Skip to main content

State & Local Executive Branches

Iowa Gov. Signs Nation's First Racial Impact Sentencing Bill

[Courtesy of The Sentencing Project] Dear Friends, Less than one year after a national report found Iowa prisons and jails maintain the highest rate of racial disparity in the nation, Governor Chet Culver yesterday signed legislation requiring examination of the racial and ethnic impact of all new sentencing laws prior to passage. "Iowa's aggressive attempt to address racial and ethnic disparity can jumpstart a movement for fairness around the nation," said Marc Mauer, Executive Director of The Sentencing Project and co-author of the report that helped instigate the legislative response. Passage of the Minority Impact Statement Bill provides a means for legislators to anticipate any unwarranted disparities and enables them to consider alternative policies to accomplish the goals of legislation without causing undue negative effects on public safety. High rates of incarceration among people of color signal a failure to address social and economic problems within communities and can indicate bias within the justice system. The consequences for communities are disproportionate rates of voter disenfranchisement, unemployment, and disassociation among its citizens. Representative Wayne Ford (D- Des Moines) authored the legislation, House File 2393, which garnered broad bipartisan support when passed by Iowa's House and Senate. In a statement he said, "I believe that we need to be tough on crime, but we must also make sure that our laws are fair and equitable." In July, The Sentencing Project released its report, Uneven Justice: State Rates of Incarceration by Race and Ethnicity, which found that Iowa incarcerates blacks at a rate 13 times that of whites, more than double the national average. Iowa is the first state to pass legislation examining the racial and ethnic impact of new criminal justice policies. Bills to enact minority impact statements are also pending in Connecticut and Illinois. Last year, Oregon was the first state to introduce similar legislation. For more information, visit the Governor's Web site.

Press Release: Advocates Demand Effective Overdose Legislation to Deal with Epidemic

[Courtesy of Drug Policy Alliance] For Immediate Release: April 7, 2008 For More Info: Gabriel Sayegh, tel: 646-335-2264 or Tony Newman, tel: 646-335-5384 New York Overdose Epidemic: More People Die from Accidental Overdose than Homicides Public Heath Advocates, Community Groups Travel to Albany on Tuesday to Demand Effective Overdose Legislation Nearly 1,000 Flowers—One Flower for Every Accidental Overdose Death in NYC —to be Delivered to Gov. Paterson’s Office at 1 p.m., April 8 On Tuesday, April 8, the Drug Policy Alliance, Harm Reduction Coalition, New York City AIDS Housing Network, Voices of Community Advocates and Leaders, and advocates from around the state will travel to Albany to demand effective overdose legislation and public health policies for drug user health in New York. There is an overdose epidemic across the country and in New York State. In New York City alone, nearly 1,000 people died of accidental drug overdose in 2006, making it the fourth leading cause of death among adults after heart disease, cancer and AIDS. More people die of overdose than homicides in New York City. At 11 a.m., advocates will gather at Emmanuel Baptist Church for a strategy meeting and inspirational talk by Senator Tom Duane and Humberto Cruz, Exec. Director of NYS AIDS Institute. At 1 p.m., the coalition will make a special delivery to Gov. David Paterson’s office—one flower for every accidental overdose death in New York City. Nearly 1,000 flowers will be delivered. Many accidental drug overdoses in New York are preventable. Most people hesitate to call 911 because they fear getting arrested for illicit drugs. Assembly Bill 8740, the 911 Good Samaritan Bill, will save lives in New York by allowing people to call 911 to save a life without fear of being arrested. Additionally, the Expanded Syringe Access Program (ESAP), passed by the NYS Legislature in 2000, amended the Public Health Law to make possession of clean syringes legal. However, New York State Penal Law still states that possession of a clean syringe is a Class A misdemeanor, and many clients are arrested around syringe exchange programs—for possession of syringes. Advocates will call on legislators to remove syringes from the penal code to encourage injection drug users to access clean syringes to reduce HIV/AIDS without fear of arrest. What: Statewide Meeting and Lobby Day to Reduce Accidental Drug Overdoses When: Tuesday, April 8th 11:00 A.M. Where: Meeting at Emmanuel Baptist Church 275 State Street, Albany, NY Who: Advocates, with special comments by Senator Tom Duane and Humberto Cruz, NYS AIDS Institute Director Action: Flower Delivery to Gov. Paterson to symbolize overdose deaths in New York: 1:00 p.m. at the Executive Chamber

