capitol Thursday asked lawmakers to overturn the mandatory sentences required by the Rockefeller-era drug laws and instead let judges decide how long offenders should stay in prison.

Under current law, drug offenders are sent to prison when they would benefit more from drug treatment, which would also save the state money, said Robert Gangi, executive director of the Correctional Association.

Would you rather run into a drug user on the street who has been in a treatment facility for the last three years or that has done three years in Attica (prison)?” he said.

Members of the Correctional Association and other groups in the Drop the Rock coalition were among many advocates who took their issues to the Capitol in a last-minute effort to get their agendas reflected in the state budget. Lawmakers are supposed to have a spending plan before the new fiscal year begins — April 1 — but they are behind schedule.

Environmental advocates pushed for passage of the “bigger better bottle bill,” which would require non-carbonated beverages — water and juices — to carry the same 5-cent deposit as soda and beer containers. They also pushed for congestion pricing for New York City — an additional tax on those who drive into parts of Manhattan during peak travel hours during the week. The goal of the measure would be to discourage car use in the city, improve the environment and encourage more to use mass transportation.

Education advocates urged lawmakers to increase the income tax for people who earn $1 million or more a year to help fund the state's education system.

The Rockefeller-era drug laws, enacted in 1973, require long prison terms for the possession or sale of a relatively small amount of drugs, Gangi said.

Drop the Rock members said that reforms to the drug laws in 2004 and 2005 did not go far enough. Prison terms for non-violent offenders who don't buy or sell large amounts of drugs should be shortened, and the state should increase money for drug treatment and other alternatives to incarceration, they said.

There are about 13,400 drug offenders in state prisons at a cost of $500 million per year, or almost $37,000 per inmate per year, Gangi said.

The state should invest in alternative drug treatment, he said.

An outpatient drug treatment service can cost between $2,700 and $4,500 per person per year, and residential drug treatment centers can cost between $17,000 and $21,000 per person per year, Gangi said.

The number of drug offenders in prison is declining, according to the state Department of Correctional Services.

under custody than there were in 1996 when the number peaked at 23,511 drug offenders - that's a 43 percent reduction.”

However, there has been a recent spike in newly incarcerated inmates with drug charges, jumping from 5,657 in 2004 to 6,148 in 2007, she said.

Assembly Corrections Committee Chairman Jeffrion Aubry, D-Queens, has proposed a bill that would effectively dissolve the mandatory minimum sentencing laws and replace them with new, suggested sentencing guidelines for judges to follow when sentencing drug offenders.

Sen. Dale Volker, R-Depew, Erie County, said he thinks sentencing guidelines are a good idea but could allow too many dangerous offenders to slip through unpunished. Many drug offenders could benefit more from treatment than jail time, he said.

“I believe in treatment, I believe that we should not send low-level offenders to jail unless under extreme circumstances,” such as if they are repeat offenders, he said.

“Very, very few people go to jail under the Rockefeller Drug Laws,” Volker said, only the biggest drug dealers.

“It is the re-offenders, not the new offenders, that are creating the problems with prisons,” he said.

dosburn@nycap.rr.com

Flash:   march 5, 2008  :russell simmons  might finish what he started in 2003

http://www.ny1.com/ny1/content/index.jsp?stid=3&aid=79139

Governor Responds To Hip Hop Moguls Demand For Drug Law Reform

 March 05, 2008

 The governor responded Wednesday to some very heated language used by hip hop mogul Russell Simmons to describe his stance on the Rockefeller drug laws. Speaking out on NY1's "Inside City Hall" Tuesday, Simmons said Eliot Spitzer is failing to live up to promises to reform the state's strict drug laws. Political reporter Josh Robin filed the following report. “I'm very disappointed in the governor. I should say that the hip hop is getting ready to get in his ass,” Russell Simmons said on Tuesday night’s “Inside City Hall.”

Simmons says Governor Eliot Spitzer as a candidate talked a good game about reforming the Rockefeller drug laws. But 14 months after inauguration, some feel cheated. "He promised all of us that he would do something about this prison reform issue,” said Simmons.

 The fiery issue is a set of laws among the strictest in the nation, demanding sentences for the sale or possession of drugs. African Americans and Latinos are hit especially hard, making up 91 percent of those behind bars. The laws account for 21 percent of the prison population, costing a half billion dollars a year.

 Running for office, Spitzer impressed advocates. "As a candidate, Eliot Spitzer was enthusiastically in favor of reform of Rockefeller,” said Assemblyman Jeffion Aubry. “I will continue to support efforts to reform these laws," he said in a survey. It’s a position he reiterated Wednesday, but now with a caveat.

 "We're trying to come up with something that is reasoned that will maintain safety. People should not forget, we have seen a dramatic drop in crime over the years in New York State,” said Spitzer. “And that's because – I can say this as a prosecutor – we prosecute crimes, we're tough, we lock up those that are guilty. And so we have to be very measured and reasoned in what we do.”

 A recent spike in the release of violent criminals has Spitzer on the defensive, although aides noted a majority of the parole board's appointees are carryovers from the Pataki administration. Spitzer did set up a commission that recommended in some cases alternatives to prison, but only with the agreement of the court, the defense and the prosecution.

 Some feel no real reforms will happen until the State Senate is stripped of its Republican control – a margin now at just one seat.

 "We're really counting on 2009 when hopefully there will be the leadership in Albany across the board to push for major Rockefeller reform together, with a comprehensive reform of New York's drug policies,” said Ethan Nadelmann of Drug Policy Alliance, an advocacy group against the nation’s war on drugs.

 As for Simmons' remarks, Spitzer still calls him a friend. – Josh Robin

__________________________

HUFFINGTON POST   Posted March 4, 2008 | 06:25 PM (EST)

by Anthony Papa

http://timesunion.com/TUNews/author/AuthorPage.aspx?AuthorNum=58

Flash!   Governor Spitzer Grants No Clemencies in 2007!

_________________________

FLASH!!!!   December 19, 2007    A Call to governor spitzer to grant executive clemency to rockefeller offenders who have fallen in the cracks of a political Quagmire

Letters to the editor

December 14 2007

A first change in drug sentencing

Re "Justices OK latitude on sentencing," Dec. 11

Finally, the Supreme Court has positively reacted to the cruelty of a bad sentencing law that has been tossed around between legislatures and the courts for 20 years. In that time, an alarming number of people's lives have been destroyed by racially discriminatory crack-cocaine laws that disproportionately sentenced people of color. However, the decision to give judges more power to use sentencing discretion is only a first step in correcting these clearly draconian laws that were constructed because of the politics of the drug war. I hope it sends a clear message to prosecutors that mandatory minimum sentences are a part of an archaic judicial structure that needs to be overhauled in the name of justice.

Anthony Papa

Communications Specialist

Drug Policy Alliance

New York

12/11/07

http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=446&Itemid=1

The U.S. Sentencing Commission has acknowledged the obvious: that penalties for possession of "crack" cocaine, as opposed to the powdered kind, amount to racist law designed to disproportionately incarcerate African Americans. Despite the Sentencing Commission's recommendation that Congress repeal its racist crack cocaine laws, the U.S. Justice Department resists righting the historical wrong, warning that release of crack offenders would open "the flood gates of hell." Rather, Bush's demonic bureaucrats rush to defend the citadels of the American Black Prison Gulag, an abomination unmatched on the planet - slavery's incarnation in the 21^st Century.

Change Racist Crack Cocaine Laws

by Anthony Papa

"Only the U.S. Congress can eliminate the racist sentencing disparity between powder and crack cocaine."

This article previously appeared in Counterpunch.

Does the number 1 equal 100? In common math it does not, but when you are talking federal drug sentencing it unfortunately does. If you distribute just five grams of crack, it carries a minimum five-year federal prison sentence. If you distribute 500 grams of powder cocaine, it carries the same sentence. This 100:1 sentencing disparity has been condemned for its racially discriminatory impact by a wide array of criminal justice and civil rights groups. Hispanics and whites make up the majority of crack cocaine users, but the majority of those convicted under crack cocaine offenses are African Americans.

After many years of heated debate over the issue of crack vs. powder cocaine sentencing disparities, the U.S. Sentencing Commission decided to ease the penalties for crack on November 1, 2007. A hearing was held on November 13 to determine whether or not to apply retroactively recommended revisions to the federal guidelines that lowered the minimum sentences for crack cocaine-related offenses. If recommended, about 4,000 prisoners will be released this year by shaving an average of two years off their sentences, with almost 16,000 to follow. In theory, it would be the largest single act to reduce the sentences of federal prisoners.

"The Justice Department quickly put out a statement saying that the proposed changes to the law would put thousands of violent criminals back on the streets."

Critics were quick to exploit the age-old defensive argument that the flood gates of hell would be opened if such an action were to become law. The Justice Department quickly put out a statement saying that the proposed changes to the law would put thousands of violent criminals back on the streets. The National Association of Assistant U.S. Attorneys warned that by freeing thousands of prisoners it would overburden prosecutors.  Advocates rebutted saying that if the law is passed it will be a small step towards mitigating the sentence disparity between crack and powder cocaine, which disproportionately affects people of color. Even federal judges like Chief Justice Robert Pratt of Iowa, has said that talk of a sudden large amount of freed prisoners was inflated, and that workloads should not prevent creating fair sentencing in crack cocaine cases that serves the interests of justice.

Some say that Congress probably did not set out to pass racially discriminatory crack cocaine laws some twenty years ago. Whether or not these laws were created with the intention of targeting African Americans, let's make no mistake about it: it has. Jasmine Tyler, deputy director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, said, "We are encouraged by the U.S. Sentencing Commission's commitment to do what is in their power to address harsh crack cocaine sentences, and we are hopeful that the Commission will apply this relief retroactively. However, only the U.S. Congress can eliminate the racist sentencing disparity between powder and crack cocaine sentences and we implore them to do so now."

"Pharmacologically they are the same drug."

The unfair sentencing that is in effect was enacted based on the many myths that surround crack use. These included media stories that told of a "crack baby" epidemic in the 1980s, stories now found to be greatly exaggerated or flat-out lies. Research now shows that factors such as smoking and drinking, malnutrition, inadequate sleep, and poverty are responsible for the many pre-natal ailments associated with crack use. Criminal penalties for possession and sales of cocaine are severe. But the penalties for crack cocaine are much more severe, despite the fact that pharmacologically they are the same drug. If these suggested changes, take affect and are applied retroactively, it will do a lot to balance the scales of justice in reforming a bad law that has dished out unfair sentences to people convicted of crack cocaine offenses.

Anthony Papa is the author of "15 to Life" and a communications specialist for the Drug Policy Alliance. He can be contacted at tpapa@drugpolicy.org This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it .

____________

http://www.chicagosportsreview.com/inthemeantime/contentview.asp?c=204651

http://www.blackathlete.net/artman2/publish/Commentary_1/Barry_Bonds_And_The_Drug_War.shtml

Barry Bonds And The Drug War
A Different Look At The BALCO Scandal

by Anthony Papa, tpapa@drugpolicy.org
POSTED: Nov 27, 2007

 

NEW YORK -- What does the war on drugs have to do with baseball? Just ask Barry Bonds who was just indicted by federal prosecutors on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice.   

