Skip to main content

Mandatory Minimums

Families Against Mandatory Minimums: Knock down drug sentences!

Families Against Mandatory Minimums logo

Friends --

Great news!  The first bill of the new Congress to eliminate mandatory minimums for all drugs was introduced by Representative Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) on March 12, 2009.  

H.R. 1466, the Major Drug Trafficking Prosecution Act of 2009, seeks to repeal mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenders and to give courts the ability to determine sentences based on all the facts, not just drug weight. It would also refocus federal resources on major drug traffickers instead of low-level offenders.  There is currently no companion bill in the Senate.

We are excited about getting this legislation passed, but we can't do it without your help. It will take time and effort to make this bill become law.  The first step is to ask your representative to become a cosponsor of H.R. 1466. If they already are cosponsors, please take a moment to thank them. FAMM's action center gives you talking points to use in your letters and also lets you know if your representative is already on board. Click here to contact your representative now.

It won't be fast and it won't be easy, but by working together, with commitment and with focus, we can knock down mandatory minimum sentencing laws and insure that the punishment fits the crime once more. 

Thanks for getting involved today!

My best -

Julie 

Julie Stewart

President

Sentences that Fit. Justice that Works.

Urge Obama to commute like Lincoln!

Families Against Mandatory Minimums logo

 

Friends --

Today we celebrate the 200th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s birth.  While most people know that Lincoln freed the slaves and saved the Union, many don’t know that he was also one of the most generous presidents when it came to granting pardons and commutations.

In one term, Lincoln granted almost 400 commutations and pardons.  Lincoln gave clemency to everyday offenders, Southern sympathizers, draft dodgers, and wrongfully-charged Indians.  He had a weakness for weeping mothers who, in those days, could walk right into the White House and beg for mercy for their sons at the president’s knee.  As many of you know from personal experience, it’s not so easy to get a clemency request into the White House today, and it is much harder to get one granted. 

Lincoln also used clemency strategically, to inspire Congress to act.  At the end of the war, he pardoned ex-Confederates as a way of telling Congress to put differences aside and start rebuilding the country. 

Join us today in asking President Obama to do as Lincoln did:  to grant clemency generously and strategically.  By doing so, he will send a strong message to Congress that mandatory minimum sentencing laws are undermining American principles of justice and must be changed.  President Obama needs to know how much normal, everyday offenders and their families are counting on clemency, so help FAMM by writing to him now!   Click here to send a letter or email to President Obama.

My best,

Julie

Julie Stewart
President
Families Against Mandatory Minimums

NEW POLL: Americans Oppose Mandatory Minimums, Will Vote for Candidates Who Feel the Same

Press Release

EMBARGOED UNTIL:                                                                 

Sept. 24, 2008, 11:00 AM                                                                   

Contact:  Monica Pratt Raffanel, (678) 261-8118 or (202) 822-6700                                                                               

Press teleconference today! Wednesday, September 24 at 11 a.m. ET

Dial In Number: (800) 593-9034

Passcode:  FAMM (3266)

 

NEW POLL: Americans Oppose Mandatory Minimums,

Will Vote for Candidates Who Feel the Same

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. – A new poll released today by Families Against Mandatory Minimums (FAMM) shows widespread support for ending mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent offenses and that Americans will vote for candidates who feel the same way. 

 

·         Fully 78 percent of Americans (nearly eight in 10) agree that courts – not Congress – should determine an individual’s prison sentence. 

·         Six in 10 (59 percent) oppose mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent offenders.

·         A majority of Americans (57 percent) polled said they would likely vote for a candidate for Congress who would eliminate all mandatory minimums for nonviolent crimes.

 

“Politicians have voted for mandatory minimum sentences so they could appear ‘tough on crime’ to their constituents. They insist that their voters support these laws, but it’s just not true,” says Julie Stewart, president and founder of FAMM.  “Republicans and Democrats support change and that should encourage members of Congress to reach across the aisle next year and work together to reform mandatory minimums.  Mandatory sentencing reform is not a partisan issue, but an issue about fairness and justice that transcends party lines.” 

 

During a time of financial crisis and uncertainty in the United States, reviewing current criminal justice policies and reforming mandatory minimums for nonviolent drug offenders is an option that Democratic and Republican lawmakers are considering.  Although neither is endorsing FAMM’s poll or report, Senator Jim Webb (D-Va.) and Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) are both concerned about America’s prison and sentencing system.

