Cocaine Blues

Today Congress is finally considering addressing the disparity in crack vs. powder-cocaine sentencing. Please take a moment or two out of your day to encourage them to do so by calling the US Capitol (202.224.3121) and asking to speak to your Congressional Rep. Ask him or her to support HR 3245, the Fairness in Cocaine Sentencing Act of 2009. In July 2009, the House Judiciary Committee voted favorably on the Act. This is the next step and it needs your support.

For those of you who have been living under a rock for the last 20 years (no crack-related pun intended, kids… heh), sentencing disparities in cocaine-related cases are a significant contributor to prison overcrowding, state budget crises, and racial disparities in the criminal justice system. The origin of all of this is the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 and 1988. In it, Congress created the notorious 100 to 1 rule. In essence, it takes 100 times the amount of powder cocaine to trigger the same mandatory sentence as a given amount of crack-cocaine. So, for example, getting caught with 50 grams of crack (approximately the weight of a candy bar) will net you a 10 year prison sentence. However, it would take a whopping 5,000 grams of powder cocaine to produce the same sentence. Now, here’s the catch. The dosage amount of crack (that is, the amount of crack you’d have to use to get high) weighs more than the dosage amount of powder cocaine. You with me? So it’s not as if 50 grams of crack is in any way analogous to 5,000 grams of powder cocaine in terms of how many dosage amounts it represents. Further, because crack actually weighs more, it’s not even the case that 50 grams of crack is the equivalent of 50 grams of powder. Think of the 50 ounces of beer vs. 50 ounces of whiskey. Not even comparable, right? Although it’s not a perfect analogy, it’s close enough to make the point. The 100 to 1 rule is utterly irrational in terms of dosage amounts.

It is also irrational with respect to other aspects of pharmacology. The only difference between crack and powder cocaine is that crack contains a number of impurities. It is, in essence, a dirty form of powder cocaine. Because it is smoked, the high is more intense and shorter-lived. A powder cocaine high builds gradually and lasts longer. But the drug is the identical. The body metabolizes it in exactly the same way. It is not the case that crack is “more addictive” than cocaine or that it transforms users into homicidal maniacs. These are myths that 23 years of scientific research has found absolutely zero support for.

Irrational laws are undesirable for a lot of reasons. In this case, though, it is an irrational law that has proven incredibly costly to American taxpayers. The vast majority of people getting sentenced under the law aren’t drug kingpins. They’re not even the major players who’ve got 5,000 grams of powder to tote around in their briefcases. Nope, they’re the poor saps shuffling around with a couple of grams of crack-cocaine in their socks. Let me tell you, a dude who has a few grams of crack isn’t a hustler or a player or a dealer. He’s still living with his parents and bumming cigarettes off strangers. And, in case you’re worried he’s going to rob you for cash to pay for the crack… don’t fret. Crack is such a cheap drug there’s no need for abusers to go to the trouble of robbery. Panhandling is often more than sufficient to generate the amount needed to buy a rock or two. Trust me, I know. I spent most of my time in graduate school interviewing crack users and hanging out with them on the street. And while crack users are a lot of things, they aren’t worth the $25,000 per year price tag it costs American taxpayers to keep them locked up.

In addition to the economic costs associated with funding an utterly irrational set of laws, there is also a very real set of social and political costs. African Americans represent about 82% of persons sentenced to federal prisons for crack-related offenses. Studies consistently find racial differences expressed across powder and crack-related arrests. Whites, for example, are more likely to be arrested for possession of powder cocaine while African Americans are more likely to be arrested for crack-cocaine. Because the penalties are much greater for crack-cocaine, it means African Americans are doing, on average, much more prison time than whites (about 37 months more, according to one study). That, my friends, is very clearly a form of de facto racial discrimination and one that is not consistent with 14^th Amendment protections or a democratic society.

Want more info? Check out the Sentencing Project’s website and read the US Sentencing Commission Report.