Bonds is now facing up to 30 years in prison if convicted. Anti-doping advocates, including America’s deputy drug czar, are calling for jail time for baseball players who use steroids saying that it may be the only effective deterrent for curbing illegal use.

Let’s face it, while Bonds’s indictment for lying to a grand jury may have legal basis, the real underlying reason for this federal indictment four years after the BALCO investigation is their failure to get Bonds to admit he had used steroids or any other performance-enhancing drugs. 

In that case a business named Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative (BALCO) was alleged to be distributing illegal performance -- enhancing drugs was investigated by several governmental agencies.  This resulted in a huge scandal which involved many major league baseball players and led to Major League Baseball initiating penalties for players caught using steroids in 2004.

Well now the government is ready to take down the home-run king along with the entire sport of baseball by pushing their personal agenda of a zero tolerance for drug use.

Travis Tygart, head of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency thinks that Major League Baseball’s rules concerning the use of performance-enhancing drugs such as steroids don’t pack enough of a wallop in terms of functioning as a real deterrent.  He is rooting for Bonds to be imprisoned so it sends a clear message.

Imprisonment of record-breaking hitters like Bonds will not solve baseball’s problem. I know this is true because of the failed war on drugs. The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world. 

It has 5% of the world’s population, but 25% of the world’s prisoners, with more than 2.3 million citizens sitting behind bars, a rate of one in every 136 U.S. residents. 

About 55% of all federal and over 20% of all state prisoners are convicted of drug-law violations with many of them serving mandatory-minimum sentences for simple possession offences.  And despite all of the incarceration drug use and drug availability are as prevalent as ever.  Are we now going to add major league players to drug war statistics?

For the sake of argument, what if Bonds did use steroids?  Does he belong in jail? He is not the first athlete to use them and he will not be the last. The pursuit for athletic superiority through the use of chemicals has been around a long time.  Before steroids were officially banned in the early 1970’s, almost 70% of all Olympic athletes had used them.  

Is it ethical and morally right to sentence someone to a lengthy prison term for putting substances in their own bodies? The premise for prosecuting the other war with no exit strategy – the drug war -- has slowly but surely infiltrated the public’s eye through different vehicles.  

Now the feds attempt to bring their message through the sport of baseball.  Bonds joins the ranks of the demonized including medical marijuana users, pain sufferers and their doctors who prescribe opioid analgesics, and students who are forced to urinate in cups. All of this in the name of a drug-free America without concern for individuals’ rights.

At one time baseball was our obsession.  It was a sport that walked hand and hand with the American dream full of heroes of whom we could all be proud. 

Now the federal government, with its crusade against any and all drug use, has begun a new mission to alter our way of thinking no matter what the cost or how many lives are ruined. I say no to the government for trying to destroy our national past time and no to imprisoning a baseball king.
 

---

Anthony Papa is a communications specialist for the Drug Policy Alliance and the author of “15 to Life”.

 

Flash!  11/20/2207   Putting Pressure on the Sentencing Commission/  The op-ed below was published in the three cities where the sentencing commission held public hearings sending them a message to address Rockefeller Drug Law reform

Buffalo NY/ Albany NY/ NYC!

chambers’ arrest highlights need for further reforms
Buffalo News,  United States - Nov 14, 2007
by anthony papa robert chambers spent 15 years in prison for the notorious murder of jennifer levin, whom he claimed he accidentally strangled during rough ...

no time to waste in sentencing issue
Albany Times Union, NY - Nov 10, 2007
... details of his 1986 slaying case will have no sympathy for chambers. what's most outrageous about this case, though, is that chambers faces more time ...
 

http://www.nysun.com/article/65937

'Isn't It Ironic, Don't You Think?'

BY ANTHONY PAPA

November 6, 2007

There has been an onslaught of press attention following the arrest of "Preppy Killer" Robert Chambers due to, this time, selling cocaine. One fact that has been omitted from the coverage is that Chambers now faces more time for selling drugs under the Rockefeller Drug Laws than he did for the murder he committed in 1986.

Chambers served 15 years in prison for the notorious murder of Jennifer Levin. He claimed that he accidentally strangled Levin during rough sex. Despite his horrific crime, Chambers was allowed to plead guilty to first-degree manslaughter instead of second-degree murder and was sentenced to serve between five and 15 years in prison. He wound up serving 15 years because of bad behavior, which included smuggling and selling drugs while in prison.

Now, 21 years later, Chambers has been arrested again, this time for selling cocaine to undercover officers. He faces top felony counts that can mean life in prison. As the case unfolds, it is evident that Chambers, along with his girlfriend, Shawn Kovell, who also was arrested, are both heavily addicted to drugs. They were described as "crackheads" by detectives who searched their disheveled Upper East Side apartment.

Despite significant evidence against him, Chambers has pleaded not guilty to multiple charges of selling cocaine that can land him sentences of between 15 and 30 years for each of the highest counts under the Rockefeller Drug Laws. So, if he is found guilty of the multiple charges, he could be spending the rest of his life in prison.

Those who remember the details of his 1986 case will have no sympathy for Chambers who has a history of drug addiction. A year after his release in 2003, he was arrested again while driving with a suspended license. Officers found drug residue in his car. He pled guilty to the charges and served 100 days on a misdemeanor charge. The most outrageous fact of all of Chambers's cases is that he faces more time for a drug offense under the Rockefeller Drug Laws than he did for taking Levin's life.

Despite two minor reforms made by the legislature in 2004 and 2005 that slightly reduced the length of most drug sentences, there are 14,000 individuals in prison sentenced under the Rockefeller drug laws. Many of them are nonviolent offenders and are serving longer sentences than people who commit rape or murder. There is something very wrong with this equation.

For example, Ashley O'Donoghue, a first time non-violent offender sold a small amount of drugs to two students at Hamilton College in upstate New York in 2003. The students got arrested, but worked out a deal with prosecutors that gave them probation. O'Donoghue, however, is serving a seven to 21-year sentence.

The reforms by the legislature, though, did not provide the needed relief for the vast majority of Rockefeller offenders. For example it reduced the highest sentences from 15 years to life to between eight and 20 years. The reforms also made some long-term drug offenders eligible for retroactive relief.

Since 1973 when the Rockefeller Laws were enacted, we have witnessed the creation of a drug-law gulag fed by a poorly conceived law that incarcerated many drug offenders from the inner city neighborhoods of New York. This helped to create smart upstate politicians who saw the Rockefeller Drug Laws as a tool to make the business of imprisonment a major industry in their districts — creating a disincentive in the legislature to reform these laws.

The recent reform did not provide funding to increase the availability of community based drug treatment. It did not increase the power of judges to place addicts into treatment programs. It also did not provide relief for the 4,000 B-drug felons: Out of the 1,000 individuals that became eligible for retroactive relief, only about 350 individuals have been freed to date because of procedural road blocks created by district attorneys.

Governor Spitzer recently put together a panel to study the disparity of sentencing guidelines in New York State. One of the issues was the Rockefeller Drug Laws. But in its recently released preliminary report, the commission failed even to address the issue of Rockefeller Drug Law reform. State commissioner of criminal justice services and chairwoman of the Commission on Sentencing Reform, Denise O'Donnell, said the issue would be addressed next time. The final report is due in March of 2008.

But the evidence is already in, and the issue does not need any more studies. It needs political will and action. The Spitzer panel must consider the families of those incarcerated, and the precious tax dollars being wasted on the court's archaic sentencing structure. Hundreds of nonviolent Rockefeller offenders in prison are serving longer sentences than those of convicted murderers.

Something is fundamentally wrong with a system that advocates serving more time for a nonviolent drug offense then for a hideous crime committed by a sociopath like Robert Chambers. On November 13, individuals affected by the Rockefeller Drug Laws will come together to speak at a public hearing conducted by the sentencing commission at the New York City Bar Association. Their message to the commission will be this: the problem needs to be fixed now — not "next time."　

Mr. Papa, the author of "15 to Life," is a communications specialist for the Drug Policy Alliance.

_________________

 

 

Commission Urges Lawmakers to Appeal Sentencing Laws

by Patricia Willens  http://www.wnyc.org/news/articles/88822

Commission Urges Lawmakers to Appeal Sentencing Laws

by Patricia Willens

NEW YORK, NY November 13, 2007 —Former inmates and prison reformers were on hand today as the New York Sentencing Reform Commission held a hearing on possibly reforming the so-called Rockefeller drug laws.

REPORTER: The state has stiff sentencing rules that don't allow judges flexibility and put many people behind bars, who might be better served in treatment programs.

Anthony Papa speaks from experience. He says he was behind bars for 12 years for carrying 4 ounces of cocaine

PAPA: These laws don't work, they incarcerate too many blacks and latinos. It's costly, ineffective, treatment has been shown to be better and we need to change these laws.

REPORTER: There are two more hearings on sentencing reform in the state. They're in Albany and Buffalo over the next week. The Commission is tasked with making recommendations to the governor in the spring. There are nearly 14,000 people jailed for drug offenses in New York State prisons. They represent about 38 percent of the prison population.

 

 

 

____________________________

 

Albany Times Union

 Time is now for drug sentencing reform 

 Wednesday, October 24, 2007

 

In response to your Oct. 15 editorial, "This time, real reform":

The state commission's preliminary report failed to address the issue of Rockefeller Drug Law reform. Denise O'Donnell, state commissioner of criminal justice services and chairwoman of the Commission on Sentencing Reform, said the issue would be addressed next time.

 I am an activist who has been involved in fighting for reform since 1985, when I was convicted of a nonviolent drug offense and sentenced to 15 years to life. I have heard the same story from several governors and the Legislature for many years.

 The evidence is in. The issue does not need any more studies. It needs political will and action. The panel must consider the families of those incarcerated, those rotting away in prison and the valuable tax dollars being wasted on its archaic sentencing structure. We are tired of hearing "next time."

 ANTHONY PAPA

New York

 The writer is author of "15 to Life."

_______________

 

Flash!   October 17, 2007    Sentencing Commission fails to address the Rockefeller Drug Laws!

The state commission’s preliminary report failed to address the issue of Rockefeller drug reform. Denise O'Donnell, state commissioner of criminal justice services and chairwoman of the Commission on Sentencing Reform said that the issue would be addressed next time.   I am an activist who has been involved in fighting for reform since 1985 when I was convicted of a non-violent drug offense and sentenced to 15 years to life.  I have heard the same story from several governors and the legislature for many years.  The evidence is in, the issue does not need any more studies, it needs political will and action.   The panel must consider the families of those incarcerated, those rotting away in prison and the valuable tax dollars being wasted on its archaic sentencing structure.   We are tried of hearing   “next time”.

 

_________

Poughkeepsie Journal (New York)

October 17, 2007 Wednesday

Panel: Streamline sentencing laws

BYLINE: Cara Matthews

SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 2A

LENGTH: 591 words

　　　ALBANY - New York needs to simplify its "virtually unintelligible" sentencing system and should permit community treatment rather than prison terms for certain non-violent felony drug offenders, a state sentencing-reform panel recommended Tuesday.