 

“America is locking up people at astonishing rates. In the name of ‘getting tough on crime,’ there are now 2.2 million Americans in federal, state, and local prisons and jails and over 7 million under some form of correction supervision, including probation and parole. We have the largest prison population in the world,” says Senator Jim Webb (D-Va.), who is chairing a symposium on criminal justice and prison issues in October.  “This growth is not a response to increasing crime rates, but a reliance on prisons and long mandatory sentences as the common response to crime. It is time for America’s leadership to realize what the public understands – our approach is costly, unfair and impractical.”

 

“Mandatory minimums wreak havoc on a logical system of sentencing guidelines,” says Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.). “Mandatory minimums turn today’s hot political rhetoric into the nightmares of many tomorrows for judges and families.”

 

"This poll suggests that a majority of Americans are open to re-examining this issue and moving to a court-driven sentencing model,” said Sparky Zivin, Research Director at StrategyOne.

 

The poll bolsters the findings of FAMM’s comprehensive new report, Correcting Course: Lessons from the 1970 Repeal of Mandatory Minimums, which describes how Congress repealed mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses in 1970 – and had no trouble getting reelected. 

 

“Our report and poll show that lawmakers can vote to reform mandatory minimums for nonviolent offenses and live to tell the story.  Republicans and Democrats alike don’t want these laws.  They don’t work, they cost taxpayers a fortune, and people believe Courts can sentence better than Congress can.  Another repeal of mandatory drug sentences isn’t just doable, it’s doable right now,” says Molly Gill, author of Correcting Course. 

 

The report details how Congress created mandatory minimum prison sentences for drug offenders in 1951 and repealed them in 1970 because the laws failed to stop drug abuse, addiction and trafficking. It also finds that after 20 years of experience, current mandatory minimums have failed as badly as those enacted in the 1950s.  Correcting Course concludes that mandatory minimum sentences:

 

• Have not discouraged drug use in the United States.

• Have not reduced drug trafficking.

• Have created soaring state and federal corrections costs.

• Impose substantial indirect costs on families by imprisoning spouses, parents, and breadwinners for lengthy periods.

• Are not applied evenly, disproportionately impacting minorities and resulting in vastly different sentences for equally blameworthy offenders.

• Undermine federalism by turning state-level offenses into federal crimes.

• Undermine separation of powers by usurping judicial discretion.

 

Eric Sterling, counsel to the House Judiciary Committee when mandatory sentences were enacted, says, “In 1986, we got stuck with some of the most punitive, least effective criminal sentencing laws ever created. Mandatory minimums haven’t stopped the drug trade.  They haven’t locked up the big dealers and importers.  They’re applied to small fries, not kingpins.  It’s a waste of taxpayer dollars to lock up a street-level dealer for 10 years when that money could be spent on treatment, drug courts, or going after the people bringing in boatloads of drugs every year.  Getting rid of mandatory minimums is about getting our priorities straight.”

 

Correcting Course includes comprehensive strategies for how Congress can repeal these ineffective laws today and better reflect the popular attitude among Americans, as brought out in the findings of the poll. 

 

“Mandatory minimums are among the worst criminal justice policies ever adopted in this country.  They treat all offenders the same, when the most sacred principle of American sentencing law is that punishment should fit the individual and the crime. Repealing these laws isn’t impossible – it’s been done before.  The next Congress should do it again,” says FAMM founder and president Julie Stewart.

 

FAMM’s poll was conducted by the independent public opinion research firm StrategyOne.  The survey was conducted by telephone between July 31 and August 3, 2008 with 1,000 adults randomly selected across the United States.  The margin of sampling error for the poll is plus or minus 3.1 percent for 95 out of 100 cases.

 

Families Against Mandatory Minimums is a national nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that supports fair and proportionate sentencing laws that allow judicial discretion while maintaining public safety. For more information on FAMM, visit www.famm.org or call Monica Pratt Raffanel at 678-261-8118.

 

 

###

Marc Mauer Testifies on Mandatory Minimum Sentencing at House

Friends: Marc Mauer, Executive Director of The Sentencing Project, testifies Tuesday, June 26, 2007 on the issue of Mandatory Minumum Sentencing before the House Judiciary Subcommitee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security. Mauer's testimony focuses on the experience with the current generation of mandatory sentencing policies in the federal system, the vast majority of which have been applied to drug offenses, and the lessons we should learn from that in order to develop more effective public policy. The main themes he will address include: Mandatory sentencing policies have been largely based on false premises, and are particularly unwise in the federal system; - Mandatory penalties in the federal system have not proven to achieve their objectives; and -A variety of policy initiatives could be enacted that would result in more fair and effective sentencing, and would produce better public safety results. See http://sentencingproject.org/Admin%5CDocuments%5Cpublications%5Csl_testimony_summer07.pdf to view his testimony.

