letter to senator's vote: not rolliing back coke jail time
Posted: November 27th, 2007, 10:18 am
MARTINEZ CALLS RETROACTIVE DRUG DEALER SENTENCE ROLLBACK MISGUIDED
November 20, 2007 - WASHINGTON - U.S. Senator Mel Martinez (R-FL) has asked the United States Sentencing Commission not to apply a recent crack cocaine sentencing amendment retroactively. Martinez pointed out that applying the amendment could result in the release of approximately 20,000 drug dealers nationally and nearly 1,500 in Florida.
“Releasing serious drug dealers at the same time that communities are experiencing increases in violent crime is dangerous and misguided,” said Martinez. “Retroactive application of sentencing guidelines will threaten public safety and usurp Congress’ authority to perform a thorough, democratic review of the issue.”
The U.S. Sentencing Commission held a hearing on November 13th to consider retroactive application of a recent sentencing amendment that reduces future crack cocaine sentences. The Commission could vote on the issue soon.
###
Latest News!
Transcript - Public Hearing on Retroactivity
The transcript from the November 13, 2007, public hearing is now available.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Comment on Retroactivity
During the public comment period ending November 1, 2007, the Sentencing Commission received comment from the judiciary, the executive branch, interested organizations, members of the defense bar, and individual citizens. In addition to the public commentaccessible through this link, the Commission received more than 33,000 letters from individuals expressing their views on retroactivity, which are available to the public in accordance with the Commission's Public Access Policy.
catalogue of public comments
in addition, here is my letter to the good senator, Mel Martinez, Republickin
Florita
who was in law school at Florita State while i was in Nam
and his kids are among the elite as well
nice going, Melvino
Senator, you should get out of the box on this one. We spend too much money on prisons for drug offenders and have a poor return rate. We should, instead, invest our precious moneys in functional ways, including community rehabilitation programs.
The way you are thinking is retroactive and will not result in any progress; this will only maintain an already failed system of re-incarceration with a burgeoning prison-industrial complex, while the social ills that produce despair and drug usage continue unabated.
Furthermore, the disproportional sentencing of crack cocaine compared with the more affluent cocaine usage is absurd. Why can wealthy drug users get off more easily? One reason is, of course, lawyers. The other reason is that they have access to drug rehabilitation programs and other resources to help them to recover and change. The reasons for affluent drug abusers is a different category from lower income drug usage. Poor people use it as an escape from a plethora of social ills. Rehabilitation must include health maintenance clinics, educational rehabilitation, and job-educational opportunities. These options are less expensive and more fruitful than the current misuse of taxpayer dollars through the dysfunctional and repetitive imprisonment for profit scheme.
As a Vietnam veteran, who experienced a long and dark period with alcohol abuse and marijuana use, as well as dabbling in speed and mescaline, and acid, and once cocaine, and tobacco, I can tell you like nobody's business that being straight is the best way. These individuals deserve better than the vote that you cast, and I am hopeful that you will reconsider more beneficial options.
Releasing drug dealers back onto the streets, as you are so fearful to do, means allowing human beings as opportunity to heal, given the opportunity and dedication. But you so-called conservatives have your heads in the sand and your pocketbooks in your eyes; you are blinded to a pseudo-fiscal responsibility, because you only see profit and loss with limited imagination. There is a lot more, of course. I served for your so-called freedom to be dumb and re·cid·i·vis·tic in your own way. You may be a senator, but as a man, you are no better than the least of those who you condemn.
Respectfully, (jimbolocoroccocco)
November 20, 2007 - WASHINGTON - U.S. Senator Mel Martinez (R-FL) has asked the United States Sentencing Commission not to apply a recent crack cocaine sentencing amendment retroactively. Martinez pointed out that applying the amendment could result in the release of approximately 20,000 drug dealers nationally and nearly 1,500 in Florida.
“Releasing serious drug dealers at the same time that communities are experiencing increases in violent crime is dangerous and misguided,” said Martinez. “Retroactive application of sentencing guidelines will threaten public safety and usurp Congress’ authority to perform a thorough, democratic review of the issue.”
The U.S. Sentencing Commission held a hearing on November 13th to consider retroactive application of a recent sentencing amendment that reduces future crack cocaine sentences. The Commission could vote on the issue soon.
###
Latest News!
Transcript - Public Hearing on Retroactivity
The transcript from the November 13, 2007, public hearing is now available.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Comment on Retroactivity
During the public comment period ending November 1, 2007, the Sentencing Commission received comment from the judiciary, the executive branch, interested organizations, members of the defense bar, and individual citizens. In addition to the public commentaccessible through this link, the Commission received more than 33,000 letters from individuals expressing their views on retroactivity, which are available to the public in accordance with the Commission's Public Access Policy.
catalogue of public comments
in addition, here is my letter to the good senator, Mel Martinez, Republickin
Florita
who was in law school at Florita State while i was in Nam
and his kids are among the elite as well
nice going, Melvino
Senator, you should get out of the box on this one. We spend too much money on prisons for drug offenders and have a poor return rate. We should, instead, invest our precious moneys in functional ways, including community rehabilitation programs.
The way you are thinking is retroactive and will not result in any progress; this will only maintain an already failed system of re-incarceration with a burgeoning prison-industrial complex, while the social ills that produce despair and drug usage continue unabated.
Furthermore, the disproportional sentencing of crack cocaine compared with the more affluent cocaine usage is absurd. Why can wealthy drug users get off more easily? One reason is, of course, lawyers. The other reason is that they have access to drug rehabilitation programs and other resources to help them to recover and change. The reasons for affluent drug abusers is a different category from lower income drug usage. Poor people use it as an escape from a plethora of social ills. Rehabilitation must include health maintenance clinics, educational rehabilitation, and job-educational opportunities. These options are less expensive and more fruitful than the current misuse of taxpayer dollars through the dysfunctional and repetitive imprisonment for profit scheme.
As a Vietnam veteran, who experienced a long and dark period with alcohol abuse and marijuana use, as well as dabbling in speed and mescaline, and acid, and once cocaine, and tobacco, I can tell you like nobody's business that being straight is the best way. These individuals deserve better than the vote that you cast, and I am hopeful that you will reconsider more beneficial options.
Releasing drug dealers back onto the streets, as you are so fearful to do, means allowing human beings as opportunity to heal, given the opportunity and dedication. But you so-called conservatives have your heads in the sand and your pocketbooks in your eyes; you are blinded to a pseudo-fiscal responsibility, because you only see profit and loss with limited imagination. There is a lot more, of course. I served for your so-called freedom to be dumb and re·cid·i·vis·tic in your own way. You may be a senator, but as a man, you are no better than the least of those who you condemn.
Respectfully, (jimbolocoroccocco)