No To "No Parole"
Yes to Drug Law Reform

Last year Governor George Pataki succeeded in eliminating parole release for inmates convicted of violent crimes -- now he wants to abolish it altogether, even for non-violent prisoners. In New York, that means mainly minor drug offenders, many of who already serve excessively long prison terms. The governor's latest effort to burnish his law enforcement credentials is bad policy for a number of reasons, including that it diverts attention from urgently needed criminal justice reforms.

Parole's great value is that it provides the criminal justice system with the ability to make discriminating judgements based on individual circumstances. Abolishing parole discretion means creating a one-size-fits-all approach to cases that will subvert the interests of true justice.

Also, without parole, prisoners will have less incentive to participate in programs, to enhance their skills and emotional resources and to follow institutional rules - behavior that earns them points with the Parole Board. Doesn't it make sense to have people returning to the community after having gone through that kind of monitored self-improvement process?

Moreover, if the governor's plan is enacted, the state will probably have to spend many millions of dollars on constructing and operating new prisons to confine people who are not dangerous to public safety. This will be true even though research shows that drug treatment is a more effective response for these kinds of offenders, not only because it is more humane and less costly, but also because it is more successful in reducing crime associated with the drug trade than long-term imprisonment.

The governor and the state's legislative leaders should turn away from this counter-productive 'no parole' proposal and look to other aspects of the criminal justice system that cry out for reform. Instead of stiffening penalties for low-level drug offenders, as Mr. Pataki's plan would likely do, state policymakers should move in the opposite direction. Changing New York's draconian drug laws should be their top criminal justice priority.

Passed in 1973 when Nelson Rockefeller was governor, these statutes require a minimum prison sentence of 15 years to life for the sale of two ounces or the possession of four ounces of a narcotic. The penalties apply without regard to the circumstances of the offense or the individual's character or background. Whether the person is a first-time offender, for instance, is irrelevant.

There are some New Yorkers in state prison today with more than a decade of hard time behind them. Convicted simply as drug couriers under the tough provisions of this law, they had no previous criminal history. Murderers, arsonists and kidnappers in New York face the same penalty as these drug mules. Rape, the sexual abuse of a child, and armed robbery carry lesser sanctions.

The problem is that the Rockefeller Drug Laws place the main criterion for culpability on the weight of the drugs in a person's possession when he or she is apprehended, not on the actual role he or she plays in the narcotics transaction. Drug kingpins will rarely if ever be foolish or reckless enough to be caught with narcotics on them; whereas a teenage mother, carrying drugs for that same kingpin, might very well be picked up on the street and charged with a serious felony.

Another criticism is that major dealers often take advantage of the laws' provision permitting lifetime probation sentences in exchange for turning in other drug offenders. Less culpable persons generally do not possess information that would be useful to prosecutors. These people often decline to plea bargain and insist on a trial. If these persons are found guilty, they frequently must be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of 15 years to life.

The overriding point is that this statute results directly in the following misguided practice: law enforcement agencies focus on those minor actors in the trade who are the most easily arrested, prosecuted, and penalized, rather than on the middle-and high-level criminals who are drug dealing's true masterminds and profiteers.

These laws have also had an adverse effect on New York's budget and prison system. There are over 22,600 drug offenders in the state prison system, about 33% of the entire prison population. It costs the state more than $680 million a year to operate the prisons holding all these non-violent offenders, to say nothing of the billions New York had to spend to construct those facilities.

Despite these enormous expenditures, New York's prisons are hobbled by crisis conditions. Institutions are overcrowded - the system has been forced to double-bunk or double cell over 10,000 inmates. There are not enough programs to productively occupy inmates, and idleness and tension levels are high, contributing to a hazardous environment for inmates and staff alike.

There is another problem with these laws. Despite studies showing that most of the people who use drugs are white and evidence suggesting that more than half the dealers are white, the vast majority of inmates doing time in New York for the sale or possession of narcotics are people of color, over 94% in fact. The drug laws and other law enforcement policies that produce this disproportionate outcome have a devastating impact - by uprooting individuals and breaking up families - on communities of color.

These laws are wasteful, unjust, ineffective, and marked by racial bias. Concerned New Yorkers should send a message to their political leaders. 'No parole' is, at best, a distraction. Changing the outdated Rockefeller statutes is the course to follow.

January 14, 1999