DPA Press Release: US Sentencing Commission urges Congress to Reduce Crack/Powder Cocaine Sentencing Disparity

For Immediate Release: May 17, 2007 Contact: Jasmine L. Tyler at 202-294-8292 US Sentencing Commission urges Congress to Reduce Crack/Powder Cocaine Sentencing Disparity Experts to Brief Congress on Current Cocaine Policy and the Need for Reform Washington, DC—Criminal justice experts will hold briefings on the crack/powder cocaine sentencing disparity for Congressional staffers on Monday, May 21. They will discuss the United States Sentencing Commission’s (USSC) May 2007 Guideline Amendment and Report to Congress. Joining the panel will be Hilary Shelton from the NAACP, Pat Nolan from Prison Fellowship, and Lisa Rich from the USSC. These briefings will be moderated by Jessalyn McCurdy of the ACLU and Marc Mauer of The Sentencing Project. The briefing is co-sponsored by the Drug Policy Alliance. ********************************************************************* WHAT: Reforming Crack and Powder Cocaine Sentencing Briefing for Congressional staffers WHO: Members of Congress and staff, media, policy advocates, stakeholders, treatment providers, faith leaders When: Monday, May 21 House Briefing: 9 a.m. - B340 Rayburn House Office Building Senate Briefing: 2 p.m. - 485 Russell Senate Office Building ********************************************************************* Twenty years ago when the crack cocaine sentencing laws were first passed by Congress, the United States faced a panic about the alleged “crack epidemic” and operated under the impression that crack had inherent properties that made it infinitely more dangerous than powder cocaine. These reports, which served as the basis for the huge disparity, have since been found to be fundamentally flawed, rendering the 100-to-1 disparity arbitrary and capricious. Further, these laws have proven ineffective in reducing drug use or distribution and have instead exacerbated racial disparity and injustices in our criminal justice system. The USSC has taken the lead on eliminating the crack/powder sentencing disparity by amending the federal sentencing guidelines to lessen the punishment range for crack cocaine cases by approximately one to two years. The Commission also urged Congress to reform federal mandatory minimum sentences to reduce the statutory disparity. Currently, there is growing bipartisan support for reforming the crack/powder disparity. There are two house bills pending and a similar one before the Senate. # # #

DPA Press Release: Lawmakers, judges, and advocates rebuke Gov. O’Malley’s veto of sentencing reform bill

For Immediate Release: May 17, 2007 Contact: Naomi Long (202) 669-6071 or Laura Jones: (202) 425-4659 Lawmakers, judges, and advocates rebuke Gov. O’Malley’s veto of sentencing reform bill; O’Malley “clinging to the failed policies of the past” in a “lapse of leadership” Coalition vows to continue educating O’Malley, promoting treatment instead of prisons Annapolis—A coalition of advocates, law enforcement officials, drug treatment providers and policy experts today denounced Governor O’Malley’s veto of a bill that would have provided the possibility of parole for non-violent drug offenders. The sentencing reform bill, HB 992, was one of the only bills vetoed by O’Malley, despite its support from the legislature, the coalition, and the editorial pages of the Washington Post and Baltimore Sun. “The veto is a disappointing mistake,” said Justice Policy Institute executive director Jason Ziedenberg. “Instead of taking a baby step in the right direction towards treatment instead of prison, O’Malley is stubbornly clinging to the failed tough on crime policies of the past. The governor failed to show leadership and vision in this decision.” States across the country have taken steps to reform ineffective mandatory sentencing laws that remove discretion to consider the individual facts of the case. Newly-elected Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick (D) recently called for wide ranging mandatory minimum sentencing reform. Newly-elected New York Governor Elliot Spitzer added language in his budget for a prison closure commission, and is considering a bill to further reform the state’s Rockefeller Drug Laws. Under the comparatively modest Maryland reform, individuals convicted of a 10-year sentence for a nonviolent drug reform would have been eligible for, but not guaranteed, parole. Individuals convicted of violent crimes would serve the full 10-year sentences. “Governor O’Malley has put Maryland out of step with other states that are moving in the direction of smarter, more effective sentencing policies,” said Naomi Long, Director of the Drug Policy Alliance District of Columbia Metropolitan Area project. “This veto was a lapse of leadership, and hurts Maryland’s efforts to implement the kinds of real reforms that would actually make a difference.” The state of Maryland spends millions of dollars each year incarcerating nonviolent drug offenders, the vast majority of whom would be better served by drug treatment options. A recent report by the Justice Policy Institute found that Maryland's sentencing laws disproportionately affect communities of color and may be the least effective, most expensive way to promote public safety. “The fight for more effective and fair sentencing policies isn’t over,” said Delegate Curtis Anderson (D-Baltimore), a sponsor of the legislation. “Maryland voters want more fair and effective sentencing policies. We will keep working with the Governor to implement those reforms.” The Partnership for Treatment, Not Incarceration supported HB 992, and is a consortium of organizations and individuals including members of faith communities, public health and drug treatment professionals, public defenders, judges, police and other law enforcement. For more information about bill, or to interview spokespeople who can respond, contact Naomi Long (202)669-6071. To learn more about sentencing reform work in Maryland, visit: www.justicepolicy.org and www.drugpolicy.org .

