« New Grid feature take close look at "past and uncertain future of executions in America" | Main | Rounding up some recent commentary for weekend reading »
April 29, 2022
GOP Senators introduce competing crack/powder sentencing reform bill tougher than EQUAL Act
Regular readers should be aware from my prior postings that Congress seems poised to pass the EQUAL Act to entirely eliminate the crack and powder cocaine sentencing disparity. This disparity and its racialized impacts have been an ugly part of the federal sentencing landscape for over 35 years (when Congress first created the 100:1 disparity), and the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 only partially reduced the disparity (down to 18:1). But after the US House voted overwhelmingly, 361-66, to pass the EQUAL Act to end disparity last year, and after the Senate version had secured 11 GOP sponsors, I was hopeful the powder and crack cocaine disparity could and would finally be ended this year.
But, this press release from Senator Chuck Grassley's office, titled "Senators Introduce Bill To Reduce Crack-Powder Sentencing Disparity, Protect Communities From Criminals Most Likely To Reoffend," now has me concerned that a competing bill might now muck up the works. Here are the details from the release:
Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) today introduced the SMART Cocaine Sentencing Act, which will reduce the sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine offenders tried in federal courts. The legislation aims to make sentencing fairer while also preserving the ability of courts to keep those most likely to reoffend off the street.
“I’ve worked on this issue for many years. I cosponsored the 2010 legislation led by Senators Durbin and Sessions to reduce the disparity in sentencing from 100-to-1 to 18-to-1. It’s high time to do more to address this important issue and make our criminal code more just and fair. Our legislation will significantly reduce this disparity while ensuring those more likely to reoffend face appropriate penalties. Powder cocaine is being trafficked across the border in historic volumes, so we also need to take precautions that ensure these traffickers also face justice for spreading poison through our communities,” Grassley said....
This sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine offenders has had a disparate impact on communities of color across the country. Reducing this disparate impact is critical, but must be thoughtfully enacted to prevent likely reoffenders from returning to communities just to violate the law again.
Separate legislation has been introduced in the Senate to completely flatten the differences between sentences for crack cocaine and powder cocaine offenses. This approach does not account for the differences in recidivism rates associated with the two types of cocaine offenses. According to a January 2022 analysis from the U.S. Sentencing Commission (USSC), crack cocaine offenders recidivate at the highest rate of any drug type at 60.8 percent, while powder cocaine offenders recidivate at the lowest rate of any drug type at 43.8 percent. Raising additional public safety concerns, USSC data reveals that crack cocaine offenders were the most likely among all drug offenders to carry deadly weapons during offenses. These statistics show the need for a close look at all available government data before we consider an approach to flatten sentencing for crack and powder cocaine offenses.
The SMART [Start Making Adjustments and Require Transparency in] Cocaine Sentencing Act will reduce the current crack-to-powder cocaine sentencing disparity from 18:1 to 2.5:1. It reduces the volume required to trigger 5-year mandatory minimum sentences for powder cocaine from 500 grams to 400 grams, and from 5 kilograms to 4 kilograms for 10-year mandatory minimum sentences. For crack cocaine, the volume triggering a 5-year mandatory sentence is increased from 28 grams to 160 grams; the volume for the 10-year mandatory sentence is lifted from 280 grams to 1,600 grams.
Critically, the SMART Cocaine Sentencing Act also requires an attorney general review and certification process for any retroactive sentencing adjustments. It provides for new federal research from the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services regarding the lethality and addictiveness of these substances as well as what violence is associated with cocaine-related crimes. The legislation also requires a new report from the USSC on crack and powder cocaine offenses, including data on recidivism rates....
Full legislative text of the SMART Cocaine Sentencing Act can be found HERE.
Kevin Ring has an effective Twitter thread here criticizing various aspects of this proposal, which he calls the "The Grassley Unequal Act." I hope that this bill does not impede progress on the EQUAL Act, but the fact that the EQUAL Act has not become law already make me concerned about the fate and future or long-overdue efforts to end the crack/cocaine sentencing disparity.
A few of many prior posts on the EQUAL Act:
- GOP Gov and former DEA chief calls for Congress to "finally and fully end the disparity between crack and cocaine offenses"
- US House votes 361-66 to pass today the EQUAL Act to end disparity between powder and crack cocaine sentences
- After an overwhelming majority of GOP House delegation voted for EQUAL Act, can the Senate move quickly to finally right a 35-year wrong?
- Shouldn't federal prosecutors already be doing what they can to minimize the unjust crack-powder sentencing disparity?
- Is it foolish to hope, after now 35 years, that Congress will soon fix the crack-powder federal sentencing disparity?
