SENTENCING REFORM NATIONAL PROGRAM PLANNING CONCURRENCE PROPOSAL

League of Women Voters^®
of the District of Columbia

SENTENCING REFORM NATIONAL PROGRAM PLANNING CONCURRENCE PROPOSAL

SENTENCING REFORM CONCURRENCE PROPOSAL FOR NATIONAL PROGRAM PLANNING & CONVENTION 2012

NATIONAL PROGRAM PLANNING. LWVUS BOARD NOTICE. PROPOSED CONCURRENCE - SENTENCING POLICY. 1982. WHY CONCURRENCE?. ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT. MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES. PLEASE DISTRIBUTE WIDELY.

ALL LEAGUES! PLEASE SUPPORT SENTENCING REFORM

The LWVUS has no position on sentencing reform; therefore, The League of Women Voters of the District of Columbia (LWVDC - Washington, D.C.) and the ad hoc committee on sentencing reform formed at Convention 2010 propose that Convention 2012 adopt through concurrence the following position based on LWVDC positions adopted in 1982 and reaffirmed in 2009.

LWVUS Board Notice of Intent to Propose Concurrence at Convention 2012

From the email sent on April 24, 2012, to State and Local League presidents by the LWVUS Board:
"On the convention floor at Convention 2012 in Washington, D.C., LWVUS will be recommending adoption by concurrence on the floor of convention with the following LWV of the District of Columbia positions on sentencing:
1. The LWVUS believes alternatives to imprisonment should be explored and utilized, taking into consideration the circumstances and nature of the crime.

2. The LWVUS opposes mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses."
Click here to read information, including pros & cons, sent by LWVUS to state and local League presidents via email on April 24, 2012, in compliance with LWVUS Bylaws, Article XII, Sec. 2. Program (c)

PROPOSED CONCURRENCE

"Title: Sentencing Policy
1)The LWVUS believes alternatives to imprisonment should be explored and utilized, taking into consideration the circumstances and nature of the crime.
2) The LWVUS opposes mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses."
CLICK HERE FOR SUMMARY INFORMATION FROM THE AD HOC COMMITTEE
CLICK HERE FOR MORE DETAILED INFORMATION

FINAL REPORT of LWVDC's 1982 STUDY

In 1982, at the height of the crack cocaine epidemic, an Initiative was placed on the DC ballot to require mandatory minimum sentences for certain crimes. After careful review, study and consensus, the DC League agreed to oppose the Initiative. The final report "Study and Action" reviewed the pros and cons. Click here to read the final two-page report.

WHY CONCURRENCE?

League Rules allow Convention to adopt a local or state League's position providing that the position was adopted after study and consensus.
Rule 10 C. Provides for the Procedure for Concurrence at Convention:
1. Proposals for concurrence at convention may be moved for adoption at the Sunday plenary meeting.

2. Debate and action on proposals for concurrence motions shall take place at the same time as debate and action on proposed program. A two-thirds vote is required to adopt the concurrence statement.

ARGUMENTS FOR SUPPORTING ALTERNATIVES TO IMPRISONMENT FOR APPROPRIATE OFFENDERS

ARGUMENTS FOR SUPPORTING ALTERNATIVES TO IMPRISONMENT FOR APPROPRIATE OFFENDERS: Alternatives include drug and mental health courts, halfway houses and day reporting centers, restitution requirements, rehabilitative services, etc. They save taxpayers money. They keep offenders with their families and jobs, instead of in prison or jail with inmates convicted of violent crimes. More information is available from the non-profit organization the Sentencing Project. CLICK HERE FOR INFORMATION FROM THE SENTENCING PROJECT'S WEBSITE

ARGUMENTS FOR OPPOSING MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES FOR DRUG OFFENSES

Harsh mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses have led to an over-representation of drug offenders in the criminal justice system, many of whom are low-level and nonviolent. Restoring judicial discretion in drug cases would allow judges to determine punishments that are proportional to the offenses committed. BACKGROUND: The United States has 5% of the world's population, but 25% of the world's prisoners--it is the world's biggest jailer. More than half the growth in the prison population over the last 30 years is due to changes in sentencing policies that prioritize long, mandatory sentences, including for drug and nonviolent offenses. Mass incarceration has led to huge financial costs to taxpayers, and millions of ex-offenders who carry lifelong, daunting burdens of a criminal record after release. Moreover, appalling racial disparity pervades the criminal justice system, and excessively impacts communities of color. Please recommend concurrence with the two positions proposed above on your response form for the LWVUS so that the LWVUS and all chapters can address sentencing issues, which they cannot do now without undertaking individual state or local chapter studies, since the LWVUS has no position on sentencing except opposition to the death penalty. More information is available from the non-profit organization the Sentencing Project. CLICK HERE FOR INFORMATION FROM THE SENTENCING PROJECT'S WEBSITE

PLEASE DISTRIBUTE THIS INFORMATION WIDELY

CLICK HERE TO PRINT THIS PAGE
CLICK HERE FOR MORE DETAILED INFORMATION
CLICK HERE TO READ THE LWVDC ORIGINAL 1982 REPORT
CLICK HERE FOR INFORMATION FROM THE SENTENCING PROJECT'S WEBSITE

Comments, suggestions, questions? Contact our webmaster. Last revised: May 12, 2012 06:16 PDT.

© Copyright League of Women Voters of the District of Columbia. All rights reserved.