Press Release: Governor Spitzer Proposes Tax Stamp on Illegal Drugs - Statement from Ethan Nadelmann of DPA

[Courtesy of Drug Policy Alliance] For Immediate Release: January 23, 2008 For More Info: Tony Newman (646) 335-5384 or Ethan Nadelmann (646) 335-2240 Governor Spitzer Proposes Tax Stamp on Illegal Drugs Statement from Ethan Nadelmann, Executive Director of the Drug Policy Alliance “I have my doubts regarding Gov. Eliot Spitzer's proposed bill to require all marijuana and other controlled substances in the state to have a tax stamp. “On the one hand, it seems perfectly reasonable to require people and businesses to pay taxes on the revenue earned from selling products of any sort, whether they are legal or illegal. Indeed, in the dozen states where marijuana has been legalized for medical purposes, many of those who sell marijuana to patients are willing and even eager to pay taxes on their revenue. “On the other hand, these tax stamp bills and laws smack of the gratuitous piling on of punitive sanctions that permeates the overall drug war. The United States already locks up people who violate the drug laws more readily, more frequently and for longer periods of time than in almost any other country – at a national cost of tens of billions of dollars per year. We also subject drug law violators to civil and criminal asset forfeiture and deprive them of all sorts of rights and privileges after they have served their sentences - - to an extent far greater than in almost any other country. More than half a million people come out of prison each year but face daunting prospects getting a fresh start, in part because they are obliged to pay fines – like this tax stamp – that end up causing far more harm than good. “The Governor could accomplish far greater tax savings for New York taxpayers if he would move forward on his campaign commitments regarding reform of the Rockefeller drug laws. The modest reforms of 2004 and 2005 already have saved the state tens of millions of dollars – but far greater savings could be attained, with no risk to public safety, if he were to support the drug law reforms passed by the Assembly in recent years. “And, quite frankly, New Yorkers would most benefit from a serious proposal to tax, control and regulate marijuana more or less like alcohol is today. Even though New York decriminalized marijuana possession in the 1970s, it still arrests people for that offense more frequently than most states that never decriminalized it. New Yorkers spend many tens of millions of dollars per year for this foolish excess, when instead the state could earn even greater amounts from taxing this ever popular consumer product. Overall consumption would likely rise only modestly given the widespread and easy availability of marijuana today notwithstanding its illegality. Virtually all New Yorkers – both those who like marijuana and those who have no interest in it – would benefit.”

Press Release: Medical Marijuana Law Needs Fixing

[Courtesy of Iowans for Medical Marijuana]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: December 8, 2007

CONTACT: Carl Olsen Iowans for Medical Marijuana (515) 288-5798

Dear Governor Richardson,

In your press release dated August 17, 2007, you vowed to fight the federal intimidation efforts, and use every state resource to fully implement the state law making medical marijuana legal for the most seriously ill patients. We think it is inconsistent that New Mexico state law continues to classify marijuana as a schedule I controlled substance, N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-31-5(A)(2) (2007), with no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.

Although federal law currently classifies marijuana as a schedule I controlled substance with no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, the actual determination of whether marijuana has accepted medical use is specifically reserved to the states under the federal Controlled Substances Act of 1970 (CSA) (21 U.S.C. §§ 801 et seq.). This is clear from the recent decision by the United States Supreme Court in Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243 (2006).

Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243, 250 (2006) (referring to 21 U.S.C. § 903):

"No provision of this subchapter shall be construed as indicating an intent on the part of the Congress to occupy the field in which that provision operates . . . to the exclusion of any State law on the same subject matter which would otherwise be within the authority of the State, unless there is a positive conflict between that provision . . . and that State law so that the two cannot consistently stand together." § 903.

Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243, 269-270 (2006):

In deciding whether the CSA can be read as prohibiting physician-assisted suicide, we look to the statute's text and design. The statute and our case law amply support the conclusion that Congress regulates medical practice insofar as it bars doctors from using their prescription-writing powers as a means to engage in illicit drug dealing and trafficking as conventionally understood. Beyond this, however, the statute manifests no intent to regulate the practice of medicine generally. The silence is understandable given the structure and limitations of federalism, which allow the States "great latitude under their police powers to legislate as to the protection of the lives, limbs, health, comfort, and quiet of all persons." (Citations omitted).