　　　Sentencing laws have not received a thorough review and revision in more than 40 years and have developed into an "overly complex, Byzantine system that is fraught with opportunities for injustice," said Denise O'Donnell, state commissioner of criminal justice services and chairwoman of the Commission on Sentencing Reform.

　　　O'Donnell said in the report the system has become "virtually unintelligible"

in many cases to judges, attorneys, defendants and victims.

　　　"We could perform a significant service to the criminal-justice system if we could arrive at a consensus about how we could simplify the sentencing structure," she said Tuesday.

　　　Spitzer formed the 11-member panel this year to study whether punishments fit the crimes and protect public safety in New York. Besides prison sentences, the panel has been reviewing community supervision, alternatives to incarceration and other parts of the criminal-justice system.

　　　The report said the current system is the result of decades of "piecemeal amendments arising more often from political than criminal justice policy considerations." The complicated sentencing laws, the mix of determinate, or fixed, and indeterminate, or variable, sentences, and "back-door early release mechanisms" all contribute to the problem, it said.

　　　The commission report released Tuesday is preliminary. The panel will hold public hearings before issuing a final report March 1. Any significant change would need legislative approval.

　　　Recommendations include:

　　　* End indeterminate sentencing for more than 200 non-violent felonies. With fixed sentences, a judge imposes a prison term with a minimum and maximum and the parole board decides when the offender is released.

　　　* Allow courts to send certain non-violent drug-addicted felony offenders to community-based treatment instead of state prison if the judge, prosecutor and defendant agree.

　　　* Consider a broader use of "graduated sanctions" - curfew, home confinement and electronic monitoring, for example - rather than prison for certain parolees who violate one or more conditions of release but don't commit a new crime.

　　　* Pass new laws and step up enforcement of existing statutes to further protect crime victims.

　　　* Help reduce recidivism and increase public safety by expanding educational and vocational training and improving employment and housing opportunities for offenders.

　　　* Establish a permanent sentencing commission to advise the legislative and executive branches.

　　　O'Donnell, Spitzer's assistant secretary for criminal justice, said the commission is mindful of the financial impact of its proposals. "I believe we are all operating on the understanding that if we could reduce recidivism, continue to reduce the prison population," then the state could invest money into other programs to help offenders, she said.

　　　Gabriel Sayegh, program director of the Drug Policy Alliance, said his group is disappointed the report does not include any "substantive recommendations" on the Rockefeller-era drug laws.

　　　The laws, which many people have called harsh and unreasonable, were passed in 1973 under then-Gov. Nelson Rockefeller. The Legislature made some changes to them in 2004 and 2005, but the Drug Policy Alliance and other groups have said lawmakers did not go far enough.

　　　Reach Cara Matthews at clmatthe@gannett.com

____________________

 

http://www.counterpunch.org/papa09252007.html

 

http://www.alternet.org/drugreporter/63662/

 

Will Drug Lord Do Less Time Than the Average American Nonviolent Drug Offender?

By Anthony Papa, AlterNet. Posted September 27, 2007.

Why Colombia's top drug lord may get off easier than small-time offenders in the U.S.

The U.S. government recently praised the arrest of Colombia's top drug lord Diego Montoya when he was captured earlier this month. Law enforcement and military officials say it was a powerful blow to Colombia's most powerful drug cartel, comparing it to the capture of Al Capone during Prohibition.

Montoya, who had been on the FBI's top ten most wanted list, is said to be responsible for providing as much as 70 percent of all the cocaine in the United States. In 1999, a $5 million bounty for his capture and extradition was offered after he was indicted in a federal court in Miami.

There is much talk about how this capture will affect the drug trade and the flow of drugs into the United States. But the question on my mind is how much time will he serve when he is brought to the United States to stand trial for the death and destruction he has caused? I would be willing to bet that he will get less time than many Americans who are now serving extraordinarily long sentences, many for low-level, nonviolent drug law violations under the notorious mandatory minimum sentencing laws. Some would ask how would I come to this conclusion.

If you look at the recently completed federal sentence of former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega, who served a 17-year federal sentence for drug trafficking, it might give you a hint what is in store for Montoya. In Noriega's case the U.S. attorney negotiated deals with 26 high-level drug dealers, including drug lord Carlos Lehder. They in turn received a package of perks that included leniency and cash payments, and were allowed to keep their drug earnings in return for testimony against the infamous general who was once a strong United States ally before he fell from grace in 1989, when the U.S. invaded Panama.

There are many Americans in prison that are serving sentences of more than 17 years in prison for simple drug crimes. These are marginalized offenders that don't have the bargaining chips to establish deals. For example, Elaine Bartlett, a mother of four, served a 20-to-life sentence under the Rockefeller Drug Laws for seven ounces of cocaine. Her husband, Nathan Brooks, was sentenced to 25 years to life. The list goes on and on. There are an estimated 500,000 Americans locked up because of the drug war. Many of them are serving lengthy sentences because of a 30-year government campaign to demonize illicit drug use and implement mandatory minimum sentencing.

In 1986, mandatory minimum sentencing laws were enacted by Congress, which compelled judges to deliver fixed sentences to individuals convicted of certain crimes, regardless of mitigating factors or culpability. Federal mandatory drug sentences are determined based on three factors: the type of drug, weight of the drug mixture (or alleged weight in conspiracy cases), and the number of prior convictions. Judges are unable to consider other important factors, such as the offender's role, motivation and the likelihood of recidivism.

The push to incarcerate drug offenders has been further exacerbated through the current federal sentencing law that punishes crack cocaine offenders much more severely than offenders possessing other types of drugs, for example, powder cocaine. Distributing just five grams of crack carries a minimum five-year federal prison sentence while distributing 500 grams of powder cocaine carries the same sentence. This 100:1 sentencing disparity has been almost universally criticized for its racially discriminatory impact by a wide variety of criminal justice and civil rights groups, and in Congress. Although whites and Hispanics form the majority of crack users, the vast majority of those convicted for crack cocaine offenses are African Americans.

Because of the war on drugs, which mandates mandatory minimum sentencing, average drug offenders are routinely elevated to kingpin status and condemned to serve out long prison sentences that should be reserved only for actual drug kingpins, not individuals that are fabricated to that level. It's time to end these draconian laws and implement a sentencing structure that promotes fairness and justice.

 

 

 

http://ny.metro.us/metro/local/article/Group_wants_Rockefeller_law_reforms/9833.html

 

Metro New York

Group wants Rockefeller law reforms

by amy zimmer / metro new york  AUG 29, 2007

 

MANHATTAN. Cheri O’Dono-ghue hopes Gov. Eliot Spitzer will make good on his campaign pledge to reform the state’s prison sentencing laws.

Her son Ashley already served four years of his seven-to-21-year sentence after being caught in a sting operation delivering roughly five ounces of cocaine to two Hamilton College students. O’Donoghue believes his sentence — meted out under the so-called Rockefeller drug laws — was excessive for the nonviolent crime of her 20-year-old, who had no record.

Spitzer established the New York State Commission on Sentencing Reform last March to review sentencing policies and study alternatives to incarceration. Examining the Rockefeller laws are high on its list for a closed-door meeting this week on a first round of recommendations it will make public in October. The final report is expected in March 2008.

“I am totally for a major overhaul because these laws are inhumane,” O’Donoghue said during a conference call yesterday with members of the Real Reform Coalition, a group of advocates, academics and families fighting to repeal the laws. “They destroy the lives of many New Yorkers, like my family.”

The coalition sent an open letter to the sentencing reform commission yesterday calling for restoration of judges’ discretion in drug cases rather than mandatory minimum sentencing. They want reduction in drug offense sentences, retroactive sentencing relief for prisoners locked up under Rockefeller laws and more community-based treatment and alternative-to-incarceration programs.

“Ashley is someone who deserves a second chance,” O’Donoghue said. “Certainly the two Hamilton College boys” — who were enlisted in the sting after getting caught buying 2.6 ounces of cocaine — “got a second chance.” Police asked them to buy twice that amount, she believes, so they could make a “trumped up charge.”

Many prosecutors oppose changing the laws, saying they’ve helped reduce crime and that many homicides are related to drug sales. They worry that any repeals could release kingpins to the streets.

“Drug kingpins will rarely carry drugs,” said Bob Gangi, executive director of the Correction Association of New York watchdog group, “whereas a teenage mother employed by a kingpin will carry a relatively small amount of drugs and will likely serve a long prison sentence.”

The breakdown

Since the Rockefeller drug laws were enacted in 1973, more than 14,000 people have been sent to prison — roughly 38 percent of the prison population. Some reforms were made in 2004 and 2005, and nearly 350 drug offenders were released.

 

Democrat and Chronicle

August 29, 2007

Advocates seek reform in 'unjust' drug laws

 State panel meets today to work on proposed changes to Rockefeller rules

 Cara Matthews

Albany bureau

ALBANY — As a state commission deliberates how to update New York's sentencing practices, a coalition of civil liberties and drug treatment and policy groups Tuesday asked for shorter terms and more community-based programs to help offenders.

The organizations, which include the Drug Policy Alliance and the New York Civil Liberties Union, said changes to the Rockefeller-era drug laws in 2004 and 2005 to reduce sentences and parole did not go far enough.

"They're unfair, unjust and cruel," Donna Lieberman, head of the Civil Liberties Union, said of the drug laws. "And ... they destroy lives rather than rehabilitating them. They are enforced with blatant racial and ethnic bias."

More than 14,000 people are in prison for drug crimes, 38 percent of the prison population. Black and Hispanic people comprise more than 90 percent of people current in prison for drug felonies, the groups said.

The state Commission on Sentencing Reform, formed earlier this year by Gov. Eliot Spitzer, is reviewing whether punishments fit the crimes and protect public safety in New York. The panel is also looking at community supervision, alternatives to prison and other aspects of the criminal-justice system.

The panel meets today to start hashing out recommendations of its subcommittees. Its preliminary report is due Oct. 1, and the final report, March 1.

"The sentencing commission is the best chance in many years to address the unfairness, inequity and outright incoherence of our current sentencing structure," said Sen. Eric Schneiderman, D-Manhattan, a member of the commission.

Schneiderman said he wants the state to expand judges' ability to order treatments proven to be effective for drug offenders and other non-violent offenders.

Members of the Real Reform Coalition, which submitted an open letter to the commission Tuesday, said they are hoping the panel will come up with significant recommendations on drug laws. They were passed in 1973 under then-Gov. Nelson Rockefeller to shut down drug "kingpins," but most people incarcerated are convicted of low-level, non-violent offenses. Many have no prior criminal records, they said.

The groups want the following:

  Restoration of judges' ability to decide the length of sentences in drug cases, rather than go by mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines, which don't allow consideration of a person's special circumstances.

  Expansion of alternative-to-incarceration programs, including community-based treatment. Treatment funding has been flat for two decades.

  Reduction in the length of sentences for all drug offenses.

  Expansion of eligibility for current prisoners convicted of drug offenses to ask the courts to review and potentially reduce their terms.

"There are many, many people still serving unconscionably long sentences with no opportunity for a retroactive review," said Anita Marton of the Legal Action Center.

