[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 86 (Thursday, May 18, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3024-S3025]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM
Mr. SCHUMER. Now, on another matter, Mr. President, criminal justice
reform. Last week, Attorney General Jeff Sessions ordered Federal
prosecutors to ``charge and pursue the most serious readily provable
offense,'' even for low-level drug crimes. Functionally, this means
Federal prosecutors
[[Page S3025]]
will seek the harshest possible penalty even for nonviolent, low-level
drug crimes.
This is a significant reversal from the Obama-era Smart on Crime
Initiative, in which Federal prosecutors were instructed to focus on
more dangerous drug traffickers and avoid charging less-serious
offenders with crimes that required long, mandatory minimum sentences.
As a result of the Obama policies, Federal drug cases dropped by more
than 19 percent between 2012 and 2016, according to the U.S. Sentencing
Commission. Cases with charges carrying longer, mandatory minimum
sentences fell precipitously, from nearly 60 percent in 2012 to 45
percent last year. Thanks in part to this initiative, President Obama
became the first President since Carter to leave the White House with a
smaller Federal prison population than when he took office.
Meanwhile, prosecutions of the more serious crimes--the evil drug
dealers, those who run the drugs, often from out of this country to
here, they are the ones we can really go after and need to go after--
increased by 17 percent and 14 percent, which makes it the way we can
stop these evil drugs from coming into this country.
So that policy was tough on crime and smart on crime. Our law
enforcement agencies have finite resources. They should be focused on
combating violent crimes. When a prosecutor is spending hours in court,
days, for a low-level possession charge and not having the resources to
go after the drug runners, the drug dealers who poison our kids, that
is misplaced priorities.
What Attorney General Sessions has just ordered is the exact opposite
approach of what we need. Instead of giving judges and juries the
discretion to use their judgment in sentencing, it compels prosecutors
to seek as much jail time as they can get for every single offense,
treating low level and high level the same. It is a blunt instrument
that will result in more unnecessary, punitive sentences, overcrowding
of our prisons, and will be less effective in our fight on crime. It
runs completely counter to a bipartisan consensus here in Congress.
Many Members of this body, Democrats and Republicans, agree that
mandatory minimum sentences have led to bloated, costly prisons, and
disproportionately ravaged minority communities.
In the last Congress, a bipartisan group of Senators sought to make
meaningful progress with a sentencing reform proposal that had, among
its cosponsors, a diverse group of Senators, ranging from Senators
Durbin and Booker on the Democratic side to Senators Lee and Paul on
the conservative side. Unfortunately, those efforts to strike a
compromise to bring much needed reform to our Nation's criminal justice
system were derailed by the obstruction of, guess who--then-Senator
Sessions, with the cooperation of the Republican leadership. Now, after
making progress under President Obama and Attorney General Holder,
Attorney General Sessions has chosen to simply revert back to the one-
size-fits-all approach that criminologists, police leaders, and
bipartisan lawmakers have determined is not the right answer.
In order to truly be tough on crime, we must be smart on crime. This
approach is dumb on crime. Congress, of course, still has the power to
legislate this issue. We have the power to override the Attorney
General's decision. So I hope this misguided change in the Department
of Justice's policy revives a bipartisan desire to pursue sentencing
reform. When we look for areas where there can be significant
bipartisan cooperation, this is one of them. I hope Leader McConnell
will choose to pursue it.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I yield the floor.
____________________