[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 54 (Tuesday, May 5, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4359-S4361]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. ABRAHAM (for himself, Mr. Allard, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Thurmond, 
        Mr. Enzi, Mr. Helms, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Coverdell, and Mr. 
        Hagel):
  S. 2033. A bill to amend the Controlled Substances Act with respect 
to penalties for crimes involving cocaine, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on the Judiciary.


      the powder cocaine mandatory minimum sentencing act of 1998

  Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the ``Powder Cocaine 
Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Act,'' along with Senator Allard and other 
Senators whose names I will be submitting in a moment.
  This legislation will toughen sentences for drug dealers caught 
peddling powder cocaine.
  I believe it is crucial, given our continuing struggle in the war on 
drugs, that we send an unwavering and unambiguous message to all 
Americans, and our children in particular, that the sale of illegal 
drugs is dangerous, wrong, and will not be tolerated.
  As the father of three young children, I am deeply disturbed by 
recent trends in drug use. Indeed, since 1992 Washington has been 
losing important ground in the war on drugs. Let me cite just a few of 
the alarming facts:
  Over the past five years, the average number of federal drug 
defendants prosecuted has dropped by almost 1500 cases from the 1992 
level. And the average number of drug convictions has gone down by a 
similar amount since 1993.
  The drug interdiction budget was cut by 39 percent from 1992 to 1996 
and drug surveillance flights were cut in half.
  The impact on our kids has been serious. In the last six years, the 
percentage of high school seniors admitting that they had used an 
illicit drug has risen by more than half.
  Incredibly, 54 percent of the Class of 97 had used an illicit drug by 
graduation.
  For 10th graders during that same time, drug use has doubled.
  And--perhaps worst of all--nearly 20 percent of our 8th graders use 
illegal drugs.
  Faced with this bad news, this year the Administration finally 
submitted a comprehensive long range National Drug Strategy to 
Congress.
  Unfortunately, it took them nearly five years to take this step. And, 
as the numbers show, our children have been paying the price.
  What is more, when it comes to one crucial part of the war on drugs--
punishing drug pushers--the Administration wants to move us in the 
wrong direction. It would make the mandatory minimum prison sentences 
for crack cocaine dealers 5 times more lenient than they are today.
  The President would raise, from 5 to 25 grams--that is, from about 50 
to about 250 doses--the amount of crack a person could sell before 
triggering a mandatory 5 year sentence. And he would raise from 50 to 
250 grams the amount of crack a person could sell before triggering a 
mandatory 10 year sentence.
  This would have the effect of lowering sentences for all those who 
deal crack--even though just 2 years ago the President vetoed a similar 
proposal, explaining ``I am not going to let anyone who peddles drugs 
get the idea that the cost of doing business is going down.''
  The President says we need to reduce crack dealer sentences because 
they are too tough compared to sentences for powder cocaine kingpins. I 
agree. It doesn't make sense for people who are higher on the drug 
chain to get lighter sentences than those at the bottom. But going 
easier on crack peddlers--the dealers who infest our school yards and 
playgrounds--is in my judgment the solution.
  Crack is a cheap drug and highly addictive. Tough sentences for crack 
dealers has forced many of them to turn in their superiors in the drug 
trade, in exchange for leniency. Softening these sentences will remove 
that incentive and undermine our prosecutors.
  I might add, in my State of Michigan, if we were to soften these 
sentences, it would create a considerable disparity between the 
mandatory minimums under the State law and the mandatory minimums under 
the Federal law. My prosecutors and local law enforcement officials are 
very concerned about this because it would, in effect, mean that a lot 
of drug dealers they are pursuing will begin making deals with and 
negotiating with Federal prosecutors in order to avoid the tough 
sanctions the people of Michigan have attempted to put into effect.
  I believe there's a better way. We must reject President Clinton's 
proposal to lower sentences for crack dealers. Instead, let's make the 
sentences for powder cocaine dealers a lot tougher.
  I agree with the Administration's view that the differentiation 
between crack and powder sentences is too sharp and should be reduced. 
But I do not agree with its conclusion that therefore we should lower 
sentences for crack dealers.
  We can instead accomplish this entirely by increasing sentences for 
dealing powder cocaine.
  For the sake of our children, I urge President Clinton to abandon his 
plans to lower sentences for crack dealers and instead support 
legislation for tougher sentences on powder dealers.