But Rockland County District Attorney Michael Bongiorno said it would be a mistake to roll back penalties.

"The drug laws have been weakened enough. Any further weakening of the drug laws will only serve to foster more drug dealing and endanger the public," said Bongiorno, chairman of the board of directors for the state District Attorneys Association.

Other points Bongiorno made include:

  Prosecutors are in a better position than judges to decide who should or shouldn't get drug treatment because they are closer to the community.

  Reducing sentences for the weight of drugs people are arrested for has allowed drug dealers to run more drugs and receive lower penalties. There has been an increase in the amount of drugs being run upstate via the Thruway from New York City.

CLMATTHE@Gannett.com

 

 

http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/storyprint.asp?StoryID=615894

 

 

Justice reform should begin with drug laws   By GABRIEL SAYEGH First published: Wednesday, August 22, 2007   While New York is focused on other matters unfolding in Albany, an important process is under way that could bring desperately needed changes to the state's broken criminal justice system. The state Commission on Sentencing Reform, established by Gov. Eliot Spitzer, has an ambitious agenda focusing on criminal justice reform. At the top of this agenda are the infamous Rockefeller Drug Laws. Over the next week, in non-public meetings, the commission will receive and vote on a first round of recommendations, made by a subcommittee. The commission will issue a preliminary report in October; its final report is due in March. The commission and its recommendations deserve intense scrutiny by New Yorkers who care about effective and genuine drug law reform. Advocates working for real reform of the drug laws have remained somewhat skeptical about the prospects for change under the commission, and for good reason: Substantial evidence backing "real reform" of drug laws already exists. In 2004, then-Senate Democratic Leader David Paterson -- now lieutenant governor -- released a report illustrating that New York's drug laws were among the most draconian in the country. The comprehensive report garnered the support of advocates, academics and the media. Paterson introduced legislation to enact report recommendations, but it died without even a public hearing. Over the last 34 years, numerous reports have been written about the Rockefeller Drug Laws. The vast majority concluded what most New Yorkers already know -- the laws are ineffective, racist and unjust. Almost all of the reports have recommended that the laws be overhauled or repealed. Unfortunately, sound research and reason have never been enough to compel Albany to act. Perhaps this is why the governor established the commission -- to build the bipartisan support needed to enact meaningful reform. For this reason, despite our skepticism, drug law reform advocates have provided testimony and research for the commission. The testimony highlighted four components that must be included in any meaningful reform of the Rockefeller Drug Laws: Restoration of judicial discretion in drug cases: The Rockefeller Drug Laws, which include the Second Felony Offender Law, did not eliminate discretion; they simply shifted power from judges to prosecutors. Prosecutors have a vested interest in keeping these laws on the books so they can garner information, seek assets forfeiture and move cases expeditiously as a result of one-sided plea negotiations conducted behind closed doors. These actions help promote the severe racial disparities that have become a hallmark of the laws: Over 91 percent of those incarcerated under these laws are black and Latino, even though whites use drugs at equal or slightly higher rates. Sentencing reform: The half-step reforms of 2004 did not affect the people most in need of a reform -- those convicted of B-level offenses. Most individuals charged with B-level offenses face mandatory prison sentences if convicted of selling or possessing, with intent to sell, any amount of narcotic. The probability of going to prison for such an offense is greater than the probability of going to prison for a violent felony offense. Community-based drug treatment alternatives to incarceration: In 2000, California voters passed a treatment-not-incarceration initiative -- Proposition 36. Rather than being sent to prison, more than 150,000 people have been placed in state-funded, community-based drug treatment programs, saving state taxpayers more than $1 billion. Some prosecutors in New York argue that placing drug offenders in tretment, rather than prison, will increase violent crime. California's violent crime rate has dropped more than the national average since the passage of Proposition 36. Retroactivity: Nearly 14,000 people are incarcerated under the Rockefeller Drug Laws. Most should be resentenced under an equitable system that allows for treatment and rehabilitation. These reforms fit into the commission's mandate, will protect the public and will save the state money through better management of our criminal justice resources. If substantial drug sentencing reform is absent from the commission's report, or if the recommendations are purely cosmetic, the commission will have abdicated its responsibility in favor of the failed status quo. If the recommendations are worthwhile, but Albany again fails to act, the report can serve New Yorkers in another way -- as a very expensive paperweight. Gabriel Sayegh is a project director at the Drug Policy Alliance, a leading member of Real Reform New York.

 

·                                 http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1653862,00.html

 

Friday, Aug. 17, 2007

Mandatory Sentencing: Stalled Reform

By Madison Gray/New York

The most painful thing to Cheri O'Donaghue about her son's incarceration on drug charges is not the imprisonment itself, but that he is serving the sentence that should go to a narcotics kingpin when all he committed, she says, was the crime of a small-time pusher. Her son Ashley was found guilty of delivering cocaine to two college students in upstate New York in 2003. He was sentenced to seven to 21 years in prison, a penalty mandated by New York's controversial Rockefeller Drug Laws. Ashley is among about 14,000 people sent to New York prisons under the Rockefeller laws, in force since 1973, which impose harsh mandatory minimum terms on even first time offenders — meaning they could get the same sentence as a person convicted of second degree murder.

O'Donaghue once had hope for a positive change in her son's situation. That was because there was a movement to change the Rockefeller laws. The momentum behind that reform, however, has now stagnated as prosecutors and legislators fear that changes in the law are being used as loopholes to free drug lords. With no light at the end of the tunnel, she and other activists fighting for a repeal feel the laws may never change and many of the state's imprisoned — her son included — continue to languish in jail. "The movement is definitely stalled, and we're trying to gain some momentum again, but it's very hard," said O'Donaghue. "I never would have dreamed in the beginning of this that it would have taken this long to get Ashley out."

Right now, the only hope for a change is a prison sentencing reform committee set up by Gov. Eliot Spitzer that has only recently begun to hold preliminary meetings and whose final report is not expected until early 2008. The activists remain committed in their cause, but for now can only deal with the frustration of having a loved one jailed under what they feel are unfair rules. Critics say that the law ignores major drug dealers and only imprisons minor players in the drug trade. For this reason, they argue, it incarcerates a disproportionate number of minorities. Indeed, since the laws were enacted, more than 90% of those sentenced have been black or Latino, according to the group Real Reform New York.

Over the last decade, activists, ex-convicts, families, politicians and even celebrities have become increasingly vocal about the laws. Reforms to the sentencing structure were enacted with the 2004 Drug Law Reform Act, which allows for reduced retroactive sentencing, and at first seemed to bring the laws closer to repeal. But they have only applied to about 1,000 people and only 350 have been released, says Anthony Papa, an official with the Drug Policy Alliance, an advocacy group committed to changing the nation's drug laws. The reforms, he says, were not enough because the change applies to too few of the people currently serving time.

"In my view as an activist who experienced the law, this was sort of a buy off to satisfy people who have been fighting for years," said Papa, who himself was sentenced to 15 years to life after selling cocaine to undercover cops, but granted clemency by then-Gov. George Pataki in 1997. "People saw it was watered-down reform because it really destroyed the movement, because now legislators have a tool they can use to say 'we have a law now, lets move on. said Papa .

Instead of new legislation, Gov. Spitzer's seven-member commission will conduct reviews of the state's toughest sentencing practices, under which the Rockefeller laws fall. But it is unlikely to bring about a full repeal of the laws, leaving O'Donaghue to wonder if a change will ever come. "These things keep carrying over and you just wonder when it's all going to be done," O'Donaghue asked. "When we get the final report? After the next legislative session?"

Activists like O'Donaghue and Papa, argue the stiffest penalties should be reserved for major narcotics traffickers, not small handlers. But the reason they have gained little in their fight is that some state legislators believe the changes in the law were enough and that many of those who have already been released are really major drug traffickers who should still be imprisoned, and further reform could prove dangerous.

"We did the reform and as a result, we provided for discretion and reductions in sentencing," said State Sen. George Winner, who explained that the changes that already resulted in loopholes for people who once controlled major drug operations. "I am not in favor of further weakening the drug law sentencing provisions. I agree that the drug kingpins should have the stiffest penalties, but some of them are using the reforms to their advantage and getting out. As a result of these things, I think we should go slow about it."

Bridget Brennan, a special narcotics prosecutor in New York City has the same fear as Winner that violent offenders and drug kingpins are beginning to win reduced sentences. "There was a mythology about who is serving these sentences," said Brennan, who was a homicide prosecutor during the height of the city's crack cocaine epidemic of the 1980s. "It was the image of a woman forced to be a drug courier. But when we looked at those applying to change their sentences, there were only two women: one who supervised the shipment of 155 kilos of cocaine and the other had more than a pound of cocaine in her apartment."

"There is no statute to address the narcotics trafficker who we commonly see in New York City," she said. "As a homicide prosecutor, 60% of my cases came from drug sales. I don't want to see this city again the way it was."

Until they win a change in sentencing guidelines, activists hope to win support for their cause simply by spreading the word. They hope a planned wide release of a documentary entitled Lockdown USA, which premiered at the Tribeca Film Festival in 2006, will help restart a push for reform. "The problem is that they are using a prison cell to address what should be public health issue," says Gabriel Sayegh, a project director at the Drug Policy Alliance. "This isn't the criminal justice system we're supposed to have in this country."

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anthony-papa/country-in-distress-the-_b_59865.html

 

Country in Distress: The Upside Down Flag

By Anthony Papa

August 9, 2007

---

I am an American. I used to be a proud one. This was before a realization that hit me hard concerning the casualties of a dirty war. I am not talking about the war in Iraq. I am talking about the other war -- the war on drugs. Every day, we see news stories that expose the realities of drug use in America. From celebrities to politicians to athletes and even ordinary people purchasing cold medication, the drug war looms large.

Recently, I was invited to show my art at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City. The venue was right up my alley. The two-day conference brought together art, music, film and spoken-word performances centered on the theme, "A New Criminology for the 21st century." I decided to create an art installation called, "The Drug War."

The art installation was a multimedia presentation of the most compelling drug war issues in the news. Its use of visual narratives reminds us of the war on drugs that ravages our communities. The installation began to take form, steeped in a motif of an upside down American flag, which signifies the universal concept of the state of distress during war. Several irate people stopped me to ask if I had permission from the administration to "disgrace" the American flag. I told them all I had a constitutional right to voice my opinion.

About two hours later a security team approached me. The leader of the team said "Mr. Papa, you must immediately take down the upside-down flags. I have been getting complaints from faculty and students saying that you are disgracing the flag." I looked at her and pointed out that I was doing nothing wrong. My art was not disrespecting "old glory" because I displayed the upside-down flag for the right reasons. According to the flag code section 36, U.S.C. chapter 10, I was correct in my intentions of stating a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property. She looked at me with indifference while the four men stood behind her standing in a military stance meant to intimidate me.

I immediately explained my position. I told her about the 500,000 Americans who were behind bars because of the war on drugs, and how this war ravages communities and destroys lives, all in the name of a drug-free society. I explained how billions of dollars are spent by the government to stop someone from putting substances in their bodies.

I looked at her and then the guards while pointing at the flags and said "I will not take the flags down."

