Expert: Loren Stevens - 11/4/2004

Question
Hello,
I am currently a freshman at UNC-Wilmington, and I am having a hard time finding information on the CON side of Changing Federal Drug laws to increase the use of treatment programs and to reduce use of prison terms. I would REALLY appreciate it if you could help me with this subject.

Thank you,
Danielle

Answer
Danielle,
Interesting questions.
I'm not sure what you are asking on the drug question. There SHOULD be more treatment programs, that are both voluntary, and as a precondition for parole/probation.
Prison terms are a legislative matter, and I doubt you'll find an elected official that would be interested in sentencing reductions. It is undoubtedly a "soft on crime" position to take.
The only way to advance it, would be on a cost initiative, coupled with alternate sanctions options.
You could start with the FEDERAL sentencing guidelines, which leaves no wiggle room. A judge should have the authorty to adjust sentences, as circumstances warrant.
If the drug laws you are asking about involve laxity, you can argue several points. Every where in the world that it has been tried, has failed.
On a legal point, you need to make a distinction between "legalizing" and "decriminalizing", as they are not synonyms.
To decriminalize, would be to reduce sanctions for small amounts. The range would be from felony-gross mis.-misd. down to the point of a minor fine for violation.
However, to legalize any of the current list of narcotics cannot easily be accomplished.
The USA is a signatore to the International Convention on Narcotics and dangerous drugs. What that means, is that we(the USA) signed an international TREATY ie., a binding pledge, concerning narc/DD. Everything from pot, to synthetics are listed, as are coke, and opiates et al.
Now, look at the constitution, ARTICLE 6, executive branch.
To paraphrase: "a treaty, signed by the Pres. ratified by the Senate becomes the HIGHEST LAW IN THE LAND......" Neither congress, or the Supreme Court can overide this committment.
Now, look at the 10th Ammendment....which states that on any areas of conflict, the states will yield to the central government ...or words to that affect. (Supremacy clause)
So, to tinker with the drug laws is more than a state making changes. as it is a national and international concern as well.International law, and federal law will come into play.
With prison terms, you'll need to do some dicing and slicing. There needs to be a seperation on violent and non violent to make sense. This should go beyond what the inmate is in the joint for. Often times, a defendant will have a whole basket full of cases. But to expedite the process, and to save $ the prosecutor and defence atty will negotiate a plea bargain. This will typically be to consolidate all the cases, plead out to an attempt to one case, and pull X amount of prison time.
But, for an outsider to look into this, they only see the offense of an attempt, and not the whole basket full of cases that had been consolidated.
Well, hope I haven't confused you. And, hope this has been a bit helpful.
loren