United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, 532 U.S. 483, 492 (2001):

The Attorney General can include a drug in schedule I only if the drug "has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States," "has a high potential for abuse," and has "a lack of accepted safety for use . . . under medical supervision." §§ 812(b)(1)(A)-(C). Under the statute, the Attorney General could not put marijuana into schedule I if marijuana had any accepted medical use.

Although New Mexico Senate Bill 523, effective July 1, 2007, now includes marijuana in both schedule I and schedule II of New Mexico's state version of the Uniform Controlled Substances Act, the question that we have for New Mexico is why New Mexico's version of the Uniform Controlled Substances Act continues to list marijuana as a schedule I controlled substance, N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-31-6 (2007), which has "no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States", N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-31-5 (2007). Under both New Mexico and federal law, the criteria for placing a substance in schedule I is "no accepted medical use in treatment in the United States".

We fear that this inconsistency is going to cause problems for patients in New Mexico who are attempting to comply with the Lynn and Erin Compassionate Use Act, N.M. Stat. Ann. § 30-31C-1 (2007), as amended by New Mexico Senate Bill 523, effective July 1, 2007.

Carl Olsen, George McMahon, Barbara Douglass

Directors of Iowans for Medical Marijuana (http://www.iowamedicalmarijuana.org/)

Members of the Board for Patients Out of Time (http://www.medicalcannabis.com/)

Petitioners in The Federal Marijuana Rescheduling Petition (http://www.drugscience.org/)

DPA Press Release: Governor Rell Ignores Will of Voters and Legislators and Vetoes Medical Marijuana Bill

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 19, 2007 CONTACT: Lorenzo Jones, T: (860) 270-9586 or Gabriel Sayegh, T: (646) 335-2264 Governor Rell Vetoes Medical Marijuana Bill, Changing Her Reasons for Opposition to Issue Yet Again Compassionate Use Bill Would Have Protected Patients With Debilitating Illnesses From Arrest, Prosecution Patients, Community Members Ask: Governor Rell, As a Cancer Survivor, How Do You Sleep At Night While Patients In Our State Continue to Be Criminalized for Seeking Relief? HARTFORD, CT—Today, Governor M. Jodi Rell vetoed HB 6715, the Compassionate Use Act. The bill would have allowed certain patients with debilitating illnesses to use marijuana for medical purposes as recommended by their physician. The bill passed the Senate by a vote of 23-13 after clearing the House of Representatives by an 89-58 vote weeks earlier, both of which were wide margins. By passing HB 6715, the Legislature ended a five-year legislative battle to win medical marijuana in a state that has overwhelming public support for the issue. A 2004 University of Connecticut poll found that 83 percent of Connecticut residents support the medical use of marijuana. Dozens of community organizations, including the CT Nurses Association, support allowing patients to access medical marijuana when recommended by their physician. “I am just 32 years old and yet due to my medical condition I feel as if, at times, I am 92,” said Joshua Warren, a patient in Wilton, CT, who suffers from chronic neurological Lyme disease. “I did not ask for this condition nor would I wish any of my pain and other symptoms on anyone else. If Gov. Rell had any compassion for people like me who are suffering with horrible pain and other debilitating illnesses, she would have signed this bill.” After the bill’s passage, patients, doctors, family members and advocates mounted a massive letter and phone call campaign urging the Governor to sign the bill. The Governor was receiving hundreds of phone calls and letters every day in support of medical marijuana, including from medical, legal, and health experts from across the country. “The Governor’s veto message shows that she’s grasping for straws,” said Lorenzo Jones, executive director of A Better Way Foundation. “She said previously that she’d support the bill if it was only for terminally ill patients, because clearly other treatments are not sufficient. Now she says she’s vetoing the bill because it’s still illegal under federal law, even though over 99% of all marijuana arrests are under state law. She has been so evasive on this that it makes one wonder if she hasn’t gotten a call from Washington. Is she taking the advice from the worst administration in history over the demands of 83% of Connecticut residents?” Thousands of Connecticut residents live with crippling pain, are suffering with cancer and HIV/AIDS, or other debilitating ailments. HB 6715 would have allowed Connecticut residents with certain debilitating medical conditions to cultivate and use marijuana for medical purposes when recommended by a practicing physician. “It’s unconscionable that Rell would ignore all the science to veto this bill,” said Gabriel Sayegh, project director at the Drug Policy Alliance. “The medical efficacy of marijuana is unassailable pain and suffering and are, as a result of this veto, still considered criminals?” Currently, there are 12 states with medical marijuana laws. New Mexico passed its medical marijuana bill in March. Last month, the Rhode Island legislature voted to make their state law permanent, and last week Vermont’s legislature voted to expand their medical marijuana law. Other medical marijuana bills are currently under consideration in New Jersey, New York and Alabama. Dawn Fuller Ball, President of A Better Way Foundation said, “In Governor Rell’s veto letter, she admits that the current legal pharmacology alternatives to medical marijuana are insufficient and that the State law enacted in 1981 is unworkable, yet the Governor continues to choose politics over patients.” Background Info: Governor Rell is Saying NO to Medical Marijuana When Connecticut Says YES: - CT's voters voted YES (83% approval rating in polls from UCONN polls to media polls) - Five Separate Legislative Committees voted YES - The House of Representatives voted YES (89-58) - The Senate voted YES (23-13) - This is a Republican sponsored bill (By some of most respected Republicans in the House and Senate) - The Black and Latino Caucus supports this bill (The President and Treasurer met with Rell's staff) - Faith Based Institutions voted YES (National and local pastors and Bishops have contacted Governor Rell) - Doctors, nurses, patients, and caregivers testified, wrote letters and called the Governor’s office on behalf of medical marijuana. ###