- How about passing the EQUAL Act so we can be "free at last" from the crack/powder sentencing disparity?
- Why is getting the EQUAL Act through the US Senate proving so challenging?
- Is Congress finally on the verge of equalizing crack and powder cocaine sentences?
UPDATE: This new New York Times article, headlined "Drug Sentencing Bill Is in Limbo as Midterm Politics Paralyze Congress," details why the EQUAL Act may not get to the finish line in this Congress. Here are excerpts:
[W]ith control of Congress at stake and Republicans weaponizing a law-and-order message against Democrats in their midterm election campaigns, the fate of the measure is in doubt. Democrats worry that bringing it up would allow Republicans to demand a series of votes that could make them look soft on crime and lax on immigration — risks they are reluctant to take months before they face voters.
Even the measure’s Republican backers concede that bringing it to the floor could lead to an array of difficult votes. “I assume the topic opens itself pretty wide,” said Senator Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri, who became the 11th member of his party to sign on to the Equal Act this month, giving its supporters more than the 60 votes needed to overcome procedural obstacles....
Though Mr. Schumer endorsed the legislation in April, he has not laid out a timeline for bringing it to the floor. Democrats say he is giving backers of the bill a chance to build additional support and find a way to advance the measure without causing a floor fight that could take weeks — time that Democrats do not have if they want to continue to win approval of new judges and take care of other business before the end of the year....
Its supporters say that they recognize the difficulties but believe that it is the single piece of criminal justice legislation with a chance of reaching the president’s desk in the current political environment. “Of all the criminal justice bills, this is the one that is set up for success right now,” said Inimai Chettiar, the federal director for the Justice Action Network. “It is not going to be easy on the floor, but I think it is doable.”
The problem is that the push comes as top Republicans have made clear that they intend to try to capitalize on public concern about increasing crime in the battle for Senate and House control in November.... Senator Mitch McConnell, the Kentucky Republican and minority leader, this week reprised his criticism of Judge Jackson and attacked Mr. Biden for having issued his first round of pardons and commutations, including for those convicted of drug crimes. “They never miss an opportunity to send the wrong signal,” he said of Democrats.
Senator Tom Cotton, the Arkansas Republican who led the opposition to the First Step Act, said he was in no mood to let the Equal Act sail through. He has said that if the disparity is to be erased, penalties for powder cocaine should be increased. “My opposition to the Equal Act will be as strong as my opposition to the First Step Act,” Mr. Cotton said.
The legislation encountered another complication on Thursday, when Senators Charles E. Grassley of Iowa and Mike Lee of Utah, two top Republican supporters of the previous criminal justice overhaul, introduced a competing bill that would reduce — but not eliminate — the sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine. They said that research showed that crack traffickers were more likely to return to crime and carry deadly weapons. “Our legislation will significantly reduce this disparity while ensuring those more likely to reoffend face appropriate penalties,” said Mr. Grassley, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee.
Sponsors of the Equal Act say they intend to push forward and remain optimistic that they can overcome the difficulties. “We’ve got an amazing bill, and we’ve got 11 Republicans and people want to get this done,” said Senator Cory Booker, Democrat of New Jersey and the lead sponsor of the legislation. “My hope is that we are going to have a shot to get this done right now.”
With strong advocates of the EQUAL Act now saying that getting this to the floor of the Senate is "doable" or can "have a shot," I cannot help but think it is quite a long shot this Congress. Sigh.
April 29, 2022 at 10:20 AM | Permalink
Comments
Reading the summary of the thoughts behind the alternative bill, I am wondering if people are confusing correlation with causation.
My understanding of the differences between powder cocaine and crack cocaine is that there is not that much of a difference either chemically or medically. It's the difference between a salt (which means that it has chlorine atoms) and a base (which means that instead of chlorine, there is a hydroxide -- an oxygen atom and a hydrogen atom). But, in terms of the impact on the user, the difference between a salt and an acid is minimal.
The difference is in the typical customer. And I have been doing prosecution long enough to know that different racial and socioeconomic groups tend to have different patterns of drug abuse. Powder tends to be more popular with a certain segment of the population who are less likely to be armed and less likely to be arrested or searched during traffic stops. Crack tends to be more popular with a different segment of the population who are more likely to be armed and more likely to be subjected to police scrutiny.
Since those two factors also have a racial component, the difference in the two sentencing schemes has a disparate impact on different races. But this new justification for a disparity also would have a disparate impact on different races. And it raises a question of whether those difference is itself a racial component or if is based on the nature of the substance. For now, I am seeing something that looks like correlation rather than causation.
Posted by: tmm | May 2, 2022 11:41:28 AM