Legislation to Remove the Disparity in Sentencing Between
Crack and Powder Cocaine Offenses Introduced in Congress 

Two pieces of legislation have been introduced that seek to eliminate the sentencing disparity between powder and crack cocaine offenses.  Currently, although they derive from the same substance, mandatory minimum sentences in the federal law require significantly longer punishments for offenses involving crack cocaine than for offenses related to powder cocaine.  H.R. 460, sponsored by Congressman Charles Rangel (D-NY), would remove the sentencing distinction by making the sentencing requirements for crack cocaine offenses the same as those for powder in current law.  H.R. 79, introduced by Congressman Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), would do the opposite to equalize the sentences, by lowering the amount of powder cocaine required to trigger mandatory minimum sentences to the amounts of crack that trigger the mandatory minimums under current law. 

H.R. 460, the “Crack-Cocaine Equitable Sentencing Act of 2007,” would:

• Amend the Controlled Substances Act and the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act to make sentencing requirements for trafficking in, possession, importation, or distribution of crack cocaine the same as those requirements for powder cocaine-related offenses;
• Make an individual’s first offense for possession of crack cocaine exempt from the existing federal mandatory minimum sentencing structure;
• Require that the United States Sentencing Commission promulgate amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines that reflect these changes after this legislation is signed into law.

Congressman Rangel first introduced legislation to remove the distinction between sentencing for powder and crack cocaine in 1993 and has introduced similar legislation in each consecutive Congressional session.  Those who support changing the sentencing requirements for crack cocaine-related offenses have argued that the inequity in sentences has had an extremely severe and disproportionate impact on communities of color and on low-income individuals.

H.R. 79, the “Powder-Crack Cocaine Penalty Equalization Act of 2007,” would amend the Controlled Substances Act and the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act to make sentencing requirements for trafficking in, possession, importation, or distribution of powder cocaine the same as the current requirements for crack cocaine-related offenses.

After introduction, both H.R. 460 and H.R. 79 were referred to the House Judiciary, and Energy and Commerce Committees where the bills await review.  Text and status of both bills can be found at: http://thomas.loc.gov/. 

“CLEAN TOWN Act of 2007” Would Create National Registry and Notification System for Individuals Convicted of Certain Drug Offenses

On January 5th, Representative Stevan Pearce (R-NM) introduced H.R. 304, the “Communities Leading Everyone Away from Narcotics Through Online Warning Notification (CLEAN TOWN) Act of 2007.”  H.R. 304 would establish a registry of individuals convicted of a variety of drug offenses and would establish guidelines and incentives for States to maintain such databases. 

H.R. 304 would require the establishment of jurisdiction-wide registries and would penalize jurisdictions that fail to comply by withholding a percentage of the federal crime control funds they receive through the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act.  The bill provides limited authority to exempt certain convicted individuals from the registry, includes provisions that would limit the amount of information made available to the public, and provides for alternative compliance procedures where the law would violate the jurisdiction’s constitution.  The registries would contain a range of information about the individual who committed the offense, and the length of registration would depend on the number of drug-related convictions the individual has acquired.  In addition, H.R. 304 would require the Attorney General to establish a national criminal drug dealer registry and notification program.  The FBI would be required to maintain a national database and jurisdictions would also maintain subsequent databases individually. 
 
Under H.R. 304, individuals convicted of any criminal offense for manufacturing, distributing, dispensing, or possessing with the intent to manufacture, distribute, or dispense a controlled substance would be required to:

• Register their residence and places of employment and education first before completing their sentences and  
• Annually provide a social security number, home address, place of employment and school, as well as license plate number and vehicle description to the registry

Registries established by the bill would include:

• A physical description of the individual
• An explanation of the offense the person committed for which they are required to register
• The individual’s criminal history, including the date of all arrests and convictions and the status of his/her parole, probation, or supervised release
• A current photograph
• A set of fingerprints and palm prints
• A photocopy of a valid driver’s license or identification card, and any other information required by the Attorney General.  

H.R. 304 does include a number of possible exemptions.  H.R. 304 would allow a jurisdiction to exempt individuals from the registration requirements for their first conviction in exchange for their substantial assistance in the investigation or prosecution of another person who has committed an offense.  Although the bill provides that jurisdictions should make the registry information available to the public through an internet website, H.R. 304 requires that jurisdictions must exempt the individual’s social security number, arrests that did not lead to conviction, and any other information that the Attorney General determines should be withheld.  Additional optional exemptions include information about other convictions not related to the offense for which registration is required and the name of the individual’s employer and school. 

Individuals would be required to keep their registration information current for the full registration period beginning on the date of whichever of the following is most recent: the date of conviction, the date on which they are released from prison, or the date on which they are placed on parole, supervised release, or probation.  The length of time that a person would be required to be on the register would depend on the number of convictions.  An individual who has been convicted of an applicable offense for the first time would be required to be registered for five years and a second conviction would result in a requirement of registration for ten years.  A person convicted more than twice for an applicable offense would be required to be registered for life.
 
H.R. 304 has three Republican co-sponsors and is awaiting review in the House Judiciary Committee.  Text and status of H.R. 304 can be found at: http://thomas.loc.gov. 

Legislation to Reduce the Spread of Sexually Transmitted Infections
in Correctional Facilities Introduced in the House

On January 4th, Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-CA) introduced H.R. 178, the “Justice for the Unprotected against Sexually Transmitted Infections among the Confined and Exposed (JUSTICE) Act of 2007.”  H.R. 178 seeks to slow the spread of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) including HIV/AIDS, and viral hepatitis in correctional facilities and among people reentering the community from the criminal justice system.  Correctional facilities including prisons, penitentiaries, adult detention facilities, juvenile detention facilities, and jails would be covered by this legislation.

