Why Massachusetts mandatory sentencing laws must change
Massachusetts enacted mandatory minimum sentencing laws in the early 1970s. State lawmakers believed that mandatory prison sentences for drug offenses would stop drug kingpins and reduce the use and demand for drugs. The theory backfired. Instead of drug kingpins, low-level couriers and addicts were sentenced to harsh prison terms, filling state prisons and costing taxpayers millions. Massachusetts also saw the level of drug use increase.
Massachusetts state mandatory sentences for first-time drug offenders range from three years for 14 grams of cocaine or heroin to 15 years for 200 grams of the drugs. The drug weight includes the total amount of the drug and any other substance it is combined with. Massachusetts also has a drug-free zone law that carries a two-year mandatory sentence that must be served consecutively to any other drug charges, even if minors are not involved.
Like the federal government and other states with mandatory minimum sentencing laws, the courts in Massachusetts are forbidden to impose sentences that fit the punishment to the crime, the individual facts in a case and the defendant’s potential for rehabilitation. Under mandatory sentencing laws, sentencing power shifts to prosecutors, who determine the charge which later determines the sentence.
Why Massachusetts mandatory sentences must change
- Mandatory sentences are not fair. Courts must send low-level, nonviolent drug offenders to prison for long periods of time, regardless of the facts of the case.
- Mandatory minimums have a disproportionate impact on African American and Latino citizens. In Massachusetts, 80 percent of people incarcerated under mandatory minimums are people of color. In 2006, 75 percent of the people convicted under mandatory minimum drug laws were minorities though only 15 percent of the state’s population is minority. (Mass. Sentencing Commission Survey of Sentencing Practices, 2006)
- Mandatory minimums are expensive. It costs more than $43,000 per year to incarcerate one prisoner in Massachusetts. Substance abuse treatment instead of incarceration saves money. Every dollar invested in drug treatment saves taxpayers $7.
- Mandatory sentences contribute to recidivism. Massachusetts mandatory minimum laws prohibit parole and limit training and reentry programs that would help offenders prepare to return to society; as a result, recidivism rates are more than 50 percent in the three years following release.
- Public supports reform. A poll on public attitudes about mandatory sentences in Massachusetts was conducted by Doble Research Association Massachusetts in 2005. It found that 88 percent oppose mandatory sentencing and 76 percent favor mandatory drug treatment over mandatory minimums.