[[Page S4360]]

  Powder sentences are too low. Powder is the raw material for crack, 
yet sentences for powder dealers were set before the crack epidemic, 
without accounting for powder's role in causing it.
  Moreover, we occasionally see a large powder supplier get a lower 
sentence than the low-level crack dealer who resold some powder in 
crack form, simply because the powder dealer took the precaution of 
selling his product only in powder form.
  That is a genuine disparity that should be remedied, although without 
eliminating the differential altogether.
  That differential should remain, Mr. President, because, as both the 
President and the Sentencing Commission recognize, crack is more 
addictive, more available to minors, and more likely to result in 
violence than is powder cocaine, and hence its sale should continue to 
be punished more harshly.
  That is why today I am introducing the Powder Cocaine Mandatory 
Minimum Sentencing Act.
  This legislation reduces from 500 to 50 grams the amount of powder 
cocaine a person must be convicted of selling before receiving a 
mandatory 5 year minimum sentence.
  By so doing it changes the quantity ratio for powder and crack 
cocaine from 100 to 1 to 10 to 1, the same ratio proposed by the 
Administration and within the range recommended by the Sentencing 
Commission. But this legislation reduces that ratio by getting tougher 
on powder dealers, not by giving a break to crack dealers.
  We owe it to the thousands upon thousands of families struggling to 
protect their children from the scourges of drugs and drug violence to 
stay tough on the criminals who prey on their neighborhoods.
  At this critical time it would be a catastrophic mistake to let any 
drug dealer think the cost of doing business is going down.
  More importantly it will be nearly impossible to succeed in 
discouraging kids from using drugs if they learn we are lowering 
sentences for any drug dealers.
  Protecting our kids means staying tough on those who peddle drugs and 
sending a clear message to our young people that we will not tolerate 
crack dealers in our neighborhoods.
  President Clinton had it right two years ago when he said:

       We have to send a constant message to our children that 
     drugs are illegal, drugs are dangerous, drugs may cost your 
     life--and the penalties for dealing drugs are severe.

