Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Rights and Liberties

Feds Bring an Ounce of Sanity to Our Drug Laws with the Second Chance Act

By Malakkar Vohryzek, AlterNet. Posted April 22, 2008.


Why are we still incarcerating people who use controlled substances, when we have ample evidence that this "cure" is worse than the "disease"?
Advertisement

On April 8th, President Bush signed into law the Second Chance Act of 2007. I would like to thank Congress and the President for finally recognizing that most prisoners eventually return home to the families and lives they left behind, and that they need assistance in making this transition.

Unfortunately, our need for re-entry programs is immense because we, as a society, continue to expend enormous resources locking up largely nonviolent people who have drug-related problems. Why are we spending so much money locking up these individuals in the first place? Their crimes - generally adults possessing or distributing prohibited substances -- are largely victimless compared to serious crimes like assault, robbery, rape or murder. Once inside a state or federal prison, these nonviolent people who have broken drug laws -- hardly "hardened criminals" -- often become victims themselves. The Second Chance Act will ease the transition back into society for countless people convicted of drug law violations, so many of whom should never have been sent to prison in the first place.

By now, we've all seen President Bush shed some tears about his own murky past as an alcohol abuser. But his administration has no compassion for people found in similar circumstances who merely chose to self-medicate with different substances. Bush was fortunate to remain out of prison and find salvation and redemption. Most Americans unlucky enough to have substance abuse problems aren't as fortunate. Instead, these people, predominately poor and of color, are sent to prison. In prison, their problematic lives are further compromised by a penal system that reduces their ability to be productive members of society. They suffer, their families suffer and their communities suffer socially and economically.

The Second Chance Act was met with great fanfare and high expectations for its ability to reduce recidivism rates. This is indeed a worthy cause. What is sorely lacking, however, is an honest, open discussion about the abject failure of prohibition and our nation's muddled drug policies. Prohibition demands we lock up people with drug convictions despite a long history of this approach failing to improve society. Instead prohibition creates the very black market system that most people fallaciously assume is endemic to the drugs themselves.

The resulting U.S. gulag, now bursting thanks to nonviolent people with drug-related convictions, is costing us billions of dollars annually and devastating our communities, one person at a time. Today, one in 100 Americans is sitting in federal, state or local prisons and detention centers, according to the latest Pew Report. Recidivism rates suggest that, once we've incarcerated someone with a drug problem, many find themselves trapped in a revolving door pattern with the criminal justice system.

In this respect, the Second Chance Act of 2007 is really more of a second chance for our nation's failed drug policies because it acknowledges that people with problematic relationships with drugs need treatment and other kinds of assistance, not jails and prison records. By signing this act, the President and Congress sent a message that these people need help and should be afforded another opportunity to be productive members of society.

There's an old saying -- an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Why are we still incarcerating people who use controlled substances, when we have ample evidence that this "cure" is worse than the "disease"? Were these individuals offered a second chance prior to being sent to prison, we wouldn't have to worry about reentry or recidivism in the first place. What is really needed is a whole new paradigm: If we weren't making such a big mistake in locking up people with drug problems, we wouldn't need to worry so much about "re-entry" services for them.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: bush, drug laws, second chance act

Malakkar Vohryzek, 32, is a former federal prisoner sentenced to ten years for conspiracy to distribute LSD, currently working at the Drug Policy Alliance.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Yeah, right.......
Posted by: mizipi on Apr 23, 2008 4:54 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anybody that thinks that our prison situation will improve - fairer sentencing laws, second chances...well, anybody that thinks our government will do anything to help the average American is the same anybody who thought Saddam posed a threat. Clinton was impeached for lying in a deposition in a civil lawsuit that had nothing to do with how he ran the government, and now we have scores of politicians, Supreme Court judges and bureaucrats who have knowingly lied to the American public about how our government operates.....I am sick of this whole mess.....New laws will never do anything to help the average American. Our entire government is now on a mission to create two classes of peoples, the haves and the have nots. We are becoming a nation of aristocrats and nobodies. Second chance my ass.......Read our Constitution. SLAVERY is not illegal in the USA, because if someone is duly convicted of a crime in the USA, that person can legally be enslaved and that is one of the reasons our prison population is increasing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Of this you can be sure.
Posted by: LMNOP on Apr 23, 2008 12:56 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't pretend to understand the dynamics underlying this legislation, but of this you can be absolutely certain beyond the slightest inkling of a shadow of a doubt, more certain than you are that the sun will shine tomorrow:

It was not motivated by reason or compassion, but by somebody's ability to make a profit by the legislation. If there happen to be good reasons to enact the legislation, I am ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN (I can't emphasize that enough) that they didn't figure into the enactment calculus. Because America's leadership -political and commercial - doesn't have any agenda or value other than to concentrate wealth and power. Not one.

