Czaplicki 1

Matt Czaplicki
Professor McMasters
ENGL 101-010
22 April 2016
Mandating the end of Mandatory Minimum Sentencing
It is no surprise that the American Criminal Justice System has many different problems
within it that continue to persist over time. Some of the most prevalent problems within the
system arise from the Corrections branch of the CJS. Almost everything about US Prisons and
sentencing could use some type of reform or tweaking. Of all of these programs that could use
reforming, there is one that could use a huge overhaul. Mandatory Minimum sentences have
been nothing but problematic since they were implemented in the tough on crime era. The
basic idea of mandatory minimums is that certain have a mandated minimum amount of time
that must be served no matter what, mostly applying to drug crimes as a result of the so called
war on drugs. These have caused lots of problems in the system and has further sent the prison
system into a nightmare tail spin. Mandatory Minimums need to be eliminated because they
dont actually work as effective punishment, they contribute to the disproportionate amount of
minorities behind bars, and they are not at all cost effective for imprisoning drug offenders.
Mandatory minimum sentencing laws were a result of war on drugs combined with the
idea of getting tough on crime as a measure of both drug and crime control. These laws
received bipartisan support which is rare enough to begin with and they sound like a great way
to deter criminals but in reality they have not worked and have become one item on the long list
of burdens in our corrections system that still need changing. In modern times, members of both
parties are now actually starting to speak out against these laws. In the research article
Remodeling American Sentencing by Michael Tonry, Kentucky senator Rand Paul was quoted
on saying We should not have laws that ruin the lives of young men and women who have
committed no violence (Tonry 6). The idea here was that mandatory minimums are hurting

Czaplicki 2
people and treating people like violent criminals when most of them arent because most of
them are non-violent drug offenders. What does it say about a nation when they treat all of their
criminals like violent offenders? These laws have not been doing the job they set out to do;
instead they are imprisoning people who dont deserve to be harshly imprisoned and that some
non violent offenders that go in under these harsh laws come out more likely to commit violent
crime. Tonry also states that Many mandatory minimum sentence laws for drug and violent
offenses require 10, 20, or more years imprisonment and few require less than 5 years (12).
This is astonishing because non violent drug offenders in most states will have to spend at least
5 years in prison and up to 20 years for something as small as drug dealing. Yes, drug dealing
and using is a problem and it is illegal but dealers and users shouldnt be treated like violent
criminals by being given the same sentences as some violent offenders. In Remodeling
American Sentencing, a chart showing recommended sentencing guidelines in 2013 had some
pretty interesting numbers. The sale of 28g of crack had a recommended sentence of 63-78
months (5-6 years) which was exactly the same as armed robbery. Both also had the same
severity level of 26. While crack is a hard drug, crack dealing is a lot less of an immediate
danger to someones life than being robbed at gunpoint. More importantly, 28g is one ounce.
Selling ONE OUNCE of crack can get you as much prison time as robbing a store with a gun.
That is logically wrong because one is clearly way more dangerous than the other. Treating
small time drug dealers the same as armed robbers in terms of sentences is very wrong
because they are not violent people. They broke the law but they did not directly endanger a life
with a firearm. Mandatory minimums are harshly unfair to drug users and dealers because they
were mostly introduced as a form of drug control by treating these mostly non violent offenders
like their violent counterparts, which isnt fair to anyone.
One of the huge problems with incarceration in the United States is that there is a huge
skew in terms of the number of people incarcerated by race. There are many more black people
in prison than there are white people in prison which is a big concern because there are a lot