  Unfortanately, President Clinton's new plan to reduce sentences for 
crack dealers does not live up to this obligation. It sends our kids 
exactly the wrong message and it does not do any favor to anybody 
except drug pushers.
  In contract, the legislation I am introducing today is faithful to 
this obligation. It achieves a reduction in the disparity between crack 
and powder cocaine sentencing in the right way, through legislation 
making the sentences for powder cocaine dealers a lot tougher.
  By enacting the Powder Cocaine Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Act we 
can send our kids the right message. We will not tolerate crack dealers 
in our neighborhoods, and we will make the sentences on powder cocaine 
dealers a lot tougher.
  Success in the drug war depends above all on the efforts of parents, 
schools, churches, and medical community, local law enforcement 
officials and community leaders. And they are doing a great job in the 
drug fight. But the Federal Government must do its part too.
  Washington has to renew the war on drugs. We must provide needed 
resources, and we must reinforce the message that drugs aren't 
acceptable and that drug dealers belong in prison--for a long time.
  Our kids deserve no less.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.
  At this time, I yield to the Senator from Colorado who, under the 
unanimous consent that we just proposed here, will now take the floor 
and speak on this subject.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, first of all, I thank my good friend, the 
Senator from Michigan, for his very hard work on this particular issue. 
He was working on the issue before I was elected to the Senate and is 
recognized for his efforts to try to control the use of illegal drugs. 
His national reputation precedes my meeting him here in the Senate, so 
the question is, How did I get involved in this particular issue? I got 
involved in this issue because I do hold a lot of town meetings in the 
State of Colorado, the State which I represent. In the inner-city areas 
of the Denver metropolitan area, the issue of discrepancy sentencing 
between powder cocaine and crack cocaine was brought up by the minority 
communities. There were a few members who felt the crack cocaine 
penalties should be less. But, by far, the majority of members in those 
meetings felt we needed to make tougher powder cocaine penalties 
because the crack cocaine penalties were working.
  I also heard some concern from within the judiciary of the State of 
Colorado about the discrepancy between crack and powder cocaine. So 
that is how I got involved in the issue. Then I had introduced some 
legislation to deal with this issue. I had an opportunity to sit down 
with the Senator from Michigan and we have worked out a provision in a 
new bill that I think is the right answer. It does toughen the 
penalties on powder cocaine, brings it more in line with crack cocaine. 
It is a position I support. It is a position I believe the voters of 
Colorado and the people of Colorado, even in the minority communities, 
do support.
  Mr. President, today I rise to address one of the most longstanding 
and racially sensitive disputes in the criminal justice system. 
Senators Abraham, Hatch, Feinstein, Kyl, and I are introducing a bill 
to lessen the disparity between criminal penalties of selling crack and 
powder cocaine.
  Under current law, a seller of 5 grams of crack cocaine receives the 
same mandatory 5-year prison term as a seller of 500 grams of powder 
cocaine. I believe this is inexcusable.
  The disparity between penalties has been scrutinized by the U.S. 
Sentencing Commission, Congress, and the Clinton administration for the 
last several years. Recommendations by the administration and U.S. 
Sentencing Commission have called for lessening the penalties for crack 
dealers, bringing them closer to the lax penalties applied to powder 
offenders.
  Our legislation rejects the administration's harmful solution. 
Lowering the penalty for crack to make it equal to powder cocaine 
penalties goes against our Nation's conviction to send a strong message 
to drug dealers: If you sell drugs, you are going to have to face 
serious consequences.
  The Powder Cocaine Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Act increases the 
mandatory penalties for dealing powder cocaine to 50 grams receiving a 
5-year minimum sentence, bringing it closer to crack's stiff sentence 
of 5 grams for a minimum of 5 years.
  The disparity ratio of powder to crack cocaine will be a 10-to-1 
ratio under our bill instead of the 100-to-1 ratio. This is the same 
number ratio recommended, by the way, by the commission and by the 
administration. This correction goes a long way in reforming the unjust 
disparity that we see now.
  Critics of current law remind us that cocaine dealers carry powder 
cocaine, leaving customers the risk of converting to crack. The very 
core of the drug crisis in the United States begins with the arrogance 
of drug traffickers who have found a way to ``work the system.'' Our 
bill will destroy the ease drug dealers now enjoy as they choose to 
traffic their drug in powder form alone. No longer will the penalty 
price for dealing powder be a bargain for drug traffickers. The safe 
option for dealing cocaine will no longer exist.
  During the 1980s, Congress legislated steep consequences for crack 
cocaine. The crack epidemic was plaguing our Nation with high crime 
rates and unprecedented statistics of addiction, and it warranted 
several drastic legal reforms. We saw the destruction wrought on entire 
communities by this cheap and highly addictive form of cocaine and 
realized that tough penalties were needed to restrict its availability.
  These tougher sentences were needed, but the problem we are seeing 
today is that powder cocaine sentences were set before the crack 
epidemic began. They don't reflect the influence powder has had on 
crime and drug trafficking.
  It is time to admit that the penalty for powder cocaine must change. 
The

[[Page S4361]]

notion that powder cocaine is not dangerous is simply false. A Rocky 
Mountain News reporter was killed 2 years ago when an heir to one of 
Colorado's largest fortunes, high on powder cocaine, plowed his sports 
car into the reporter's car. Ask the wife and son of this young 
reporter if they think the penalty for powder cocaine should be 100 
times less than that of crack.
  Law enforcement officials, including drug enforcement detectives in 
both Denver and Washington, DC, have encouraged me to pursue passage of 
this legislation. The National Headquarters for the Fraternal Order of 
Police issued a statement several weeks ago saying:

       The current disparities in the sentencing are unjust and do 
     not provide law enforcement with the tools they need to 
     restrict the sale of powder cocaine.
       The overwhelming majority of violent crime in this country 
     is drug related. We need to do more to get and keep dealers 
     of drugs, whatever the form, off the streets. Your bill will 
     help us do it.

