[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 172 (Thursday, November 2, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S16560-S16562]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                            DRUG SENTENCING

  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, in the past month there has been much 
discussion about penalties for crack cocaine and about whether we 
should lower them. Of course, on Tuesday, President Clinton signed 
legislation preventing reduced sentences for crack cocaine from taking 
effect. That was the responsible course of action to take, and he 
should be commended for taking it.
  So I was disturbed to read, in Saturday's New York Times that:

       * * * in Miami, some Federal prosecutors say they have 
     chosen not to charge some crack suspects because they believe 
     the punishment they will face is unduly harsh. [NY Times, 
     October 28, 1995]

  I am sure most Senators will agree that those who violate the law 
must be vigorously prosecuted. Congress enacts the laws and penalties, 
and the Justice Department enforces them. I have written to the 
Attorney General asking whether there is any evidence that crack 
prosecutions--or any other type of prosecutions--are being foregone 
because Federal prosecutors feel the penalties are too harsh.
  The Times's unattributed statement is also troubling in light of the 
fact 

[[Page S 16561]]

that Federal drug prosecutions have slipped more than 12 percent since 
1992--from 25,033 in 1992 to 21,905 in 1995.
  I want to take a couple of minutes to reinforce the reasons why this 
body voted unanimously to block reductions in crack sentences, 
especially since the Washington Post has been attacking President 
Clinton for signing the legislation [President Clinton and Crack, 
November 2, 1995].
  Some basics: penalties for crack are currently two to six times 
higher than for a comparable quantity of powder cocaine--not 100 times 
longer as some have imagined.
  Crack use is associated with the explosion in the most horrifying 
cases of child abuse in recent years. And while drug addiction has long 
been a path to prostitution, crack has created what on the street is 
called the ``freak house'' phenomenon, where female crack addicts 
gather to trade sex for their next $5 piece of crack.
  Crack dealers are notorious for their remorseless killings.
  Crack is a much more powerful psychoactive agent than powder cocaine.
  According to the U.S. Sentencing Commission, the typical dealer is 
caught selling 109 grams of crack--the equivalent of 3,000 rocks.
  The Sentencing Commission tells us that crack defendants are more 
likely to have carried a weapon than other traffickers, and are more 
likely to have had an extensive criminal record at the time of arrest.
  No one, to my knowledge, disputes these basic facts. No one claims 
that those who are convicted are innocent.
  It is true that some low-level crack dealers are being arrested. Yet, 
very few Federal crack defendants are low-level, youthful, and 
nonviolent. According to the U.S. Sentencing Commission, of the 3,430 
crack defendants convicted in 1994, there were just 51 youthful, small-
time crack offenders with no prior criminal history and no weapons 
involvement.
  In other words, despite all the rhetoric, just 1 crack defendant out 
of 67 qualifies as youthful, nonviolent, and low-level. Incidentally, 
under the so-called safety valve provision of last year's Crime Act, 
cases similar to the 51 are now eligible for specially lenient 
sentences.
  We have a situation where, unfortunately, opponents of the sentencing 
regime are dismissing the facts. That is regrettable, especially so 
since the victims of the crack trade are so overwhelmingly concentrated 
among the minority residents of our inner cities.
  For a blunt assessment of crack's effects in the inner city, listen 
to T. Willard Fair, president and CEO of the Urban League of Greater 
Miami:

       [Crack dealers] sell death to my community. They undermine 
     the peace and harmony of my community by virtue of what they 
     choose to do.

  Crack  is not the only problem we are facing, of course. Today, a 
major national  survey is being  released by PRIDE--a parents' group 
headquartered in Atlanta. PRIDE has found dramatic increases in drug 
use among kids. Cocaine is up. Hallucinogens are up.
  Marijuana use is up 111 percent in grades 6-8. It is up 67 percent in 
grades 9-12. One in three high school seniors now smokes marijuana. 
This confirms reporting from other sources that in 1994, the number of 
high-school kids smoking pot hit 2.9 million--nearly 1.3 million more 
than in 1992.
  This chart shows the fruits of our newly permissive attitude toward 
drugs. Among 9-12th graders, marijuana use is up for the 3d straight 
year, from 16.4 percent of students back in the 1991-92 school year to 
28.2 percent of students.
  Like many of my colleagues, I am also concerned at the Clinton 
administration's misguided policy of focusing on hard-core drug 
addicts--people who are very difficult to rehabilitate.
  I am not saying we should not, but our limited funds ought to be 
going to these first-time youthful offenders that we have a chance of 
rehabilitating, not for people who we have virtually no chance of 
rehabilitating.
  One key indicator of the success or failure of such a policy is the 
number of emergency room admissions, because many emergency room cases 
involve addicts and burned-out users. There is a survey instrument that 
studies such cases, and many Members of Congress will have heard of 
it--the Drug Abuse Warning Network, better known as DAWN.
  Members may be surprised to learn that the numbers for DAWN have been 
unaccountably late this year. That is right: The numbers for the first 
half of 1994, which should have been released months ago, are now 
sixteen months old.
  In past years, these numbers have always been released in April. The 
1993 numbers were released on April 11, 1994. The 1992 numbers were 
released on April 23, 1993. The 1991 numbers were released on December 
18 of the same year--less than 5 months after the survey data had been 
collected.
  It  is  my understanding that the administration had planned to 
finally release this data on Friday. It is further my understanding 
that the data will show a large upswing in the use of cocaine and 
methamphetamine.
  Unfortunately, the American people will have to wait a few more days 
for this information. You see, the administration has postponed the 
release of this data until next Tuesday, which just so happens to be 
the day elections are being held in Virginia, New Jersey, Kentucky, 
Louisiana, and Mississippi. In other words, to get past the election, 
or at least that is what it appears to be.
  Voters in these states will not learn of this evidence of failed 
leadership until after election day. What does this tell the American 
people about the Clinton Administration's drug policy?
  And why do we have to wait 16 months for this information when we 
know from past experience that we can get it in less than 5? It is 
intolerable that the Congress has to wait over a year for vital 
information on the present state of our drug problem.
  The administration is aware of the seriousness of this problem. 
According to the Attorney General:

