They say that bad facts make bad laws.  One weekend in the 1980’s, Tip O’Neill, then Speaker of the House, heard of the sudden death of a famous basketball player.  The athlete had died of drugs.  In quick response to this, O’Neill introduced into the House the federal sentencing guidelines.

Since then, these guidelines have been our law.  Prison sentences have been mandatory for even first time offenders.  Judges have had almost no input into the sentencing of drug addicts.  Mitigating circumstances have played no part in the process.  And our prisons have become overloaded with inmates.

Last week, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has said that the guidelines should be amended so as to allow non-violent first time drug offenders options other than jail.  While I am not generally a fan of Mr. Holder, he is correct on this issue.  The sentencing guidelines should be amended, and possibly even eliminated.

Legislators often speak about budget cuts.  They fail to mention the huge expenditures required for the construction and maintenance of prisons.  The elimination of mandatory prison sentences for first-time drug offenders would not merely be the more humane solution.  It would also be more cost effective.

It takes far less money to give a person rehab or drug education than it does to house him or her in prison.





About jalesy55

Charles Lupia is a playwright, freelance writer and lawyer. His blogs cover a range of topics, from politics to entertainment.
This entry was posted in federalism, law and politics, News and politics and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s