  The U.S. Attorney for the District of Colorado, Henry Solano, 
supports this legislative concept saying:

       The law enforcement community learned years ago that the 
     strong sentences meted out to crack cocaine dealers has had a 
     significant deterrent effect on the production and 
     distribution of crack.
       Senator Allard's proposed penalty for powder cocaine will 
     likewise restrict the flow of powder cocaine in this country.

  In light of the numerous proposals introduced to correct this 
problem, I encourage my colleagues to contemplate the alternatives and 
consider how justice is served in this matter. Maintaining the current 
ratio is allowing a wrongful disparity in penalties to continue. It is 
time to act to correct this injustice. I encourage my colleagues to 
support the powder cocaine mandatory minimum sentence bill.
  I yield the remainder of my time to the Senator from Michigan.
  Mr. ABRAHAM addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
  Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I just have one or two additional 
comments to make before yielding the floor.
  In the process of putting together this legislation which we 
introduce today, I had the occasion to speak to a number of people in 
the law enforcement community in our State, as well as individuals who 
have been touched in some way or another by the crack cocaine epidemic. 
There are two or three points I would like to enter into the Record at 
this point, in conjunction with our legislation, that are drawn from 
some of the comments I have heard.
  One of them I have already mentioned, and that is the concerns local 
law enforcement people have that if we change the crack minimum 
mandatory threshold at the Federal level, it will create a problem in 
our State, and probably in a lot of other States where there are very 
tough mandatory minimums for crack dealing, because it will give people 
who are criminal defendants the option of going into the Federal system 
to avoid tough State-level penalties. I don't think we want to do that.
  Second, it was pointed out to me that the 5-gram trigger which 
currently exists for crack is very appropriate for the simple reason 
that most drug dealers who at least deal in crack cocaine do so in very 
small quantities; that there are very, very, very few crack cocaine 
dealers who are ever dealing in quantities such as 25 grams where they 
can be found in possession of and dealing at that level. In fact, what 
happens is that they essentially hide their crack cocaine stash in 
locations that are very hard to trace to the dealer and carry around 
quantities in the 5-gram level, which is why the mandatory minimum is, 
in fact, only appropriate.
  A third point that was made to me is the fact that by having this 
tough mandatory minimum in place at the Federal level, as well as in 
our State, at the State level, we have been very successful, through 
the safety valve process that exists in the Federal legislation, in 
getting people at the lower end of the drug chain, the crack dealer at 
the 5-gram level confronted with the possibility of a very severe 
prison sentence, to begin cooperating with authorities in exchange for 
the benefits to be received under the safety valve, to, in fact, begin 
to allow law enforcement to pursue people further up the drug chain.

  Increasing the threshold for the crack mandatory minimum, as the 
administration has proposed and consistent with the sentencing 
commission's recommendations, will affect very dramatically, it is 
believed by at least the law enforcement people in my State, the level 
of cooperation people will have, because in individual transactions 
they will be dealing below that 25-gram level and, therefore, not 
confronted with the 5-year mandatory minimum threat, consequently, not 
nearly in the same position of jeopardy as is the case today. It means, 
in fact, that we might have less cooperation, less ability to pursue 
the people who are the drug lords rather than those who are at the 
dealer level.
  Finally, again, I want to talk, as I said, about some of the contact 
we have had with the people who are victims. When we have talked to 
those people to the extent we have, it doesn't really matter--Senator 
Allard alluded to the racial disparity and it is a very significant 
issue that we are trying to address with our bill--but I have not found 
people, regardless of their race, whose children have been touched by a 
crack cocaine dealer who don't want to see the person responsible 
suffer consequences.
  Their families are suffering consequences, their school yards are 
suffering consequences, their neighborhoods are suffering consequences. 
They believe that the people behind it --whether it is the peddler in 
the school yard or the kingpin selling the powder cocaine--ought to 
suffer the consequences, as well.
  The way to do that, in my judgment, Mr. President, and the reason 
Senator Allard and I are here today, is to make it tougher on the drug 
kingpins and make it no easier on anybody involved in this heinous 
activity. We hope our colleagues will join us in this legislation.
  We think the arguments for it, as we have attempted to lay it here 
today, should be ones that are persuasive as they have been persuasive 
to us.
                                 ______