Introduction
The reformation of the Rockefeller drug laws was a significant step forward in the way of softening the draconian measures and enhancing the effectiveness of the anti-drug policies through adopting more humane and cost-effective alternatives. However, taking into account certain drawbacks of the reformed legislation, particular alterations could be considered for improving the outcomes.
Policy A: The Rockefeller Drug Law Reform Act
The policy options implemented for solving the drug-related problems, including the increased rates of addiction and illegal drug trade can vary from one extreme of war and draconian punishments to the legalization of particular substances in different countries and at different stages of their development. In recent years, significant success has been made in many countries which have reformed their policies by recognizing drug addiction as a chronic disease.
For instance, the recent changes in China’s drug policies were based upon the premise that treatment f addicted individuals are preferable to incarcerating them. “The government of China has come to realize that simply bringing drug addicts to justice is not the ultimate solution in the new era of drug addiction in China” (Liu et al, 2010, p. 153). The same approach of replacing the prolonged sentences for non-violent drug offenses with paroles and involvement in the treatment programs was adopted by the US policymakers who reformed the drug laws in 2009.
Another influential factor deserving consideration when discussing the rationale for reforming the anti-drug policies is the economical implications of the increased inmate population and the prolonged sentences. Through the financial and legal analysis, it has been discovered that the draconian punishment for non-violent drug offenses is cost-ineffective.
“Treatment delivered in the community is one of the most cost-effective ways to prevent such crimes and costs approximately $20,000 less than incarceration per person per year” (Justice Policy Institute, 2010, p. 8). After the implementation of Rockefeller drug laws, the prison population has increased significantly, while the prisoners arrested for non-violent offenses, including the storage of small amounts of substance for their personal use only counted for the largest part of the inmates.
These measures placed the main burden and spent enormous amounts of resources upon the addicted, while the big players of the illegal drug trade remained unpunished. On the contrary, the draconian drug law enforcement was associated with the increased levels of drug market violence (Werb et al, 2011, p. 90).
Regardless of the significant changes in the American legislation which were made in 2009 (Walder 2010), including the involvement of the non-violent drug offenders into the treatment programs as the alternative to prisons, the increase of the judicial discretion for making the non-violent offenders be eligible for the probation or local jail time and resentencing of the non-violent offenders who were incarcerated before the enactment of the reform.
Despite the preliminary estimates of the positive effects of these reforms, even the reformed legislation does not affect the underlying causes of the drug-related problems and certain alternatives can be considered for enhancing the effectiveness of the drug policies.
Policy B: Overall eligibility of the non-violent offenders to parole and community treatment
The increase of the judicial discretion for defining the eligibility of every individual non-violent offender for the parole and treatment involves particular inconsistencies into the legal regulations, enhances the impact of the human factor, and increases the responsibility and working load of professional juries. In that regard, the improvement of the legal formulations through defining the overall eligibility of the non-violent offenders for the parole, probation, and community treatment programs would allow overcoming some of these difficulties.
Thus, the possible implications of the inconsistencies in the legal formulations can be hazardous. Consideration of every individual case of non-violent drug offenders would be a rather time and energy-consuming process. Moreover, the increase of the judiciary discretion for making particular decisions concerning the offender’s eligibility for incarceration or parole would strengthen the impact of the human factor which is especially hazardous for the judiciary sphere.
It can result in increased attempts of bribing the juries for influencing their decision. Another disadvantage is the increased amount of work and professional stress for judges who will have to take the responsibility for their professional decisions.
This alteration can become a significant improvement in the existing policy contributing to its efficiency. “Treatment delivered in the community is more cost-effective and beneficial than treatment in prison” (Justice Policy Institute, 2010, p. 1). Thus, making all non-violent drug offenders eligible for parole without the extension of the judicial discretion can help reduce the impact of the human factor, eliminating the inconsistencies from the drug law formulations and enhancing the effectiveness of the treatment programs for enhancing the chances of the offenders to return to normal life instead of committing the following crimes.
Policy C: Involvement into the prison-based treatment programs before resentencing
Resentencing of the inmate population that has been incarcerated before the enactment of the new anti-drug laws was one of the major changes in the anti-drug policies which allowed decreasing the prison population during the first year after the reform enactment. However, taking into account the peculiarities of the experience and condition of a prisoner who has spent certain periods in prison, special rehabilitation programs are needed for providing them with the necessary support.
The mandatory enrollment of the non-violent offenders before resentencing could become an effective alteration in the existing regulatory patterns. Thus, effective prison-based rehabilitation programs could decrease the risks of the following recidivism.
As has been mentioned previously, the draconian measures which have been implemented under the Rockefeller laws could only increase the levels of violence in the drug market. Even though the recent drug law reform is a humane and more effective alternative than the prior legislation, it can be stated that the results of the prolonged war on drugs cannot be eliminated immediately.
Currently, non-violent offenders can be held accountable instead of imprisoned. Still, the moral and psychic condition of those individuals who have become the victims of the draconian drug laws and have been incarcerated for minor violations deserves special attention. The development of prison-based rehabilitative programs before the involvement of the resentenced non-violent drug offenders can become an important improvement in the current drug legislation intended to prevent future recidivism and decrease the level of violence in the drug market.
Conclusion
Regardless of the preliminary data on the positive effects of the drug law reform of 2009, the current drug law still contains certain drawbacks, including the inconsistencies in definitions and the lack of attention to the resentenced offenders which could be eliminated through consideration of the above-discussed alterations.
Reference List
Justice Policy Institute. (2010). For immediate release: How to safely reduce prison populations and support people returning to their communities. Web.
Liu, Y., Liang, J., Zhao, C. and Zhou, W. (2010). Looking for a solution for drug addiction in China: Exploring the challenges and opportunities in the way of China’s new Drug Control Law. International Journal of Drug Policy, 21: 149- 154.
Walder, N. (2010). NY reform saved 1 000 drug offenders from prison in first year, report says. New York Law Journal.
Werb, D., Rowell, G., Guyatt, G. and Wood, E. (2011). Effect of drug law enforcement on drug market violence: A systematic review. International Journal of Drug Policy, 22: pp. 87- 94.