Skip to main content

Amidst Controversy Over Anthem Protests, NFL Endorses Drug Sentencing Reform [FEATURE]

Submitted by Phillip Smith on (Issue #994)
Politics & Advocacy

Caught up between players who insist on exercising their right to call out racial injustice in a manner of their choice and a scapegoating president who demands the league stifle what he deems unpatriotic protest, the National Football League has reacted in a surprising and progressive way: In a Monday letter to leading senators, the NFL endorsed a federal sentencing bill aimed at reducing the number of drug offenders.

The bill is the bipartisan Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act of 2017 (S. 1917), rolled out earlier this month by such Senate heavy hitters as Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-IA), ranking Democratic member Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), minority whip Dick Durbin (D-IL), Lindsay Graham (R-SC), and Patrick Leahy (D-VT), among others.

"We are writing to offer the National Football League's full support for the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act of 2017 (S. 1917)," said Commissioner Roger Goodell and Seattle Seahawks owner Doug Baldwin, Jr. in the letter. "We want to add our voice to the broad and bipartisan coalition of business leaders, law enforcement officials, veterans groups, ci vii rights organizations, conservative thought leaders, and faith-based organizations that have been working for five years to enact the changes called for in this comprehensive legislation."

The subject of years of negotiation in the Senate, the bill would reduce mandatory minimum sentences for some drug offenders, give judges greater discretion to sentence below federal sentencing guidelines, reform sentencing enhancements around weapons possession (to allow departures from mandatory minimums if the weapon wasn't used or brandished), make Fair Sentencing Act of 2012 reforms retroactive, and create programs to reduce recidivism.

As compromise legislation, the bill isn't all reform. It also includes provisions creating new mandatory minimum sentences -- for interstate domestic violence and providing weapons to terrorists -- and harshly punishing the sale of heroin cut with fentanyl. Still, overall, the bill would be a big step toward reducing the federal prison population overall and the federal drug prisoner population in particular.

NFL player takes a knee. (PxHere)
More than two thirds of NFL players are black. And just like the rest of us, they understand that pro football isn't the only place blacks are overrepresented: As the by now numbingly familiar refrain goes, African-Americans make up only 13% of the population and use drugs at roughly the same rate as other groups, but constitute 40% of all prisoners and a whopping 72% of federal drug prisoners.

With racial justice issues bubbling up in the NFL since then San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick took a knee during the national anthem before a game last season to protest racial injustice in general and police killings of black men in particular, and reaching a fever pitch when President Trump used anthem protests to throw red meat to his base this season, the NFL has been desperately searching for a way to get over the anthem controversy and back to the business of pro football. Endorsing federal sentencing reform could be a way to do that, but it leaves the league trying to appease players on one hand while trying to give props to the cops on the other.

"Football and community are the twin pillars of the NFL," Goodell and Baldwin added. "Over the last two seasons, one particular issue that has come to the forefront for our players and our teams is the issue of justice for all."

For the NFL, they wrote, the challenge is "ensuring that every American has equal rights and equal protection under the law, while simultaneously ensuring that all law enforcement personnel have the proper resources, tools, and training and are treated with honor and respect."

For the team owners, however, the challenge is whether this move will quell the controversy, get the players back to concentrating on football, and get President Trump back to concentrating on anything -- anything! -- other than the NFL.

Permission to Reprint: This content is licensed under a modified Creative Commons Attribution license. Content of a purely educational nature in Drug War Chronicle appear courtesy of DRCNet Foundation, unless otherwise noted.


OK, maybe not "hate", but it bothers me that entertainers (which the NFL is) deliberately use the att'n they get to endorse unrleated products, issues, or even attitudes -- like you should take their advice because, uh...they're experts?  They know you or your family & hence your needs or concerns?  Or because they're just magick?  It doesn't bother me that the NFL brands a football or some other piece of equipment related to what they do.  It doesn't bother me when someone interviewing a celebrity, just for human interest or to have something else to say, asks them what brand of shirt they prefer, or when it comes up casually.  But the idea that an unrelated and deliberate endorsement counts for something, that's just funny at best.

Sat, 10/21/2017 - 4:26pm Permalink

Totally agree Robert but instead of calling it funny I see the insane and lethal side of it.

It is a bit crazy that people who have yet to receive their product ordered from Amason (for example) but they talk about it as if they did in their review!?!?!  "I ordered the product yesterday and I think I will love it because the picture shows...blah, blah, blah..." Funny?  Helpful? No and no!

Where such pseudo endorsements get dangerous and lethal is to capitalize on a person's popularity to distort a products true effects or properties.  For example, healthy looking people and atheletes endorsing cigarettes or advertising which equates beer or wine coolers with sexy images and great times...

My favorite insanity is commercials for the lottery in which all or most of the folks checking their tickets win and scream in delight. When we take an obvious rare occurance and make it the norm we lie to consumers and, it appears, this must work to sell things because they sertainly spend alot on it! 

This same human tendency to believe outrageous lies is how Russia stole the election and why we have the mess of a president we do now.  

Reform is needed. Simply require inclusion of the objective truth in the ad or state clearly that this person is being paid to say... While some commercials are starting to say this to seniors (so and so is a paid endorsement) people shouldn't have to wade through lies and distortions to get the truth.

When society values the truth sufficiently we will require it!!

Sun, 10/22/2017 - 11:07am Permalink

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.