The JUSTICE Act would require the Attorney General to:

• Direct the Bureau of Prisons to allow community organizations to distribute sexual barrier protection devices and to engage in counseling and prevention education on STIs in federal correctional facilities; such community organizations would be required to offer sexuality education that is evidence-based, free from bias and comprehensive and includes information about abstinence and the proper use and disposal of sexual barrier protection devices
• Survey all Federal and State correctional facilities annually for five years and issue reports to Congress and the public with the results; the Attorney General would be prohibited from requesting or retaining the identity of any person who has sought or been offered counseling, treatment, testing or prevention education information regarding an STI or who has tested positive for an STI.  The survey would review a number of critical issues, including:

o The type of prevention education, information or training offered to incarcerated people and correctional facility staff about sexual violence and the spread of STIs

o Whether the correctional facility tests incarcerated people for STIs or gives them the option to undergo such testing at intake, on a regular basis and prior to release

o The number of incarcerated people who are tested for STIs and the outcome of such tests at each correctional facility;

o Whether incarcerated people are informed prior to release about STI-related services or other health services in their communities, including free and low-cost counseling and treatment options

• In consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, State officials and community organizations, develop and implement a five-year strategy to reduce the prevalence and spread of STIs in Federal and State correctional facilities, including plans for:

o Improving prevention education, information and training offered to incarcerated people   and correction facility staff, including information and training on sexual violence and the spread of STIs, and comprehensive sexuality education

o Expanding access to sexual barrier protection devices in correctional facilities

o Testing incarcerated people for STIs during intake, regular health exams and prior to release, including ensuring that people testing positive for STIs receive post-test counseling, care, treatment and supportive services

o Ensuring that correctional facilities have the necessary medicine and equipment to treat and monitor STIs

 

o Establishing and strengthening linkages to local communities and   health facilities that provide counseling, testing, care, and treatment services for people upon release from incarceration

Following its introduction, H.R. 178 was referred to the House Judiciary Committee where the legislation awaits review.  Full text and status of the JUSTICE Act can be found at: http://thomas.loc.gov/. 

“Good Time” Alternative Release Policy for Certain Incarcerated People Convicted of Nonviolent Offenses Proposed

On January 5th, H.R. 261, the “Federal Prison Bureau Nonviolent Offender Relief Act of 2007” was introduced by Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX).  H.R. 261 would provide an alternative release date for certain people in prison who were convicted of nonviolent offenses.  Under H.R. 261, federal law would be amended to direct the Bureau of Prisons, pursuant to a good time policy, to release an incarcerated person who has served one half or more of his or her term of imprisonment if that individual has:

• Reached age 45
• Never been convicted of a crime of violence; and 
• Not engaged in any violation, involving violent conduct, of institutional disciplinary regulations.

After its introduction, H.R. 261 was referred to the House Judiciary Committee where the legislation awaits review.  Additional information about H.R. 261, including the legislation’s text and status, can be found at: http://thomas.loc.gov/. 

Bipartisan Legislation to Create Incentives for States to Improve Health Care Systems and Better Address the Needs of People without Health Insurance
Introduced in Both the House and the Senate

On January 17th, legislation aimed at creating a partnership between the federal, State, local and tribal governments, and private payers and health care providers to seek an innovative health care system and address the large number of people in this country without health insurance was introduced in both the House and the Senate.  Stated goals of the legislation include: increasing health coverage and access; ensuring that patients receive high-quality, appropriate health care; improving the efficiency of health care spending; and testing alternatives such as public or private health systems.  Senators Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and George Voinovich (R-OH) introduced S. 325, the “Health Partnership Act.”  Companion legislation, the “Health Partnership Through Creative Federalism Act,” was introduced in the House by Representatives Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), John Tierney (D-MA) and Tom Price (R-GA).
 
Both of these pieces of legislation would set up a grant program through which States or certain regions of States could apply for federal funds to implement, expand and improve current health programs.  The legislation’s sponsors identified a number of different approaches States could take, including utilizing tax credits, expanding the Medicaid program or SCHIP (State Children’s Health Insurance Program), and using pooling arrangements, single-payer systems, health savings accounts or a combination of these or other options. 

States wishing to participate would submit an application to a bipartisan State Health Innovation Commission (“Commission”) that would consider State applications. Members would be appointed to the Commission, including the Secretary of Health and Human Services, a number of State governors, legislators, county officials, mayors and a number of individuals selected by the bipartisan leadership of both chambers of Congress.  State applications would be required to include a health care plan with the goal of improvement in coverage, quality and cost.  Applications would also be required to provide a methodology for the appropriate use of health information technology to help improve the availability of medical data to providers and patients and other health information systems. 

Under the legislation, projects would be approved for five years and could be extended for subsequent five year periods upon the approval of the Commission.  The legislation authorizes as much funding as is necessary for each of the fiscal years.  At the end of the five-year period, the Commission would submit to Congress a list of recommended State projects that represent a variety of approaches. 

Following introduction, S. 325 was referred to the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, and H.R. 506 was referred to the House Energy and Commerce and Rules Committees where the pieces of legislation await review.  H.R. 506 currently has 28 bipartisan co-sponsors.  Information about both pieces of legislation, including text, status, co-sponsors and introductory remarks, can be found at: http://thomas.loc.gov.