An editorial in the New York Times notes that the New York Legislature finally seems poised to overturn the infamous Rockefeller drug laws. The impending change comes too late for the tens of thousands of low-level, nonviolent drug offenders who wasted away in prison because of mandatory sentencing policies when they should have been given treatment and leniency. But after years of building support for reform, legislative leaders now have it within their power to make wholesale changes in this profoundly destructive law.

Read the rest of the editorial here.

Enacted in 1973 by then-governor Nelson Rockefeller, the tough on crime statues established mandatory minimum sentences for drug-related offenses, limiting judicial discretion on the length and type of sentences handed out. Last year more than 20% of new inmates, or roughly 12,000 prisoners in the New York state correctional system were committed for drug-related offenses. Over the last 35 years, hundreds of thousands of offenders have been sentenced under these laws.

In 2004, in response to questions about both the laws’ efficacy , and their ability to distinguish between kingpins and addicts requiring treatment, the Drug Law Reform Act was introduced. Yet, while some mandatory minimums were lowered, the lack of judicial discretion remained unchanged.

This past May, on the 35th anniversary of the laws’ enactment, public hearings convened by six assembly committees reopened the question of their reform. With a Democratic majority senate around the corner, some anti-Rockefeller groups are looking forward not only in the laws’ repeal, but also to a new approach to drug-related sentencing.

“The changes in Albany are something that we have anticipated for some time. There’s near universal agreement that they’ll be scrapped. The question is what type of drug policy should New York State have to replace the Rockefeller drug regime,” said Gabriel Sayegh of the Drug Policy Alliance, and group that advocates for the laws’ repeal.

The May hearing’s emphasis on drug treatment and alternatives to incarceration is indicative, said Sayegh, of what will likely replace the Rockefeller laws.

“A public health approach to drug policy might be an indication of where we are going nationally. Health providers have been very vocal that using incarceration as a response to addiction is not only patently wrong, but immoral.”

It is also expensive. In 2001, the cost to New York State per inmate was nearly $37,000, or 35% higher than the national average, according to the Justice Department’s National Institute of Corrections. Critics of the laws anticipate the state’s fiscal emergency will encourage many lawmakers to re-examine less costly alternatives to incarceration, such as addiction-treatment.

“We think that the time is more right that ever for moving on reform given the state’s fiscal crisis,” said Gangi. “Repealing the Rockefeller drug laws would save the state millions if not hundreds of millions of dollars.”

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS: How has your family been affected by the Rockefeller drug laws?

[Use the comments feature below or call (646)-867-1891 to leave an audio message.]

Ria Julien is a student at the CUNY Graduate School of Journalism. She has worked on prison issues as a book editor and organizer.

The crumbling economy, taxes, and the Iraq War have soaked up the limelight when it comes to the 2008 Presidential Election.  With less than one week left before voters’ caste their ballots, questions about Senator John McCain and Senator Barack Obama’s positions on incarceration and criminal justice remain unanswered.

According to the Sentencing Project, a nonpartisan research and advocacy organization, little specifics are known about the candidates’ viewpoints to reform the federal prison system.

Based on information from the candidates’ past records, Obama once against the death penalty, currently supports it for monstrous crimes.  As an Illinois State Senator, Obama also lead the charge in passing legislation that requires confessions and interrogations to be videotaped to prevent death sentencing errors in capitol cases.

Obama has connected issues of unemployment and poverty within certain communities to the disproportionally high rate of crime and incarceration of those who live there.

Senator John McCain who has been labeled as “tough-on-crime” is a firm supporter of the death penalty. In his past votes, during the mid-nineties, McCain showed support for restricting appeals to the death penalty and was against using the defense of racial discrimination within appeals. McCain has favored violent offenders to serve their complete sentences, with no opportunity for parole.

McCain has also offered the alternative of rehabilitation programs for first time drug offenders and has voted for more community police to prevent hate crimes.

Both candidates have vocalized support for re-entry programs once a prisoner has been released, but a clear and concise picture as to what the programs actually look like and involve is unknown.

On November 4th, regardless of who is elected into the oval office, Ryan King, a policy analyst for the Sentencing Project, says incarceration issues should must become a priority for the next President.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS: Are you considering the candidates’ views on incarceration and criminal justice in your voting decision? Which way are you leaning and why?

[Use the comments feature below or call (646)-867-1891 to leave an audio message.]

Lindsay A. Lazarski attends CUNY Graduate School of Journalism with a concentration in Urban Studies and Interactive Media.

He attended several of the video training workshops offered by the project.

While he is quiet in person, he has a lot to share. Please watch this video in which he introduces himself:

Click on the player above or download this video here. (iPhone version)

The document Davian mentions, Children of Incarcerated Parents: A Bill of Rights, is attached in the previous link as a PDF. Just click on the link to download it.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS: What are some impressions you have formed about your incarcerated parent? And when you visit, how true is that impression compared to the real person?

[Use the comments feature below or call (646) 867-1891 to leave an audio message.]

If you are a child of someone who is incarcerated and you have a question for Davian, you have three options:

1) Post a question in the comments section below,

2) Send an email to questions@livesinfocus.org,

3) Call (646) 867-1891 to leave a message.

Davian also welcomes questions from others who might simply be interested in knowing more about how the life of children is affected when a parent is incarcerated.

Drew Geraets, the digital media manager for the project (and for CUNY Graduate School of Journalism), has created a multi-layered design that really captures the new philosophy having storytelling from various sources. The stories shared on this site will come from three sources:

1. Professional journalists will write profiles about people affected by incarceration and also provide news pieces about this subject.
2. People who have been affected by incarceration and who have attended media workshops will tell their own stories in their own words. We have a several new columnists who will join us, starting with Davian Reynolds who introduces himself in his first column.
3. The third group will be people who stumble across the site and want to share their own stories with this community. These folks can join the community to post their own photos, videos and audio.

I realize that not everyone has a broadband Internet connection to upload video, audio and photos, so I invite them to join the conversation by using their cell phones or home phones to call us and to leave a message. The number is 646-867-1891.

I also have several new columnists who will come online over the next month and some innovative Web programming that will begin to appear over the next month.

Come back often to visit, or subscribe to our RSS feed.

We are going to examine the impact of incarceration on families in a nuanced and intelligent way. With such a large number of Americans in prison, we need to have a better understanding of how this affects our communities and families.

Thank you to the Knight Foundation, J-Lab and the CUNY Graduate School of Journalism, among others, for helping to bring this important issue to light.

Sandeep Junnarkar
Editorial Director and Founder
Lives in Focus: Family Life Behind Bars