 |
 Roots to Rap
Rahiel Tesfamariam
Friday, October 22, 2004; Page 23
The Casualties of the Drug War
It seems that every mainstream media outlet that has “pull” with young voters is trying its best to stress the importance of voting to them. While some are failing to empower them with information, many have developed campaigns that have made voting far more than the catch phrase of the year. MTV is one such network whose “Choose or Lose” campaign is doing a phenomenal job at both encouraging youth to vote and enlightening them on the issues at hand.
A special titled “Drug Wars” that aired last Monday on the network sought to bring awareness that the candidates are not giving much attention to, mandatory minimum sentencing.
Congress passed the Anti-Drug Abuse Act in 1986 in response to what is now described as the height of the crack era. Escalated violence and drug distribution on streets led to the creation of mandatory minimum penalties for first-time drug traffickers, which based jail time on the amount of drugs found.
Many believed that the law has been successful, as violent crime in the United States has dropped by 20% since 1986. But others view that this law has been and continues to be flawed, strengthening the modern prison industrial complex and putting a disproportionate number of African Americans behind bars.
Two million people sit in prisons throughout this country today due to these drug laws. The U.S. incarcerates more of its citizens than any other country in the world, with 1 in 3 Americans in the penal system (either in jail, on probation or on parole). And, ironically, the U.S. Department of Justice reports that drug offenders serve an average of one year more than violent crime offenders.
Another argument is that these laws fail those that they prosecute, as over 16 million Americans need treatment for drugs and alcohol but received no form of rehabilitation.
Controversy has stirred from debate over what qualifies as fair and adequate rehabilitation.
President George W. Bush’s focus has been on using faith, love and religion to get drug abusers clean once and for all. Some believe that his use of tax payer money to fund faith based treatment is unconstitutional, as it defies the separation of church and state.
His opponents have also argued that he has tried to promote Christian and heterosexual conversion through these programs.
On the other hand, what would seem like an obvious means of altering ones life course in a positive manner, higher education, is not made easily assessable to past drug offenders. When filing forms for federal financial assistance, admitting to drug felonies and convictions almost guarantees delay or denial. This began in 1998 with the passage of a provision called the Higher Education Act, which makes the possibility of going to college nearly impossible for prior felons.
Bush has suggested limiting the law to those charged with a drug crime while enrolled in college. Kerry, who has said, “We are putting nonviolent people away and filling up our jails in the most absurd ridiculously overly expensive way,” wants to limit the provision to those who are caught selling- possessing drugs.
The mandatory minimum sentencing laws are unjust, in my opinion, in that they dehumanize the criminals, putting the need for a quantitative number before the need to recognize that every human being comes with his or her own “story.”
Jim Cho of Families Against Mandatory Minimums said in the MTV special, “A mandatory minimum ties the judges hands so that he cannot go below that set amount of time that Congress has already predetermined.”
For Rahiel Tesfamariam send email to rahielt@washingtoninformer.com.
|
|