font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">
What better way to quell the fire that burns in the hearts of drug
war activists in New York than to pass reform that is rumored to effect,
in theory, about 1,000 prisoners sentenced under the Rockefeller Drug
Laws?
We have fought
for meaningful reform for 32 years. In 1973, when the Rockefeller
Laws were enacted, we saw a badly created law that incarcerated
many drug offenders from the inner city neighborhoods of New York.
This in turn, created smart upstate rural politicians like Senator
Dale Volker, who saw the Rockefeller Drug Laws as a tool to help
make the business of imprisonment a major industry in the 59th Senate
District that he presides over. Other politicians followed Volker's
lead and thus a reason for not reforming these laws was created.
A staggering
93% of the 16,000 people locked up under the draconian Rockefeller
Drug Laws are Black and Latino. Many of those incarcerated under
the Rockefeller Drug Laws are people convicted of first-time, non-violent
offenses. Under these laws, people convicted of drug offenses face
the same penalties as those convicted of murder, and harsher penalties
than those convicted of rape.
Through constant
political pressure from concerned activists over the course of many
years, we managed to get to get the point across to New York politicians:
We were not going to give up until the Rockefeller Drug laws were
reformed. So, when the pressure mounted, these politicians reacted,
as politicians will.
Finally, early
in 2005, a revision was made that affected 446 prisoners sentenced
under the A-1 felony statute. Activists, feeling their job was done,
began backing off. After all those years of fighting, finally a
real change had occurred. Now in September of this year, the governor,
senate and assembly proudly announced another change that would
affect about 540 prisoners sentenced under A-2 felonies.
To those who
are not familiar with the history of the struggle and the extent
of the changes made, it may seem as though the problem has been
fixed. The laws, it seems, had been changed. But, if we take a good
look at what really happened, most of the 446 A-1 felons eligible
for relief are still in prison. According to the Department of Corrections,
as of July, 2005, only 86 were set free from the 184 prisoners who
were re-sentenced under the changes.
New York politicians
claimed the recent changes to the law amounted to nothing less than
sweeping reform. Self-serving feathers in the caps of politicians
are nothing new, but, to proclaim that the 32 years of struggle
activists have invested to fix these very wrong laws have concluded
in meaningful reform is a travesty of justice. Advocates expected
the new law to actually be followed so that eligible people could
go home, but the re-sentencing process has proved unnecessarily
difficult.
In a recent
Drug Policy Alliance press release Bill Gibney, a lawyer with the
Legal Aid Society, stated that "These reforms are just symbolic
if they're not implemented." "The vast majority of people
eligible to petition for early release are still behind bars. The
Governor and Legislature shouldn't pat themselves on the back until
they've ensured that these reforms are duly acted upon. "Without
granting freedom along with reform, the reform remains the same
political rhetoric we have heard for years.
As activists
and concerned citizens, we cannot sit back and bask in the glory
of these recent watered down changes. We must continue to push for
meaningful reform that will set free the many thousands of non-violent
drug offenders stuck in the prisons of New York State. Without implementing
freedom through these recent changes, Rockefeller reform is meaningless.
Anthony
Papa is the author of 15 To Life: How I Painted
My Way To Freedom (Feral House)
Posted
January 5, 2006 6:14 AM
Why is the race of those locked up under these laws relevant? It really degrades the venerability of the author in my eyes that there is a need to play the race card to drive the point home, even more so that it is the first reason listed to show that these people should not be in prison. It should be enough argument to point out that they are non-violent first time offenders. Only someone who has guilt caused by, or wants special treatment for, their genes and the associated level of pigment in their skin finds that statistic relevant.
The law in question makes no note of the color of skin of the offender in regards to their punishment. Any argument that there is racist treatment should be backed with statistics to show that there are an equal number of police incidents with each race that should result in jail time but far higher conviction rates for the races in question. The author should also note that any information to the affect that the system is racist should be in an article about racism, not an article about how marijuana possession is punished more harshly than rape.
Posted
by: Bill
at May 9, 2007 9:26 AM