The head of security huddled with her crew while several sympathetic professors came to my aid. A meeting took place and it was agreed that they had to take this to a higher authority. I was asked to stop building my art installation while we waited for a verdict from the president of the university. During that time, I had a flash back to 12 years ago when something similar occurred in a maximum security prison in New York when I was doing a 15-years-to-life sentence for passing an envelope containing four ounces of cocaine in return for $500. My art was confiscated by the prison guards, who told me I could not send out paintings to the free world that depicted the atrocity of imprisonment.

My mind snapped back to the present moment when one of the security guards tapped me on the shoulder. He said that a decision was made and I was allowed to display the upside down flags. I shook his hand and turned to the American flags and thought about the greatness of our Constitution, which guarantees the freedom to express our opinions, even if it meant turning the flag on its head to make a point.

 

 

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007708010304

 

Wednesday, August 01, 2007

 

Opinion

Drug treatment isn't a silver bullet

Anthony Papa

OK, so you're rich and famous and have a drug problem. You relapse and get arrested. What do you do?

It seems the latest trend in countering your likely conviction is not hiring a "dream team" of legal defenders but immediately enrolling in a rehab drug program.

Lindsay Lohan, the troubled Hollywood starlet, joins a host of other high-profile celebrities, including Paris Hilton, Nicole Richie and the son of the former vice president, Al Gore III, who have adopted this novel strategy.

Lohan's pal, Paris, just did a brief stint in jail for driving with a suspended license after a previous drunk-driving arrest.

Nicole Richie recently pleaded guilty to driving under the influence from an incident where she was caught driving the wrong way down a Los Angeles freeway last year. She was sentenced to four days in jail and mandated to enter a drug and alcohol program.

Gore was recently arrested for speeding down a highway in his Prius at 100 miles per hour with a small amount of marijuana and a pocket full of different prescription pills. He pleaded guilty to two felony counts of drug possession, among others, and was allowed to enter a drug diversion program. If Gore successfully completes that program, the charges may be dropped.

The role of drugs and drug addiction loom large over these individuals' criminal cases since each enrolled in rehab quickly after their brushes with the law.

Without question, rehab is an essential tool on the road to recovery. It is a multi-tiered, long-term process that enables changes to life patterns that typically trigger the urge to get high. This requires time and effort by the participant.

Lohan was only out of rehab for two weeks when she was busted again for driving under the influence and cocaine possession. Her father, Michael, himself a former addict, was recently released after serving a two-year sentence for a drunk-driving incident. He said his daughter needs a long-term treatment plan to successfully recover from her problems with alcohol and other drugs.

Many were quick to blame the rehab center Lindsay attended, saying it failed her. But no rehab center can produce miracles in such a short period of time.

What most fail to realize is that relapse is an expected part of recovery. Treatment is valid for fighting the demons of addiction and an effective tool in overcoming the government's use of incarceration and punitive measures in response to low-level, nonviolent drug law offenses stemming from addiction.

According to Justice Department statistics, the United States holds a firm lead in maintaining the most prisoners of any country in the world -- now at 2.2 million and rising, and last year recorded the largest increase in the number of people in prisons and jails since 2000. Criminal justice experts attribute the exploding U.S. prison population to harsh sentencing laws and record numbers of drug law offenders, many of whom have substance abuse problems.

Should we treat drug addiction as a criminal matter or a medical problem? For most people, treatment is much more effective than imprisonment for breaking their addictions, yet our prisons are full of drug addicted individuals.

Nonviolent drug offenders should be given an opportunity to receive treatment, not jail time, for their drug use. This would be a more effective (not to mention much more affordable) solution for the individual and the community.

Our 30-plus-year war on drugs has stifled the open debate this country should be having about addiction and how best to deal with it. It is time to treat addiction for what it is, a medical problem, not a criminal one.Even for celebrities who rely on a trend to bail them out and continue driving down that road to oblivion.

Anthony Papa is a communications specialist for the Drug Policy Alliance ( www.drugpolicy.org), a New York group working to reduce the harms of both drug misuse and drug prohibition. Please e-mail comments to letters@detnews.com

 

 

Newsday

 

http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-oppap305275288jun30,0,7254904.story?coll=ny-viewpoints-headlines

 

Paris' jail lessons could lead to helping others

BY ANTHONY PAPA

Anthony Papa is author of "15 To Life" and a communications specialist for the Drug Policy Alliance, which describes itself as an organization working to reduce the harms of both drugs and drug prohib

June 30, 2007

Paris Hilton is free. Hooray! Sometimes it takes a traumatic experience to awaken the hidden self. The 23 days she spent at the Century Regional Detention Facility was far short of doing "hard time."

But it did give her a taste of life in the gulag. In that short time, I gather she felt the reality of what it's like to lose your life as you know it. Sitting in a small cell can be a most existential existence - I'm sure Hilton saw the light.

There is something mystical about spending time in a cage. Since there is nowhere to go, you pace the perimeter of your cell. Back and forth or around in circles, all the while reliving the crime you committed that brought you there.

When it gets really bad, you start reading the Bible and praying to the Lord for forgiveness. For sure, Hilton has learned her lesson - or has she?

The problem she will now face as an ex-con is one that all ex-cons experience, and one that can lead them down the road to recidivism. For the most part, when you are released you want to forget the prison experience. You do your best to block it out. In her case, I would bet that in a week those feelings she has built up inside her brought on by her longing for her freedom will disappear.

How do I know? I did a 12-year stretch at Sing Sing, and the first day I got out I almost completely forgot all the feelings I had. I forgot about how my existence was reduced to daily routines and calculations. I forgot about measuring time in reference to the day at hand and the functions associated with it - the head counts and bells that the prison used to maintain security and order.

So, for sure, those 23 days will not mean much unless she is doing something to remind her of her experience.

Hilton should follow up with her talk that she wants to find meaning in her life. Because her jail time came from her arrest on a charge of driving with a suspended license after a previous drunk-driving arrest, it would be appropriate if Hilton now explored the subject of drugs and addiction. She would have a great opportunity to become a noted spokeswoman for those less fortunate. Think of how many lives she could save.

But let's not kid ourselves too much. Hilton comes from the part of the privileged class that most of the time has justice applied in a kinder fashion. She probably will go back to her home and drown herself in its lush surroundings and surely forget all about the time she did.

I just hope Hilton keeps a memory of the redemption and forgiveness she sought while sitting in her cell. Maybe then it will compel her to use her fame for the good of society.

Copyright 2007 Newsday Inc.

 

 

 

 

http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/storyprint.asp?StoryID=590779

 

Set free prison politics in New York state

 By ANTHONY PAPA

 

Monday, May 21, 2007

 

 Thousands of parole petitioners are ready to return to society as productive citizens of New York but remain stuck in prison because of the politics of incarceration. This unwritten policy of former Gov. George Pataki persists in spite of Gov. Eliot Spitzer's attempt to change the nature of the criminal justice system.

 

Offenders who commit crimes such as murder are actually less likely to return to jail than nonviolent offenders. Nevertheless, after coming to terms with their crimes, they are still wasting away in New York's prisons. Time and again, the parole board fails to weigh all of the relevant statutory factors together with the prisoner's positive accomplishments and productive behavior while incarcerated. Instead, the parole board focuses almost entirely on the nature of the petitioner's crime.

 

A case in point is the story of John Valverde, a 36-year-old Queens man who recently was denied parole for his third consecutive time. He has already served 15 years of a 10- to 30-year sentence for killing a freelance photographer, Joel Schoenfeld, a 47-year-old Manhattan man with a history of enticing young female models to his studio and sexually assaulting them. In 1991, Schoenfeld raped John's 19-year-old girlfriend. After unsuccessfully seeking help from the police -- powerless to act without the brutalized and traumatized victim coming forward -- John Valverde, then a 21-year-old student, confronted Schoenfeld. The ensuing argument turned violent and John shot and killed Schoenfeld.

 

The single bullet fired that night changed not only John's life forever but also that of his family. His mother, brother and sister have fought endlessly to free John and themselves from the nightmare of his continuing ordeal behind bars. John regrets the act he committed ending the life of an individual who took the honor away from his former girlfriend many years ago. I know this because I was with John during his time of remorsefulness at Sing Sing prison when I was serving a 15-to-life sentence under the Rockefeller Drug Laws.

 

In 1995, we both graduated from the New York Theological Seminary. I left John behind when I was granted executive clemency by Pataki in 1997. I became an activist against the Rockefeller Drug Laws making many trips to Albany to meet with state legislators to try and convince them to change the laws that had taken away 12 years of my life.

 

In 1998, I co-founded the Mothers of the New York Disappeared, a leading advocacy group consisting of family members of those incarcerated under the Rockefeller Drug Laws. We pleaded our case for years before those laws were partially reformed in 2004. I have dedicated my life to reforming a system that has been plagued by injustice. Our prisons are full of human beings like John who have made mistakes and are ready to return to society as law-abiding citizens, but are stuck there because of politics.

 

In denying John's freedom for the third time, the parole board had reasoned that despite his accomplishments as a model prisoner, the violence displayed by his crime outweighed everything else. Why are violent offenders, who seem to be ready to return to society, being hit by the parole board on a continuous basis?

 

The answer is simple. Politicians and parole officials are reluctant to grant parole to violent prisoners because they are afraid of falling from grace in the eyes of the public. In 2003 Brion Travis, the New York parole commissioner, was reassigned to another department by Pataki after causing an uproar with the release of a high-profile offender involved in the murder of two upstate police officers.

 

On April 20, about 50 supporters came to Albany to rally on John Valverde's behalf. John's brother Frank stood close to his parents while he explained to the crowd how they were all there to ask the court to overturn the parole board's latest denial through an appeal. If the judge who heard the appeal decides to overturn the denial, John would quickly receive another parole hearing, giving him another chance for freedom.

 

It is time for the parole board to free prisoners like him. We cannot minimize the seriousness of the crime he committed but neither can we minimize the tragedy of his plight to regain his freedom. He is just one of many individuals who have paid their debt to society for the crimes they have committed but kept in prison because of the politics of incarceration.

 

Anthony Papa is a communications specialist for the Drug Policy Alliance (http://www.drugpolicy.org  and author of the book "15 To Life."

 

 

 

 

 http://www.counterpunch.org/papa06192007.htm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anthony-papa/a-dying-wish-to-governor-_b_53019.html

  

A Dying Wish to Governor Spitzer

Posted June 20, 2007 | 02:04 PM (EST)

 

On June 21, 2007 the New York State legislative session is expected to end without any reform of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. To most people it will not mean much. But to Veronica Flournoy it will.

Veronica spent eight years in prison for a first-time, nonviolent crime under New York's inhumane Rockefeller Drug Laws. Tragically, at the age of 39, Veronica is now dying. A spot discovered on her lung while in prison went untreated, which has led to cancer that spread to her brain. She had a terrible drug addiction that compelled her to deliver drugs for her boyfriend to fuel her habit. The district attorney's office pressured her to provide evidence against her boyfriend to help secure his conviction. Veronica was reluctant to cooperate out of fear for the safety of her family. The system rewarded her refusal to cooperate by throwing the book at her and handing her a sentence of 8-years-to-life.

