War on drugs: Eric Holder endorses reduced sentences for nonviolent offenders

Attorney General Eric Holder expressed support Thursday for a proposal by the US Sentencing Commission to amend its recommended sentences. The guidelines are part of a bigger recalibration of the war on drugs.

Yuri Gripas/Reuters
US Attorney General Eric Holder testifies before a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington May 15, 2013. The Obama administration on Thursday threw its weight behind a proposal that it says could cut the average prison sentence for a federal drug defendant by 11 months, a change designed to help reduce the massive US prison population.

The Obama administration on Thursday signaled its support for a proposal to cut prison sentences for nonviolent federal drug offenders, as part of its broader effort to overhaul policies on drug crime and reduce the vast – and expensive – size of the prison population.

In a speech before the US Sentencing Commission, Attorney General Eric Holder expressed support for the commission’s proposal to amend its recommended sentences for federal nonviolent drug crimes. The measure would cut the average prison sentence for a federal drug defendant by about 11 months, and it would apply to almost 70 percent of defendants convicted of federal drug offenses in the future, according to the Department of Justice (DOJ).

The guidelines, part of a bigger recalibration of America’s war on drugs, would marshal government money to go after violent drug traffickers with long sentences, putting funds where they count the most, Mr. Holder said. The changes would also give nonviolent drug offenders – who are disproportionately minorities – a better shot at rehabilitation, and it would ease the toll that long prison sentences take not just on prisoners, but on the communities they leave, Holder said.

Overall, the reduced sentences would de-bloat a hefty prison budget, nixing about 6,550 inmates from the federal prison system over five years – a point that has brought such policies considerable bipartisan support in Congress, he said. State and federal governments spent a total of about $80 billion on prisons in 2010 alone, he said.

The new guidelines “would help to rein in federal prison spending while focusing limited resources on the most serious threats to public safety,” Holder testified, adding that America’s “reliance on incarceration is not just financially unsustainable – it comes with human and moral costs that are impossible to calculate.”

“This straightforward adjustment to sentencing ranges – while measured in scope – would nonetheless send a strong message about the fairness of our criminal justice system,” he said.

The US Sentencing Commission, a presidentially appointed group over which Holder has no direct authority, is charged with voting on guidelines that address how long federal judges should sentence defendants for various crimes. It is not expected to vote on the proposal until late April, and the new sentencing guidelines would not go into effect until the fall, if passed.

Still, Holder has asked prosecutors not to object if defense lawyers before then propose sentences consistent with the prospective guidelines.

However, only Congress, not the commission, has the power to change mandatory minimum sentences. Legislation before lawmakers, called the Smarter Sentencing Act, would cut many federal mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offenses, some of them by half.

Holder’s speech comes after his call in front of the American Bar Association last August for a rethinking of how drug crime is handled in the United States, where almost half of its some 216,000 federal inmates are doing time for drug-related crimes.

His initiative, called Smart on Crime, asks that the harshest penalties be reserved for the most dangerous drug criminals and that more minor drug crimes be penalized with lighter sentences or, if possible, handled with drug rehabilitation programs, not prison.

Also in his speech before the American Bar Association, Holder announced a measure allowing some low-level drug offenders with no connection to major drug trafficking syndicates to avoid severe mandatory sentences.

The latest proposal, first proposed by the commission at the beginning of this year, would adjust the drug crimes sentencing table, lowering by two levels the offense associated with various drug quantities, according to the DOJ. For example, possession of between 200 and 400 grams of heroin is right now a Level 26 offense, according to the current guidelines. Under the new guidelines, it would be a Level 24 offense.

The proposed measures to cut sentences also come about four years after President Obama signed the Fair Sentencing Act to address a 100-to-1 sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine. That disparity in the sentencing, which began in the 1980s, had disproportionately put poor minorities behind bars for decades-long terms, since those communities were more likely to use crack, not powder cocaine, the preferred drug of white, wealthier users.

The Smarter Sentencing Act, which Holder has endorsed, includes provisions that make the amended sentencing guidelines for crack/cocaine cases retroactive, alleviating the stiff sentences that current inmates convicted of crack-related crimes are serving. In January, the DOJ issued a call for those prisoners to apply for clemency, potentially meaning changes could happen ahead of congressional action.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.