If you think otherwise, your observational and analytical skill are nonexistant, and you are among the few percent that think that Bush is doing a bang-up job.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Salvation and redemption--bullshit
Posted by: Jim Swanson on Apr 23, 2008 6:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The following quote illustrates why I have stopped donating to DPA: "Bush was fortunate to remain out of prison and find salvation and redemption. Most Americans unlucky enough to have substance abuse problems aren't as fortunate."
Drug use is a normal activity at some time in at least half of all Americans' lives. There is no "sin" involved. "Sins" are religious fictions with absolutely NO basis in reality. Our simplistic, and ignorant, attempts to explain why we, whom many claim are "made in the image of god", are not gods. Humans, similar to other animals, use neurologically active substances for many reasons and 90% of people who use the illegal ones do not become "addicts" (another fiction for most users--and the ones who do have "addiction problems" would have the same basic problems even if these substances did not exist).
As long as we see drug use as "abnormal" we will punish some drug users. GW Bush, Obama, Paterson, and tens of millions of others used these substances and did not become "addicted" nor suffer from them. These fictions are largely used to "control People of Color". The drug laws are driven by Racism, and Religiosity--such as that shown by this author.
Shame, shame, shame on DPA for falling for the religiosity bullshit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» i beg to differ... Posted by: undrgrndgirl
» RE: i beg to differ... Posted by: Jim Swanson
A problem-
Posted by: WizardofOhm on Apr 23, 2008 9:03 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Most Americans unlucky enough to have substance abuse problems aren't as fortunate. Instead, these people, predominately poor and of color, are sent to prison."

The wording here is racist and ignorant. "These people" are not predominately poor and or of color, statistics on drug use (especially in the case of marijuana, the main culprit of innocent incarceration) show that drug use shows no preference beyond sex.

The ones who are imprisoned ARE predominately poor and of color, which is what I believe you were trying to say. Your grammar suggests that you are racist when it is the system that is rascist, and should be corrected.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A problem- Posted by: Malakkar
THE SECOND CHANCE LAW IS TOO LITTLE TOO LATE. THE REAL PROBLEM IS WITH THE DRUG LAWS
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Apr 23, 2008 10:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
themselves. The churchy right wing conservatives and the drug dealers vote to keep the drug laws in place.
George Bush has quietly turned his head as the Texas banks have laundered vast sums of drug money. There is so much money in it that some say that it will be impossible to change.

WHEN ARE WE GOING TO CHANGE THIS? I'M READY FOR NOW.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He only approved the second chance bill because...
Posted by: Bearzerker on Apr 27, 2008 4:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...he's gunna be needing it soon himself...

but I hope they give to him what he has more than earned & deserved...
[he believes in his/the politically manipulated justice system]

I hope his justice systems find him guilty of treason and hangs him till dead!

George W. Bush [the decider #43]
he's a real winner isn't he...
opps... I meant to say whiner

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Without even reading the entire article yet
Posted by: davesilvan on May 1, 2008 1:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I already have a problem with it. These people who've been caught with illegal substances rarely have 'drug problems' other than the fact that they got caught by some pigs. (Or of course the drugs could always have been planted: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hixltpXMRL8 )

The war on drugs is hardly a war on drugs, in fact, it's a war on minorities. Minorities brought their drug habits with them when they emigrated to America. (The Europeans who came brought theirs too: alcohol, but we saw how well alcohol prohibition failed and was repealed in short order.)

Please read the following links and you'll see very clearly that it's not a war on drugs, it's a war on minorities.

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/LIBRARY/ studies/vlr/vlrtoc.htm
(take the space out of the line above to get the correct link.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]