Last weekend, college students from across the country converged on the nation’s capital for the 10^th Annual Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) National Conference, and among them were 10 students from Franklin Pierce University in Rindge, NH.  On Friday, Nov. 21, over 250 students swarmed Capitol Hill for scheduled meetings with their Congressmen and Senators.  Their issue du jour?  The 100-1 sentencing disparity for crack vs. powder cocaine.

This sentencing disparity was created in 1986 by legislation which followed the overdose death of basketball star Len Bias.  In the midst of that period’s drug war hysteria, which was already marked by media reports of “crack babies” and tales of violent acts, politicians quickly concluded that crack cocaine was a menace far worse than powder.  22 years later, a mere five grams of crack still triggers a five year mandatory minimum sentence, while it takes 500 grams of powder cocaine to trigger the same sentence.  Of all illegal drugs, only crack carries a federal mandatory minimum sentence for simple possession, and this remains the case even though today it is widely understood that crack and powder cocaine are indisputably the same substance.

As we too often see when politicians rush to judgment, the singling out of crack in 1986 was based more on hype than on facts.  Bias, it turned out, used powder cocaine the night he died, but the media did a poor job spreading that information.  And yes, babies born to crack-addicted mothers faced challenges, but the effects of drinking legal alcohol are actually much more devastating for a developing fetus. 

The good news is that neither form of cocaine has ever caught on with the bulk of the population.  Harsh punishments may have had some effect, but the mounting pile of dead celebrities probably served as a more effective deterrent to prospective hard drug users.  To rebellious youth, breaking a law can be half the fun, but nobody wants to end up like Len Bias, John Belushi, or Janis Joplin.  That quit being cool a long time ago.

Unfortunately, maintaining such disproportionate penalties against a form of cocaine used primarily by the urban poor has created a slew of unintended consequences.  These consequences quickly became clear to the U.S. Sentencing Commission, which has been recommending that Congress equalize the crack-powder disparity since 1995.  Rather than focusing limited federal resources on catching kingpins, the policy has resulted in mandatory minimum sentences for addicts and low-level dealers.  This is a much better deal for the prison guards’ unions than it is for the taxpayer.

After a morning training session at the University of Maryland campus, all these arguments and more went with SSDP members into the various Congressional office buildings.

I was able to join 7 FPU students for their 1:30 meeting with Christopher Gahan, Legislative Director and General Counsel for Sen. Judd Gregg.  Gahan listened attentively as FPU chapter president Lisa Dougherty explained that the sentencing disparity has resulted in unfair, disproportionate punishments for minority populations.  Gahan did not take a position on the issue, but he thanked the students for coming to express their views and promised to follow the proposed legislation closely.  What’s more, he surprised us by admitting that Sen. Gregg’s office had never before been lobbied to reduce a drug penalty.

Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the group’s meeting with Congressman Paul Hodes’ staff, but the students said they were pleased with that encounter as well.  What impressed me most about the students from FPU and elsewhere was the zeal with which they took on an aspect of drug policy that, frankly, has little effect on college campuses.  Agree or disagree, these young adults are asking tough questions about the drug war, and their intent is to make the world a better place.  Will Congress listen?