She left behind her two-year-old daughter, Candance, and, while serving her sentence, she gave birth to her second daughter, Keyshana, who lived in the prison nursery until she was 13-months-old. Her elderly mother then cared for both children while Veronica did hard time at the Bedford Correctional Facility for women in upstate NY.

While in prison, Veronica overcame her personal demons and received the treatment she needed to deal with her drug addiction. Upon her release, Veronica reunited with her family and became a central figure in the Rockefeller reform movement. She worked hard to overturn the drug laws that had taken away her life as it had the many others that shared the "scarlet letter of addiction." Although struggling with her life as a single parent and having to bear the stigmatizing label of "ex-addict" and "ex-felon," she became a true champion of those with substance abuse problems who were sentenced to prison instead of treatment.

Her two daughters, now ages 10 and 12, along with her 84-year-old mother pray for a miracle. Their lives are in shambles---unable to support themselves, watching the life ebb away from a woman who was once so vibrant.

Just a few weeks ago, Veronica appeared on camera for a moving public service announcement calling on Gov. Spitzer to keep his word and deliver the reform he promised while campaigning for his governorship. Spitzer, who recently won his bid to become governor of New York, has sidestepped this issue since ascending to office, in line with the legacy of his predecessor, George Pataki, who danced around the issue of Rocky reform for more than nine years.

Veronica's story reminds us of the horrors of drug addiction. It destroys lives. But far worse is to condemn those with drug addictions to imprisonment, while withholding the treatment they so desperately need. Our prisons are filled with tens of thousands of individuals with all kinds of drug addictions and psychological problems. Addiction should not be treated as a criminal manner. Instead, we should treat addiction as a medical problem. Gov. Elliot Spitzer who has been silent on Rockefeller reform needs to address this issue now. No more stalling. No dancing around the issue. It is the least he can do for a dying woman, her heart-broken family, and the tens of thousands of others affected by these laws.

 

 

 

El Diario La Prensa

Rockefeller Drug Laws:

Still unfair, still inhumane

OPINION - 05/23/2007

BY ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN

 

The New York State Assembly just passed Bill 6663, introduced by Assemblyman Jeffrion L. Aubry, which if enacted into law would substantially reform the Rockefeller drug laws. This bill, which I have also introduced in the Senate (S4352), would end the use of mandatory minimum sentences, increase judicial discretion, expand drug treatment options for non violent drug offenders, and allow certain inmates serving long sentences to apply for re-sentencing. This common sense legislation should become law. But the problem, once again, lies in the Republican majority in the State Senate, which for decades have closed their eyes and ears to the obvious judicial, social and financial problems of these laws.

 Legislation enacted in 2004 and 2005, which many opponents of real reform would tell you solved the problem, was is the equivalent of putting a temporary bandage over an open wound, instead of curing the injury once and for all.

 I voted for this legislation, unwilling to turn down the opportunity to reduce mandatory minimum sentences from 15 to 8 years, and allow some offenders to return home to their families early. But these “reforms” applied to a small minority of those incarcerated under the Rockefeller Drug Laws, doing nothing to rectify the sentences of thousands of non-violent drug offenders still serving long mandatory minimums. They also failed to give judges reasonable power to apply sentences based on individual circumstantial evidence or decrease recidivism by supporting these individuals as they re-enter their communities. The disproportionate effects of these laws on African Americans and Latinos make the need for their reform even more urgent. Of the 15,500 people in prison, 92 percent are people of color, while studies have shown that whites comprise 72 percent of illegal drug users in the nation.

 For years, the Democratic Conference of the State Senate has actively pursued a means to correct the damage of the Rockefeller Drug Laws and put in place laws that will apply proportional punishment to drug related crimes on an individual basis. I am calling on our Republican colleagues to put partisanship aside and join us in doing the right thing for all New Yorkers by enacting real reform of these shameful laws.

 Because they are focused on drug possession, major drug traffickers can easily escape the hardship of the laws by using other people as “mules” to carry their contraband. The ineffective laws also target drug-addicts possessing small amounts of illegal substances.

 In addition to being inhumane, the laws are also disproportionately expensive in comparison with community and professional alternatives, costing the state more than $500 million a year. Credible cost analysis has estimated that even the most expensive non prison alternative treatment will cost less than half that amount.

 We can argue that back in 1973 governor Nelson Rockefeller was well intentioned when proposing harsh penalties to combat the illegal drug contraband, and its social consequences. But how can we justify that decades later, despite studies and persuasive economic arguments to the contrary? We can not. Let’s put an end to this draconian punishment, let’s repeal the Rockefeller drug laws once and for all.

 State Senator Eric T. Schneiderman represents New York State Senate District 31st, that covers parts of Manhattan and the Bronx.

 

Flash!   May 23, 2007  New Rockefeller Drug Law Song on UTube

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=2030786088

 

 

 

Flash!   Rock Law Survivor Veronica Flournoy speaks out against  Governor Spitzer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8g4uX7pObrY&eurl=

“My name is Veronica and I spent eight years in prison for a nonviolent crime under New York’s harsh Rockefeller Drug Laws. I spent eight years away from my family, and my daughters were left in the care of my elderly mother. While I was in prison, my lung cancer was undiagnosed. Now the doctors say I have six months to live.

There are thousands of people just like me in prison. Gov. Spitzer came into office saying Day One, everything changes. Gov. Spitzer, it’s time for real reform of the Rockefeller Drug Laws.”

 

 

Flash!   May 20th 2007 Prison Politics of New York State!

Set free prison politics in New York state
Albany Times Union, NY - May 20, 2007
I became an activist against the Rockefeller Drug Laws making many trips to Albany to meet with state legislators to try and convince them to change the ...
 

__________________________

Syracuse Post-Standard

May 20, 2007 Sunday

FINAL EDITION

UNFINISHED BUSINESS;

THERE'S STILL WORK TO DO IN REFORMING HARSH ROCKEFELLER DRUG LAWS

SECTION: OPINION; Pg. E2

LENGTH: 411 words

 

   The 34th anniversary of the Rockefeller drug laws passed this month without fanfare. Yet the more than 15,000 mostly African-American and Hispanic offenders incarcerated under some of the harshest drug laws in the land would surely have liked someone to notice. Too many non-violent drug offenders remain imprisoned under laws that in some cases require stiffer penalties for possessing small amounts of cocaine than for committing rape or manslaughter.

   And although almost every political leader, past and present (including those who drafted the lock-em-up-and-throw-away-the-key statutes in 1973), believes the laws are archaic, the momentum for change seems to have slowed considerably. Three years ago, the Drop the Rock campaign by celebrities such as hip-hop mogul Russell Simmons, and other efforts from lawmakers and advocacy groups like the Drug Policy Alliance, brought some changes, but they didn't go far enough. Under the reforms, which were further amended in 2005, some drug offenders with Class I and II felonies could apply for resentencing, which could make them eligible for release. Some sentence times were shortened. But many non-violent drug offenders did not benefit from the changes, and Gov. Pataki and legislative leaders agreed that the reforms were only a first step.The Assembly seems motivated to continue the work. Last month, it passed more reforms, including the much-needed provision that gives judges discretion in sentencing, which would allow them to send non-violent offenders to drug treatment programs, where many belong. The Assembly plan also lengthens sentences for drug kingpins.

 But the Senate, which had resisted drug law changes for so long, has not moved on the issue. Some critics have suggested the Senate doesn't want to change the laws because Upstate communities would lose some of their prison populations, which are included in Census counts. Communities with lower Census counts could face redistricting.   It is doubtful that senators are that callous or calculating. But whatevertheir reasons, they have not been pushing the reforms.

   The Senate and Gov. Eliot Spitzer, who has backed drug law reform, need to re-engage in this effort. It would also be nice to hear Attorney General Andrew Cuomo's voice on this issue; he has a history of fighting for the cause.  Next year, there should be no 35th anniversary commemoration of drug laws that have punished some non-violent offenders more than child rapists and killers.

 

 

 

Flash!!   May 11, 2007   Looking to repeat the Russell Simmons Hip Hop Assault Against the Rockefeller Drug Laws - Jim Jones new record and video Lockdown USA hits hard and send a powerful  message

 

 

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/485/turning_up_pressure_rockefeller_drug_law_reform_new_york

 

Feature: Turning Up the Heat on New York's Rockefeller Drug Laws (and the Politicians Who Fail to Fix Them)

Printer Friendly Version Email this Article

from Drug War Chronicle, Issue #485, 5/11/07

On Tuesday, New York marked an ugly anniversary -- 34 years since the state's draconian Rockefeller drug laws were enacted. Now, three years after the legislature enacted the first, timid reforms of those harsh drug laws and one month after the State Assembly voted to broaden them, drug reform activists are seeking to heighten the pressure on Gov. Eliot Spitzer (D), Lt. Gov. David Paterson (D), Attorney General Andrew Cuomo (D), and the Republican-led state Senate to act.

Prisoners sentenced under mandatory minimum Rockefeller drug laws now number more than 13,000, and an astonishing 91% of them are black or brown. The reforms enacted in 2004 have resulted in the release of only 300, leaving thousands of prisoners serving mid-level mandatory minimum sentences still in purgatory.

Spitzer, Paterson, and Cuomo campaigned on Rockefeller law reform, but since they took office the silence has been deafening. In 2003, the hip-hop community, led by empresario Russell Simmons, put tens of thousands people on the street to rally for reform. Now, once again, the hip-hop community is calling out the politicians.

Working with Real Reform New York, a coalition coordinated by the Drug Policy Alliance, hip-hop superstar Jim Jones Tuesday released a new rap single, "Lockdown, USA," a powerful call to reform the Rockefeller laws which has so far run on dozens of radio stations around the country.

A Harlem native, Jones has seen the impact of the Rockefeller drug laws firsthand. Conversely, the politicians in Albany have seen the impact of a mobilized hip-hop nation first hand, too, and reformers report that the prospect of a new call to arms from the hip-hop community has them nervous.

"We're kicking up the pressure now, trying to revive the Russell Simmons coalition approach to Albany, and I'm hearing that they're starting to sweat," said Anthony Papa, a former Rockefeller law prisoner turned author and painter who now works to undo those laws. "They're getting flashbacks of 100,000 people on the street [for the 2003 Russell Simmons Countdown to Fairness], and it's good if that makes them nervous," Papa told the Chronicle.

He isn't just speculating. After publishing an op-ed in the widely-read Huffington Post blog last weekend, titled "Spitzer, Cuomo and Paterson: Where Did You Go?," Papa received a personal call from Paterson's office. "Not too happy," Papa characterized their feelings about it in an e-mail to DRCNet yesterday. And word is that the chatter in Albany about it all is far more extensive than that.

"These guys campaigned on Rockefeller law reform, and now Spitzer has been in office for more than 100 days, and it is nowhere in sight," Papa complained. "Hip-hop is now calling you out, Spitzer!"

It's time for change, said one prisoner's mother. "Small changes to the Rockefeller Drug Laws were clearly not enough. My son Ashley is a prime example of this, because he is serving a 7- to 21-year sentence for a first-time, nonviolent offense," said Cheri O'Donoghue, an advocate for Real Reform New York. "These inhumane, racist laws have been around for nearly 34 years. Enough is enough."