DPA Media Advisory: Surprise Birthday Party for Gov. Spitzer; Advocates Ask Spitzer to Keep His Campaign Promise to Reform Draconian Drug Laws

MEDIA ADVISORY: June 7, 2007 Contact: Gabriel Sayegh, 646-335-2264 or Tony Newman, 646-335-5384 Rockefeller Drug Law Reform Advocates to Throw a Surprise Birthday Party on Friday at Noon for Gov. Eliot Spitzer Real Reform New York Coalition and Others to Deliver Birthday Cake and Card to Spitzer Asking Him to Keep His Campaign Promise to Reform Draconian Drug Laws New York, NY—The Real Reform New York Coalition will join with many others on Friday, June 8 at noon to throw a surprise birthday party for Gov. Eliot Spitzer outside of his New York City office. Asking him to heed his campaign promise to reform the draconian Rockefeller drug laws, the coalition will celebrate Spitzer’s promise of justice. The Real Reform New York Coalition, made up of advocates, people formerly incarcerated under the Rockefeller drug laws, their family members and supporters, will share cake and party favors with the crowd, and deliver a large birthday card—signed by New York voters—demanding real reform of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. While campaigning, Spitzer promised to make Rockefeller Drug Law reform a priority during his term as governor. However, during the first six months in office, he has remained strangely silent about reforming Rockefeller Drug Laws. The Rockefeller drug laws underwent minor changes in 2004 and 2005. These changes proved to be ineffective in changing the racist and non-rehabilitative impact of these laws. The Rockefeller drug laws have filled New York’s state prisons with more than 14,000 people convicted of drug offenses, representing nearly 38 percent of the prison population and costing New Yorkers more than $550 million annually. New York’s Drug Law Reform Act of 2004 (DLRA) lowered some drug sentences but it fell far short of allowing most people serving under the more punitive sentences to apply for shorter terms. The reforms also did not increase the power of judges to place addicts into treatment programs. While advocates and family members are encouraged by the modest reforms, they maintain that the recent reforms have no impact on the majority of people behind bars. Most people behind bars on Rockefeller drug law violations are charged with nonviolent lower-level or class-B felonies. In April, the state Assembly passed A.6663, a bill that would significantly reform the Rockefeller Drug Laws by expanding treatment, reducing harsh sentences for low-level offenses, and increasing judicial discretion. Governor Spitzer has yet to comment on the bill, which is now sitting in the Senate. What: Surprise Birthday Party/Rally for Rockefeller Drug Law Reform Where: Outside Gov. Spitzer’s New York City Office, 633 3rd Ave. When: Friday, June 8, 2007, 12 p.m. to 2 p.m.