FAMM urges Congress to heed message from Commission, New report finds crack disparity unjustifiable, up to Congress to fix the problem

WASHINGTON, D.C.: Federal crack cocaine penalties overstate the harmfulness of the drug, apply mostly to low-level offenders, and hit minorities hardest, concludes the U.S. Sentencing Commission in a new report to Congress, "Cocaine and Federal Sentencing Policy," released today, May 15. Based on these findings, the Commission maintains it's consistently held position that current crack cocaine penalties significantly undermine the congressional objectives of the Sentencing Reform Act, including fairness, uniformity and proportionality. The solution? Congress should act, says the report. Mary Price, vice president and general counsel of Families Against Mandatory Minimums (FAMM), a national, nonpartisan sentencing reform organization, says, "The prisoners, children and families torn apart by these unjustifiably harsh penalties are watching closely and will welcome crack sentencing reforms that restore some justice to crack penalties. Only Congress can change our harsh mandatory minimum crack laws. Lawmakers should not squander the important opportunity presented by the most recent set of findings and recommendations by the Sentencing Commission. The time is ripe for reform, especially given the bipartisan support for crack sentencing reform that has emerged in recent years." In its report, the Commission again unanimously and strongly urged Congress to act promptly on the following recommendations: (1) Increase the five-year and ten-year mandatory minimum threshold quantities for crack cocaine offenses to focus the penalties more closely on serious and major traffickers, (2) Repeal the mandatory minimum sentence for simple possession of crack cocaine and (3) Reject addressing the 100-to-1 disparity by decreasing the five-year and ten-year mandatory minimum threshold quantities for powder cocaine offenses, citing no evidence to justify such an increase in quantity-based penalties for powder cocaine offenses. In addition, the Commission seeks authority to incorporate any future changes to the mandatory minimums for crack into the federal sentencing guidelines. FAMM strongly supports these recommendations and looks forward to working with members of Congress to implement these reasonable and long-overdue reforms to crack cocaine sentencing. Visit www.ussc.gov to read the report.

Today is the 34th anniversary of the signing of New York's infamous Rockefeller Drug Laws

[Courtesy of the William Moses Kunstler Fund for Racial Justice, Inc. and Tony Papa] Today, May 8, marks the 34 year anniversary of the signing of New York's infamous Rockefeller Drug Laws. In December of 2004 the laws were mildly modified but continue unabated to wreak untold havoc on poor communities of color across the Empire State. Below is a link to a powerful and edifying video/song written and performed by Hip-Hop megastar Jim Jones calling on Governor Spitzer to reform the cruel and unusual, and racially applied Rockefeller Drug Laws (now the Elliot Spitzer drug laws). The video serves as trailer for the newly released documentary Lockdown USA. Moreover, we have included a compelling editorial that appeared this week in the Huffington Post. The editorial was written by artist/activist and Rockefeller Drug Law survivor Anthony Papa. In the editorial, Mr. Papa urges not only the Governor Spitzer but also Lt. Governor David Patterson in particular NY Attorney General Andrew Cuomo to use their offices to follow through on their past commitment to push for the REPEAL of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. Mr. Cuomo is one of the four major figures featured in the Lockdown USA documentary. All three public officials have been silent on the issue since their respective inaugurations. Mr. Papa, formerly of Mothers of the NY Disappeared, is now a media specialist for the Drug Policy Alliance (DPA). DPA has worked closely with the NY Mothers and the Kunstler Fund for the past 9 years in the popular movement to repeal the Rockefeller Drug Laws.(www.drugpolicy.org). Jim Jones Lockdown, USA Song http://www.drugpolicy.org/statebystate/newyork/lockdownusa/

FAMM eGram: U.S. Sentencing Commission votes for changes to crack cocaine guidelines

[Courtesy of Families Against Mandatory Minimums] WASHINGTON, D.C.: For the first time in 12 years, the U.S. Sentencing Commission has approved guideline changes to federal crack cocaine penalties, tonight by a 6-1 vote. The amendment affects approximately 78 percent of defendants convicted of crack cocaine offenses, reducing their sentences by an average of 16 months. It will now be sent to Congress on May 1, 2007, along with other proposed sentencing amendments.
Subscribe to Mandatory Minimums