Czaplicki 3
more whites in America than blacks. This isnt because black people commit more crime, its
because black people are more likely to be incarcerated than white people in most cases. In
2013 according to the US Department of Justice, 466 white males per 100,000 people were
incarcerated. That number for blacks was 2,805 and 1,134 for Hispanics. That is interesting
because whites make up 72% of the US population and blacks make up just 12%. Hispanics
make up even fewer. That means that the prison population is extremely disproportionate to the
US population. In a Huffington Post article, Wade Henderson states that Of those sentenced for
federal drug offenses last year, 73% were Black or Latino, even though Whites use and sell
drugs at roughly the same rate (Why Federal Sentencing Would Make A Difference). How
does this relate to mandatory minimum sentencing? This article also answers that question. For
example, in federal drug cases in 2010, over 40% of Blacks were subject to a mandatory
minimum compared to 18% of Whites (Henderson Why Sentencing). A sort of safety valve
idea has been implemented to allow judges to lower a minimum under certain circumstances
but Blacks usually qualify for this relief less because criminal history is the number one factor for
these decisions and it is usually singled out among Blacks, according to Henderson. There is
proposed legislation to change this but it is still a long uphill climb. The biggest part to this
legislation is that it would allow courts to waive criminal records if it over-represents public
safety (Henderson. Why Sentencing). This is a step in the right direction but it is clear that
mandatory minimums are only making the racial disproportion worse in prisons because more
blacks are being sentenced quicker from a higher use of mandatory minimums.
One of the big goals especially as of late within the corrections system has been to
figure out ways to make incarceration and prisons more cost effective and cheaper to run
considering how much corrections actually costs the United States. Currently, it costs taxpayers
billions of dollars to run Federal and State institutions. One of the problems with trying to
become cost effective is that it has mostly meant was cutting corners to save money, which has
brought up lots of prisoner rights issues. Mandatory minimums were one of the programs that

Czaplicki 4
sought out to try and make corrections more cost effective. It hasnt quite worked in that regard
either but by now that shouldnt be very surprising. In a research study done by Jonathan P.
Caulkins of the RAND Corporation titled Are Mandatory Minimum Drug Sentences CostEffective?, a study on cocaine control strategies showed some very intriguing numbers. The
study found that spending money to expand mandatory minimums for dealers would reduce
overall consumption by about 13 kilograms. Spending money to focus on treating and
rehabilitating users showed the consumption being reduced by a little over 100 kilograms
(Caulkins Are Mandatory Minimums). When it comes to drug control, mandatory minimums
are not the answer even from a financial standpoint because there are clearly better ways to
invest money to control even more hardcore drugs like cocaine. Treatment and rehab is usually
the better option. According to the article, treatment works better and is more cost effective than
because drug crimes are economic crimes. This means that the more they spend and succeed
at rehabilitating offenders, the less people there are to buy the drugs to use them, and so less
money flows into the market. The less money that flows into the drug market, the less crime
there is. Mandatory minimum incarceration doesnt do nearly as much to control drug use or
reduce consumption as other cost saving alternatives do.
Mandatory minimums are one of the many barriers the justice system faces before
effective reform measures can be introduced to make the system less flawed than it has been
but it will definitely take time. There are certainly plenty of reasons why actions should be taken
as soon as possible to take away these laws. They dont actually work as fair punishment
towards non violent offenders and just as there was bipartisan support to enact these laws,
there is now bipartisan support to repeal them because even lawmakers are starting to
understand the repercussions of these laws. Mandatory minimum laws also provide a hefty
contribution to the disproportionate number of minorities in prison and they are not a cost
effective drug control measure in almost any situation. There is no reason why these laws
should still be in place because while they had good intentions at the time, their actual

Czaplicki 5
application has no benefit or upside in any situation regarding correctional issues and only
cause more problems. Prison reform has to start somewhere so why not start with laws that can
be easily repealed yet have caused so many issues?

Czaplicki 6

Works Cited
Carson, E. Ann. Prisoners in 2013. N.p.: US Department of Justice, 2014. Print.
Caulkins, Jonathan P. Are Mandatory Minimum Drug Sentences Cost-Effective? Rand.org.
RAND, 1997. Web. 18 Apr. 2016.
<http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB6003.html>.
Henderson, Wade, Esq. Why Federal Sentencing Reform Would Make a DifferenceParticularly for Communities of Color. Huffington Post. Huffington Post, 8 Apr. 2016.
Web. 15 Apr. 2016. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wade-henderson-esq/why-federalsentencing-reform-would-make-a-difference_b_9633530.html>.
Tonry, Michael. Remodeling American Sentencing- A Ten Step Blueprint to Moving Past Mass
Incarceration. EBSCOhost. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Apr. 2016.
<http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?sid=c0a9851a-8dbf-4ada-a08c97f0bf200ced
%40sessionmgr4002&vid=0&hid=4213&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d
%3d&preview=false#AN=100012133&db=i3h>.