It seems the U.S. Congress rarely agrees on any issues these days. It has, though, agreed on one thing in recent years: mandatory minimum sentencing reform.
“Mandatory minimum sentencing is a costly and counterproductive cookie-cutter approach that removes a judge’s ability to apply a fairer sentence,” said Jasmine Tyler, deputy director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, a nonprofit which advocates for drug sentencing reform.
A number of members of Congress have introduced bipartisan bills to reform the federal mandatory minimum drug-sentencing policies. This follows the passage of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010. It significantly reduced the disparity in crack and powder cocaine sentences and eliminated the first mandatory minimum penalty since the 1970s.
Congress enacted the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 and the Anti-drug Abuse Act of 1986, under which federal judges are without discretion but to sentence federal drug offenders to statutory minimums.
Early in 2013, a bill was introduced to give federal judges the authority to impose a sentence below a mandatory minimum to prevent an unjust or irrational sentence. The measure, H.R. 1695, was presented by Reps. Bobby Scott, D-Va., Thomas Massie, R-Ky. and five others. It was a companion bill to S. 619, introduced a month earlier by Sens. Rand Paul, R-Ky. and Patrick Leahy, D-Vt. in the Senate, titled the Justice Safety Valves Act.
In July 2013, legislation was introduced to cut the length of some mandatory minimum drug sentences in half and expand access to the safety valve for federal drug offenders. It would also afford retroactivity for the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010. The measure, S. 1410, was proposed by Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Leahy. Titled the Smarter Sentencing Act, it was followed by a companion bill, H.R. 3382, introduced by Reps. Raul Labrador, D-Idaho, and Scott plus seven others in the House of Representatives on October 30, 2013.
Efforts at drug sentencing reform come as no surprise. According to the U.S. Sentencing Commission and a report by the Congressional Research Service, mandatory minimums have significantly contributed to overcrowding and racial disparities in the Bureau of Prisons (BOP).
The BOP operates at nearly 140 percent capacity—and is on track to use one-third of the Justice Department’s budget. More than half of the prisoners in BOP are serving time for a drug law violation.
“I am honored to join Congressman Labrador as a cosponsor of the Smarter Sentencing Act,” said Rep. Scott, “Granting federal judges more discretion in sentencing for nonviolent drug offenses is the right thing to do. Studies of mandatory minimums conclude that they fail to reduce crime, they waste the taxpayers’ money, and they often require the imposition of sentences that violate common sense.
“This bipartisan bill targets particularly egregious mandatory minimums and returns discretion to federal judges in an incremental manner. This legislation is an important step in updating sentencing policies that are not working, that are costing taxpayers too much, and do nothing to make our families and communities safer,” Scott added.
The U.S. leads the world in the incarceration of its own citizens, accounting for nearly 25 percent of the world’s prison population, reports the Drug Policy Alliance. Recently, Attorney General Eric Holder said there are too many people in prison and it is time for federal sentencing reform. In his remarks, Holder encouraged a partnership between the legislative and executive branches to work to solve the issue.
