Time for drug-law change

Op ed by Troy Williams, published in Fayetteville Observer, October 27, 2013.

The United States has the highest documented incarceration rate in the world, largely due to misguided drug laws.

In the 25 years since the passage of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act, the United States prison population rose from around 300,000 to more than 2 million.

Imprisoning millions of people for nonviolent drug offenses has turned debilitated addicts into debilitated convicts. Without doubt, the present drug policy of today's criminal justice system is a major feeder into the African-American and Latino prison/jail population.

Crack is the only drug that carries a mandatory prison sentence for first-offense possession. For example, a person convicted in federal court of possession of 5 grams of crack will automatically receive a five-year sentence. The result is extremely severe prison terms for low-level offenders, who are two out of every three crack offenders.

Back in August, Attorney General Eric Holder announced a policy shift that will avoid charging low-level and nonviolent drug offenders with crimes that carry mandatory minimums and give U.S. Attorneys throughout the country a greater amount of prosecutorial discretion for certain defendants - those without ties to large-scale organizations, gangs and cartels.

At some point, America is going to have to realize mass incarceration of low-level drug offenders is a poor solution to the challenge of problematic drug use. We need to identify and promote health-centered alternatives to harmful, punitive drug laws.

Money laundering is the biggest part of the drug trade, and criminals use large, global banks to handle their money-laundering needs. Several of the banks that drug lords and terrorists frequently use are based in the United States. And here's the problem: The Department of Justice has decided those banks are too big to prosecute to the full extent of the law, though why this also gets bank employees and executives a free pass remains a mystery. There may be fines, but the largest financial companies are unlikely to face criminal actions or meaningful sanctions.

Holder testified before a Senate Judiciary panel, saying, "I am concerned that the size of some of these institutions becomes so large that it does become difficult for us to prosecute them when we are hit with indications that if we do prosecute - if we do bring a criminal charge - it will have a negative impact on the national economy, perhaps even the world economy."

This is where the absurd begins. Some kid gets caught selling crack cocaine, and the chances are good he or she will go to jail. If they do it repeatedly, they could wind up going to jail for life.

But drug lords can funnel billions in drug money through our banks, violating federal anti-money-laundering laws or violating international trade sanctions, and the company pays a fine, and parties on both sides of the transaction go home and sleep safely in their own beds instead of a prison cell.

If the people at the top levels of the war on drugs are "too big to jail," why are we still arresting street-level dealers and acting as though we are making a difference?

Last March, during the Senate Judiciary panel investigating the matter, a member of the U.S. Senate reported that one bank that dealt solely with money from drug cartels and terrorists, said money-laundering drug lords believe they have nothing to fear from the U.S. government. The conclusion is this: The legal banking sectors in this country are swilling hundreds of billions of dollars - the blood money from the murderous drug trade in Mexico and other places around the world - and are essentially being protected by the U.S. taxpayer.

I spent seven years working as a drug agent for the Sheriff's Office in this community. At one point, I was assigned as a special federal marshal with a crime task force with DEA and the FBI, and I know firsthand the dangers in this line of work. My decisions regarding reform of current drug laws and the decriminalization of marijuana are personally difficult, but I believe necessary.

Making a marijuana arrest for a simple possession case could easily not be considered real police work anymore. Marijuana is probably the No. 1 reason police use to search motorists. The odor alone gives them probable cause to search you, your car or your home. With the limited resources law enforcement has, misdemeanor marijuana arrests inevitably divert cops from other, more important aspects of policing.

Last week, for the first time, a Gallup poll found a majority of Americans, 58 percent, favor legalizing marijuana. That number was just 12 percent in 1969, when Gallup first asked the question. Thirty-eight percent of Americans surveyed this year said they had tried the drug. Marijuana's illegality has done very little to stop its use. If you support the current system of drug prohibition, you support the same thing the drug cartels support. It's time for change.