Press Release: California to Fund Needle Exchange Programs for the First Time

For Immediate Release: June 4, 2007 California to Fund Needle Exchange Programs for the First Time, Governor Passage of Legislation Still Needed to Purchase Syringes SACRAMENTO -- For the first time, the state of California will fund some needle exchange programs. On June 1, the HIV Education and Prevention Services Branch of the Office of AIDS announced awards totaling $2.25 million of direct state funding to Syringe Exchange Programs (SEPs). Ten syringe exchange programs were awarded for $75,000 a year each for three years. Community-based organizations that operate SEPs and local health jurisdictions in areas where SEPs are approved for operation were awarded the grants. Because of a California law that denies the use of state funds to purchase syringes themselves, this funding will be dedicated to improving access to sterile syringes by increasing SEP operating hours, purchasing non-syringe operating materials, expanding syringe exchange to new locations, adding staff or improving compensation for existing staff as well as adding outreach workers, to encouraging clients of SEPs to test for HIV and HCV and link clients to medical care when appropriate. Funds may also be used to add services, such as wound care, that improve overall health and wellness for injection drug users. Assemblymember John Laird is sponsoring a bill, AB 110, to change the state law that denies the use of state HIV prevention funds for the purchase of syringes for clean needle and syringe exchange projects. The same bill was passed by a strong majority in the California legislature last year, but was pulled when Governor Schwarzenegger threatened a veto. Proponents are hopeful that this funding from the Office of AIDS will demonstrate the need for state commitment to such programs. "This funding represents a positive sea change in terms of support for needle exchange in California, said Hilary McQuie of the Harm Reduction Coalition, "But there are over 30 other programs in CA that don't get any state funding and survive on a shoestring, while courageously serving as a bridge between active injection drug users and medical and social services, reducing the spread of HIV and other blood borne diseases, and reducing the number of syringes discarded in public places. The governor should follow the lead of the Office of AIDS, and let local communities use their prevention dollars as they see fit." According to the Center for Disease Control, over a third of adult AIDS cases are associated directly or indirectly with injection drug use. In California, sharing contaminated injection equipment accounts for 20 percent of new AIDS cases. State data also suggests that more than 1500 new HIV infections occur annually due to syringe sharing. Seventy-five percent of HIV infections among women and children are related to sharing of injection equipment, and communities of color are hit especially hard. In addition to the human toll, the cost of medical treatment ranges from $200,000 to $600,000 over the lifetime of one HIV patient. # # # # The Harm Reduction Coalition is a national advocacy and capacity-building organization that promotes the health and dignity of individuals and communities impacted by drug use. For more information, see www.harmreduction.org

The Sentencing Project: Disenfranchisement News & Updates - 4/26/07

Maryland: Governor Signs Legislation Restoring Right to Vote On Tuesday, Gov. Martin O'Malley signed legislation restoring the right to vote to all formerly incarcerated individuals, ending the state's draconian lifetime voting ban. Coverage featuring the news included an "above-the-fold" front-page article in the Baltimore Sun. As a result of the legislation, which takes effect July 1, more than 50,000 Marylanders will be eligible to vote. Currently, those individuals convicted of two felonies can petition for vote restoration after their sentences and a three-year waiting period are completed. If both convictions are for violent offenses, the voting ban is permanent.

The Sentencing Project: Disenfranchisement News & Updates - April 19, 2007

Florida: Making Up for Lost Time; Still Some Work to Do When he served as attorney general, Governor Charlie Crist investigated the murder of a Florida civil rights activist and his wife whose home was bombed as a result of their work in registering black voters in the 1950s. Though Crist was unable to bring justice to the case, according to the Florida Times-Union he has followed in the late activist's footsteps in reforming a 138-year-old policy that banned voting rights for ex-offenders. "That law, which was passed in 1868 and re-enacted 100 years later, had racist origins. Enacted after the Civil War, it bolstered the 'black codes,' which called for harsh punishments for vagrancy and other minor transgressions that newly freed slaves were likely to get caught up in," writes columnist Tonyaa Weathersbee.