Representative
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515

RE: Reforming federal sentencing system

Dear Representative ,

On January 12, 2005, the United States Supreme Court ruled that a key component of the federal criminal sentencing guidelines is unconstitutional. Now it’s up to you and other Members of Congress to decide whether to pursue meaningful sentencing reform--as many states have done--or more costly and unfair sentencing policies.

I urge you to consider alternatives to incarceration of nonviolent drug offenders--alternatives that embrace reason, compassion and justice. Advancing alternatives to incarceration involves the diversion of certain nonviolent drug offenders from prison to drug treatment--offering compassionate options in public policy that bring about obvious fiscal advantages.

A growing number of judges, scholars and practitioners have questioned the wisdom of federal mandatory sentencing laws. Many cases have demonstrated that mandatory sentences often result in expensive and unjust incarceration. The Supreme Court decision on sentencing presents Congress with an opportunity to reform the complex, rigid and harsh federal sentencing system.

I encourage you to consider three key issues in regard to any legislative action in this area:

1. In order to create a sensible, long-term sentencing policy, Congress should avoid the temptation to create a "quick fix". There is no real quick fix, and avoiding important issues could have unintended negative consequences. A proposal to allow much longer sentences while retaining current restrictions on judicial discretion to mitigate punishment (the so-called "Bowman fix") should be rejected.
2. In order that punishments fit the crimes committed, Congress must closely evaluate the past 20 years of sentencing policy and the broader implications of these policies. Mandatory minimum sentences and other problems, like the abhorrent crack/powder cocaine sentencing discrepancy, should be fixed in the process.
3. Congress should adopt sentencing alternatives--like California’s Proposition 36--that divert people convicted of nonviolent drug offenses into treatment instead of prison.

Please work toward meaningful sentencing reform. Congress must strike an appropriate balance among competing goals, and must do so carefully and with meaningful participation from all of the affected parties--including the judiciary; the Sentencing Commission; criminal justice practitioners (including community and institutional corrections); academic experts; victims; and the public at large. It would be a grave mistake to pass sentencing legislation without a careful analysis of the current state of federal sentencing, the growing problems surrounding the federal criminal-justice and prison systems, and the implications that will flow from a legislative response to the Court’s decisions.

copy to:
Dr. Zalmay Khalilzad
U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan
American Embassy
The Great Masoud Road
Kabul, AFGHANISTAN

EAN Alerts Email List | Tell a Friend | Links | Contact | Site Map