New York's Drug Law Reform Act of 2004 (DLRA) lowered some drug sentences but it fell far short of allowing most people serving under the more punitive sentences to apply for shorter terms, and it did nothing to increase the power of judges to place addicts into treatment programs. While advocates and family members are encouraged by these modest reforms, it is clear that the recent reforms have had a negligible impact on the majority of people behind bars. Most people behind bars on Rockefeller charges are charged with nonviolent lower-level or class-B felonies.

"Given the extraordinary racism associated with these laws, it's unbelievable they've been around for 34 years," said Gabriel Sayegh, project director at Drug Policy Alliance. "We hope that this powerful song will inspire the thousands who attended the 2003 Lockdown, USA rally -- and all outraged New Yorkers -- to pick up the phone and step into the streets to put heat on Governor Spitzer and State Senator Joe Bruno -- to make them keep their word and reform these inhumane laws."

But even if the Democratic administration starts moving on real reform, a huge political obstacle remains in the Republican-dominated Senate, with its strongholds in the prison country of upstate New York. Seven upstate Senate districts held by Republicans depend on prisoner numbers to reach their required population size and would have to be redrawn if large numbers of prisoners were released or the US Census Bureau counted them as residents of their home towns.

Prisons are also a growth industry in Republican-dominated upstate, which has seen dozens of new prisons in the past two decades. It is no surprise that two of the most vocal reform opponents, Sens. Dale Volker (R) of suburban Buffalo and Michael Nozzolio (R) of Finger Lakes have 17% of the state's prison population in their districts.

Spitzer ran on his record as a crusader against waste and corruption. Now, he has the opportunity to undo the Rockefeller drug laws. But will he, or will he bow to political pressure from powerful special interests who benefit directly from the mass incarceration of their nonviolent fellow citizens? The reform community is now turning up the heat to help him do the right thing.

________________________________________

© 2007 blackandbrownnews.com.

NY State Top Pols Play ‘Silent Sam’ On REAL Drug Law Reform.

May 13, 2007 by Anthony Papa, Writer (View Source) 

_________________

http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/5249/1/258/

Governor Spitzer: Hip Hop Is Calling You Out! By Anthony Papa

5-09-07 May 8 marked the 34th anniversary of New York's Rockefeller Drug Laws. On this day Jim Jones the hip hop superstar released his new rap single and video titled "Lockdown, USA," a powerful song calling for real reform of the laws. The song is a single from the forthcoming documentary about the Rockefeller Drug Laws called Lockdown , USA. The new song and video was released on the website of the Drug Policy Alliance http://www.drugpolicy.org/statebystate/newyork/lockdownusa/  as part of the Real Reform New York Coalition's continuing struggle to win real reform of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. Real Reform New York is made up of dozens of organizations representing thousands of community members, activists, advocates, policy and treatment experts, survivors, their friends and families that have joined to reform these laws. Despite a few recent reforms, which in theory would fix the draconian nature of these laws, little has been done and the campaign for meaningful reform continues. In fact, out of the current 14,000 Rockefeller prisoners, fewer than 300 have been freed under the revisions to date. It is hoped that this call from the Hip Hop world ignites legislative action as it did in 2003 when Russell Simons called on Governor Pataki to reform the Rockefeller Drug Laws. Over 50,000 people lined the streets of NYC with the "Countdown to Fairness" coalition requesting the governor to reform the Rockefeller Drug Laws. In recent elections, a number of officials who went on record in support of real Rockefeller reform were voted into office. Governor Elliot Spitzer, for one, along with Lt. Governor David Paterson and Attorney General Cuomo all have spoken out for reform in the past. But now they are surprisingly silent on the issue. In 2004, I wrote a memoir of my experiences serving a 15-to-life sentence under these harsh laws. Andrew Cuomo, before he became our state's attorney general, threw a book release party for me at the Whitney Museum of American Art. Attending the event were prominent individuals like Senator David Paterson, along with many other influential guests. Cuomo and Paterson spoke bravely about changing these draconian laws. Spitzer, the then-attorney general of New York, did not attend but wrote a letter saying that my story was a "very personal and tragic story, like those of so many other nonviolent offenders languishing in our prisons on relatively minor drug offenses," and that it "illustrates the impact that our Rockefeller Drug Laws have had on a generation of New Yorkers. I applaud Mr. Papa's courage in speaking out and sharing his ordeal with the world." It was a moving event that generated a vision of changing the Rockefeller Drug Laws in a positive way. I find it strange that the people who had supported change in the past have now become so silent on the issue. My question is why do politicians who use political platforms to generate votes suddenly forget their past when elected to higher office? Governor Elliot Spitzer, does appear interested in correcting the criminal justice sector, as evidenced by his success in removing exorbitant charges on collect calls made by prisoners to their families, and his recent attempt to downsize half-empty prisons. But his laudable efforts have not cued in on the Rockefeller reform. Attorney General Andrew Cuomo who has used this issue in the past to revive his political career has not uttered a word about it. And Lt. Governor David Paterson who represented a highly affected Harlem district as senator has steered away from the issue. It's time for Spitzer, Paterson and Cuomo to join the NYS Assembly and step up to the plate. They should remember their past intentions, especially when it affects the people who voted them into office. --Anthony Papa is the author of 15 Years to Life: How I Painted My Way to Freedom and Communications Specialist for Drug Policy Alliance. He can be reached at: anthonypapa123@yahoo.com. Papa's artwork can be viewed at: 15yearstolife.com.

 

 

 

flash: MAY 8TH   :  THE 34TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE ROCKEFELLER DRUG LAWS!

 

05.05.2007

Spitzer, Cuomo and Paterson: Where Did You Go?

by Anthony Papa

  

http://www.counterpunch.org/papa05052007.html

 

Weekend Edition
May 5 / 6, 2007

34 Years of Rockefeller Drug Laws

Spitzer, Cuomo and Paterson: Where Did You Go?

By ANTHONY PAPA

May 8 marks the 34th anniversary of New York's Rockefeller Drug Laws. Despite a few recent reforms, which in theory would fix the draconian nature of these laws, little has been done and the campaign for meaningful reform continues. In fact, out of the current 13,000 Rockefeller prisoners, fewer than 300 have been freed under the revisions to date.

In recent elections, a number of officials who went on record in support of real Rockefeller reform were voted into office. Governor Elliot Spitzer, for one, along with Lt. Governor David Paterson and Attorney General Cuomo all have spoken out for reform in the past. But now they are surprisingly silent on the issue.

In 2004, I wrote a memoir of my experiences serving a 15-to-life sentence under these harsh laws. Andrew Cuomo, before he became our state's attorney general, threw a book release party for me at the Whitney Museum of American Art. Attending the event were prominent individuals like Senator David Paterson, along with many other influential guests.

Cuomo and Paterson spoke bravely about changing these draconian laws. Spitzer, the then-attorney general of New York, did not attend but wrote a letter saying that my story was a "very personal and tragic story, like those of so many other nonviolent offenders languishing in our prisons on relatively minor drug offenses," and that it "illustrates the impact that our Rockefeller Drug Laws have had on a generation of New Yorkers. I applaud Mr. Papa's courage in speaking out and sharing his ordeal with the world." It was a moving event that generated a vision of changing the Rockefeller Drug Laws in a positive way.

I find it strange that the people who had supported change in the past have now become so silent on the issue. My question is why do politicians who use political platforms to generate votes suddenly forget their past when elected to higher office?

Governor Elliot Spitzer, does appear interested in correcting the criminal justice sector, as evidenced by his success in removing exorbitant charges on collect calls made by prisoners to their families, and his recent attempt to downsize half-empty prisons. But his laudable efforts have not cued in on the Rockefeller reform. Attorney General Andrew Cuomo who has used this issue in the past to revive his political career has not uttered a word about it. And Lt. Governor David Patterson who represented a highly affected Harlem district as senator has steered away from the issue.

Last week the New York State Assembly passed a bill for further reform of the Rockefeller Drug laws. Cheri O'Donoghue joined them at a press conference and talked about her son Ashley who is serving a 7 to 21 sentence for a first time non-violent drug offense. This mother grieved for the son she had lost to laws that had taken away her relationship with him. She asked why the Rockefeller Drug Laws had now not been a priority with so many politicians that had benefited from them in the past. No one could answer her question. It's time for Spitzer, Patterson and Cuomo to join the NYS Assembly and step up to the plate. They should remember their past intentions, especially when it affects the people who voted them into office.

Anthony Papa is the author of 15 Years to Life: How I Painted My Way to Freedom and Communications Specialist for Drug Policy Alliance. He can be reached at: anthonypapa123@yahoo.com

Papa's artwork can be viewed at: www.15yearstolife.com/art1.htm

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=584144&category=OPINION&newsdate=4/26/2007

 

Spitzer must lead drug law reform

By GABRIEL SAYEGH First published: Thursday, April 26, 2007

Last week, the state Assembly passed important legislation to reform the draconian Rockefeller Drug Laws. The bill, sponsored by Assemblyman Jeffrion Aubry, D-Queens, increases drug treatment alternatives to incarceration, expands judicial discretion to restore fairness in our courts and, critically, allows for people currently serving harsh prison terms for low-level drug offenses to seek much-needed relief.   The Assembly should be commended for passing smart reforms. But where are the governor and the state Senate on drug law reform? While running for governor, Eliot Spitzer campaigned on a promise: "Day One, Everything Changes." Spitzer made campaign statements in support of real reform of the laws. Lt. Gov. David Paterson was a long-time reform champion while Senate minority leader. Families and advocates working for repeal of the failed Rockefeller Drug Laws were cautiously optimistic about Spitzer's promise. It seemed entirely possible that on Day One, the Rockefeller laws, after nearly 34 long, terrible years, might finally be repealed. But in the first hundred days of the new administration, drug law reform went missing in action. Spitzer took on a variety of important issues, but the Rockefeller Drug Laws didn't even make his priority list for the end of the legislative session. Why is it so hard to win real reform, when everyone knows these laws are racist, ineffective, wasteful and unjust? So asks longtime advocate Cheri O'Donoghue, whose son, Ashley, is serving seven to 21 years for a first-time, nonviolent drug offense. Ashley is one of more than 14,000 people incarcerated under these harsh laws. The answer to Cheri's question is downright sinister, but it's no secret. The reason the Rockefeller Drug Laws haven't been done away with is because of a despicable trinity of racism, cash cows and the U.S. census, not to mention the people who rely on this trinity for their political survival. From 1817 to 1981, New York built 33 prisons. But from 1982 to 2000, New York built 38 more prisons -- all of them upstate. The unprecedented prison boom was largely an economic development plan meant to ameliorate the job loss upstate. Rural, white communities were clamoring to build and staff prisons. The Rockefeller Drug Laws delivered the bodies with harsh mandatory-minimum sentences for low-level drug offenses. The RAND Corp. and other think tanks have shown that drug use and abuse is roughly equal across all racial groups. But the Rockefeller Drug Laws always have been marked by severe racial bias. Today, 91 percent of the people incarcerated under these laws are black and Latino. It's a scenario we'd expect to find in an apartheid state, not a democracy. Once elected, Spitzer proposed the possibility of closing half-empty prisons in upstate New York, saving millions of dollars. Many groups applauded Spitzer, because New York's prison population has dropped in recent years and its archaic prison industrial complex needs an overhaul. The leading voices against studying closing prisons, though, were politically very powerful. The correction officers union and upstate politicians have parlayed the politics of imprisonment into lucrative businesses and political careers. The prospects for reform have at least dimmed, if they haven't died altogether. The plot thickens, though. More than 76 percent of the state's prison inmates come from New York City. The U.S. Census Bureau counts them as residents of the upstate prisons in which they're incarcerated, not as residents of the communities from which they came. Why does this matter? According to the Prison Policy Initiative, if prisoners were not counted as "residents," seven upstate Senate districts would be 5 percent short of their required population size, and thus have to be redrawn. This means that senators in those districts -- all of them Republicans -- would lose their seats, causing Republicans to lose their slim Senate majority. Unsurprisingly, Senate Republicans remain staunch opponents of repealing the Rockefeller Drug Laws. Two vocal reform opponents -- Sen. Dale Volker of suburban Buffalo and Sen. Michael Nozzolio of the Finger Lakes -- have more than 17 percent of the state's prisoners in their districts. Is it any wonder why they oppose reform? Spitzer was elected on his record as a crusader against waste and corruption, no matter what powerful interests stood in his way. Advocates for drug law reform hoped the new governor would stand up to the corruption and racism blocking real reform of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. He now has that chance, with the legislation passed by the Assembly and sent to the Senate. But the Senate, under Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, will block those reforms unless the governor gets more directly involved. For the sake of justice, and families like the O'Donoghues, let's demand that the governor makes a priority of drug law reform. Because if nothing changes, nothing changes. Gabriel Sayegh is a project director at the Drug Policy Alliance in New York City, http://www.drugpolicy.org.

URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v07/n514/a02.html Newshawk: Drug Policy Alliance www.drugpolicy.org Votes: 0 Pubdate: Sun, 22 Apr 2007 Source: Newsday (NY) Copyright: 2007 Newsday Inc. Contact: letters@newsday.com Website: http://www.newsday.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/308 Author: Anthony Papa   SPITZER RIGHT ON PRISON-CALL FEES Regarding "Spitzer ends charge on inmate collect calls" [News, April 15]: Gov.  Eliot Spitzer did the right thing in ending the major ripoff of families of those incarcerated.  They were forced to pay enormous amounts of money to telephone companies to keep them in touch with their imprisoned loved ones. My mother used most of her Social Security checks to pay for the collect calls I made to her while serving a 15-to-life sentence under the Rockefeller drug laws. Many families of the imprisoned in New York State had to make sacrifices to keep their families together through the use of phone calls. This was nothing short of a moral crime. I just want to point out that Spitzer, who had a steamroller history of going after white-collar crimes as attorney general, did nothing about the telephone charges when he held that position. Maybe this was because he was bound by law to defend the actions of the Department of Corrections. Whatever the case may be, he now shows commitment as governor to correcting the wrongs in the criminal justice sector.  Let's hope he can now help reform the Rockefeller drug laws. Anthony Papa Editor's note: The writer is communications specialist for the Drug Policy Alliance. Manhattan

 

 

Flash!   April 19, 2007:  Assembly Drops New Rockefeller Drug Law Bill

http://www.theithacajournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070419/NEWS01/704190373/1002

 

Advocates say Rockefeller drug laws remain too harsh
By Cara Matthews
Albany Bureau

 

ALBANY — Lawmakers and family members of people imprisoned on non-violent drug charges urged legislators Wednesday to further roll-back sentencing under the state's Rockefeller-era drug laws, widely considered to be among the nation's harshest. Changes to the laws in 2004 and amendments last year called for eliminating parole and reducing overall sentences of non-violent drug offenders. Some prisoners who had committed Class A felonies, the most serious level, could apply for reduced sentences. But lawmakers did not make changes for Class B and other lower-level felonies, said Sen. Eric Schneiderman, D-Manhattan. It expanded eligibility for prison-based drug treatment, among other changes.   Schneiderman and other lawmakers are sponsoring legislation to expand treatment programs and allow prisoners convicted of Class B felonies for non-violent drug offenses to apply for reduced sentences. It would increase sentences for violent drug dealers and “kingpins.”   The legislation would “really change the culture around drug addiction in our state to focus more on treatment,” Schneiderman said. It would prevent the “brutal breakup of families and long-term harm done by incarcerating people for long periods of time whose real problem is drug addiction,” he added. Sentencing reforms enacted in 2004 have resulted in the release of only 177 people, the senator said. On average, they were released 43 months before their previously calculated earliest release date. The bill would make the following other changes: * Increase judges' discretion and allow some people convicted of first- and second-time drug offenses to receive treatment and probation instead of prison terms. * Set up drug courts in every county. Drug courts make special efforts to get offenders in treatment programs. * Raise the weight thresholds for certain drug offenses so that the possible sentence times are reduced. * Create or expand “second chance” programs for low-level drug defendants, such as the Court Approved Drug Abuse Treatment program, in which offenders' cases can be dismissed or reduced to misdemeanors upon successful completion of treatment. The legislation on Wednesday passed the Assembly, where it is sponsored by Jeffrion Aubry, D-Queens. Senate Republicans have resisted efforts to further ease the Rockefeller-era drug laws, and district attorneys have strongly opposed such measures. Cheri O'Donoghue of New York City, said her son, Ashley, was arrested in a sting operation set up by two Hamilton College students who were cooperating with police after they were caught selling drugs on campus. They asked to buy enough cocaine from him to make the charges an A felony. Ashley, now 24, pleaded the case down to a Class B felony and received a sentence of seven to 21 years, said Cheri O'Donoghue, whose family also has a home in Pleasant Valley, Dutchess County. He has been in prison nearly four years. People need to take responsibility for their actions, she said, but her son's punishment does not fit the crime. “When you look at this, you have to ask yourself, ‘Does this make sense?' and I don't see how anyone could come away from this and say it makes sense,” she said. “We all make mistakes and I think that Ashley should have at least been given a second chance. These other two kids were given a second chance.” The Drug Policy Alliance estimates that when fully implemented, the state would save about $123 million a year due to fewer prison admissions and reductions in drug-related crime. According to the Real Reform New York Coalition, less than 30 percent of 1,000 prisoners serving time on Class A-1 and A-2 drug felonies were released after requesting re-sentencing. The re-sentencing process is much slower than expected, the group said.   Originally published April 19, 2007

 

April 19, 2007

A Nightmare Behind Bars

John Valverde's Fight for Freedom

By ANTHONY PAPA

Former Governor George Pataki's legacy of not freeing rehabilitated violent offenders is alive and well in New York State. Today thousands of parole petitioners are ready to return to society as productive citizens but remain stuck in prison because of the politics of incarceration.

This unwritten policy persists in spite of newly installed Governor Elliot Spitzer's attempt to correct the criminal justice sector, as evidenced by his recent calls to remove the exorbitant charges on collect calls

Statistically it is a not-so-well-known fact that offenders who commit crimes such as murder are actually less likely to return to jail than nonviolent offenders. Nevertheless, after completing their sentences and coming to terms with their crimes, they are still wasting away in New York State gulags. Time and again the parole board fails to weigh all of the relevant statutory factors together with the prisoner's positive accomplishments and productive behavior while incarcerated. Instead, the parole board focuses almost entirely on the nature of the petitioner's crime.

A case in point is the story of John Valverde, a 36-year-old Queens man who recently was denied parole for his third consecutive time. He has already served 15 years of a 10- to 30-year sentence for ending the life of a freelance photographer, Joel Schoenfeld, a 47-year-old West Village photographer with a history of enticing young female models to his studio and sexually assaulting them. In 1991, Schoenfeld raped his 19-year-old model girlfriend. After unsuccessfully seeking help from the police--powerless to act without the brutalized and traumatized victim coming forward--John Valverde, then a 21-year-old student, confronted Schoenfeld. The ensuing argument turned violent and John shot and killed Schoenfeld. The single bullet fired that night changed not only John's life forever but also that of his family. His mother, brother and sister have fought endlessly to free John and themselves from the nightmare of his continuing ordeal behind bars.

John regrets the act he committed ending the life of an individual who took the honor away his former girlfriend many years ago. I know this because I was with John during his time of remorsefulness at Sing Sing prison when I was serving a 15-to-life sentence under the Rockefeller Drug Laws. In 1995, we both graduated from the New York Theological Seminary. Despite the negative environment that surrounded him, John managed to transcend the prison experience by finding purpose in his life through helping others. He taught religion, volunteered as a tutor for men who could not read, and worked with AIDS patients.

The hard time John served in a maximum security prison transformed him from the 21-year-old boy who had made the biggest mistake of his life into a man who now understands the horror of his crime. Apparently all inconsequential in the view of the parole board, which offered the following reasoning in John's case: "The violence displayed in this crime outweighs everything else."

Why are violent offenders, who seem to be ready to return to society, being hit by the parole board on a continuous basis? The answer is simple. Politicians and parole officials are afraid of granting parole to violent prisoners out of fear of falling from grace in the eyes of the public. Recently, the New York Parole Commissioner was demoted from his position by Governor Pataki after causing and uproar with the release a high-profile offender involved in the murder of two upstate police officers.

If we look at the history of why violent offenders are routinely denied parole we can see how it could have evolved out of the cash incentives for new prison construction given by the federal government to states that ended parole for violent offenders in 1994 under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. This law was devised to give states fiscal incentives to build prisons if they in turn enacted laws that result in violent offenders serving 85% of their sentences. Grants were made available for states to build more prisons coupled with an effective end to parole. From 1996 to 2000, New York State received around $200 million under this Act.

On April 20, family and friends of John Valverde will gather in front of the Albany Supreme Court in New York to rally on John's behalf, and in support of overturning the parole board's latest denial. We are calling on Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, who represents the parole board, to look into the totality of facts in this case so John and his family may receive proper judicial relief.

It is time for the parole board to free model prisoners like John Valverde. We cannot minimize the seriousness of the crime he committed but neither can we minimize the tragedy of his plight to regain his freedom. He is just one of many individuals who have paid their debt to society for the crimes they committed but kept in prison because of the "Politics of Incarceration."

Anthony Papa is the author of 15 Years to Life: How I Painted My Way to Freedom and Communications Specialist for Drug Policy Alliance. He can be reached at: anthonypapa123@yahoo.com

Papa's artwork can be viewed at: www.15yearstolife.com/art1.htm

For more info contact Hispanics Across America -- 212-481-1820.

 

 

 

US NY: PUB LTE: The War on Drugs, Now in Schools

 

URL: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v07/n428/a02.html Newshawk: Drug Testing Fails Our Youth www.drugtestingfails.org  Votes: 0 Pubdate: Sun, 01 Apr 2007 Source: New York Times (NY) Copyright: 2007 The New York Times Company Contact: letters@nytimes.com Website: http://www.nytimes.com