       The latest surveys confirm that despite some recent gains, 
     drug use in the United States is clearly on the upswing once 
     again. The social consequences--of drug use--cannot be 
     reduced of affected by enforcement efforts until our society 
     changes its more tolerant attitude toward drugs. . . .

  Mr. President, the Attorney General called it exactly right. We are 
not going to get anywhere on this problem until we start to change 
attitudes again. The job of changing attitudes belongs to all of us in 
positions of national leadership. It also belongs to the President.
  I have previously indicated that I think President Clinton is AWOL--
absent without leadership--in the war on drugs. Senator Dole and 
Senator Grassley have already been vocal on this issue, on the need to 
bring national attention to bear on just how bad the situation has 
become. We need to revitalize the drug war. In coming months, I will be 
calling on a number of my colleagues to join in this effort.
  I am concerned. By working together, I believe we can reclaim this 
lost ground. Just look at this chart, ``Rate of Youthful Marijuana 
Use.'' And we all know that once they start using marijuana, many of 
them will start trying harder drugs like cocaine, ultimately heroin, 
and so on. In grades 9 through 12, the PRIDE survey shows that we had a 
low here at 16.4 percent in 1991 and 1992, and from that day on it has 
gone up to where it is 28.2 percent.
  Keep in mind, almost all these kids, a high percentage of these kids 
are going to try harder drugs because they think it is a fun thing to 
do after trying marijuana. Marijuana use is up, and it means the other 
harder drug usage will be up as well.
  I wonder what this particular DAWN survey will say, but we will not 
have the privilege of knowing it until after the election this year.
  We have a number of very important elections coming on that Tuesday.
  No matter which way you look at it, you have to be alarmed by this 
problem of more and more kids grades 9 to 12 using marijuana every year 
since 1992.
  Frankly, there is not much leadership in trying to stop them from 
doing so. Mr. President, I am concerned about these problems. I hope 
the administration is concerned. It is about time that they get 
concerned about these problems. We have to do what is right here. We 
have to do what is right, and do what is in the best interests of our 
kids and of our grandchildren and the future of our country. We have to 
start getting very, very tough on drug use in this country.

[[Page S 16562]]

  And for us and this administration to take the limited funds that are 
available, and use them for hard-core drug addicts, instead of these 
kids that need the help now that have a chance of being rehabilitated, 
I think, is basically immoral. If we have enough money left over, sure, 
I am willing to throw it down the drain by trying to help the hard-core 
drug addicts as well. And occasionally you will get one that will do a 
little bit better in treatment, but it is almost none who come through 
that process who are hard-core drug addicts. It is very, very uphill.
  Frankly, with the limited funds we have, we ought to be using them to 
help those kids who need it and are likely to quit using drugs after 
the rehabilitation period starts.
  Mr. President, I hope that the President and others will do more 
about this issue. We have all got to do more about this issue, and I am 
going to continue to speak out until I see some changes in this 
administration and some changes in our government as a whole. I  hope  
that  we will all cooperate in trying do this because this is not a 
Republican/Democrat thing and not a pro-administration, anti-
administration thing.
  These are facts that have to be brought out. Hopefully the 
administration just does not understand, and once they do, will start 
doing more about it. And hopefully the President will use his bully 
pulpit to start fighting these things that are destroying America, 
financing crime and murders throughout this society, and killing our 
kids and their futures well into the future.
  I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor.
  Mr. McCONNELL addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kyl). The Senator from Kentucky is 
recognized for 10 minutes under the previous order.
  (The remarks of Mr. McConnell pertaining to the introduction of S. 
1378 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced 
Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senator from New 
Mexico is recognized for up to 20 minutes.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Thank you, Mr. President.

                          ____________________