The Difference Between Crack and Powder Cocaine: The Punishment

Crack and powder cocaine are essentially the exact same thing -- the only difference is the former is mixed with baking powder. Yet one is used primarily by poor minorities, while the other is traditionally associated with more well-off Caucasians. Guess which triggers the harsher punishment?

Fueled by the usual dangerous mix of fear and demagoguery, the Democratic-controlled Congress of 1986 passed a series of laws that transformed the war on drugs from a metaphor to an all-too-real reality for many Americans. Though chemically identical, lawmakers enacted a 100-to-1 ratio for crack and powder cocaine sentencing, meaning that while it would take 500 grams of powder cocaine to trigger a 5-year mandatory minimum sentence, it would take just 5 grams of crack cocaine to trigger the same -- even for a first-time offender.

The effects were predictable – the nation's prisons became filled with more than a quarter million nonviolent drug offenders – and racially disproportionate, with the U.S. Sentencing Commission pointing out that just under 90 percent of those sentenced for crack cocaine offenses in 2009 were either black or Hispanic; for powder cocaine, the figure was a marginally better 79 percent (the majority of cocaine users are, of course, white).

Perhaps scandalized by the fact that one out of every 15 African Americans is now behind bars, Congress acted over the summer to reduce -- but heavens no, not actually eliminate -- that crack-power cocaine sentencing disparity, cutting it to "just" 18-to-1, meaning, as blogger John Caruso wrote at the time, that blacks are “now merely 18 times more likely than whites to go to jail for similar crimes.”

While a welcome change, if altogether too modest, lawmakers failed to make the new sentencing ratio retroactive, leaving tens of thousands of nonviolent offenders to rot behind bars for offenses that, had they been sentenced today, might have seen them sent to rehab instead.

Now activists with Families Against Mandatory Minimums (FAMM) are rallying support for a bill introduced last week by Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA) that would correct that oversight. While it's unlikely the measure will be passed before Congress adjourns for its holiday break, FAMM says it's crucial that people educate their lawmakers now on the need to retroactively correct injustice. "Showing members of Congress our vigorous support for retroactivity now will raise awareness about the bill, put it on the members’ radar for next year, and make it easier to reintroduce and build support for the bill when Congress returns in 2011."

And doing so will help people like Stephanie Nodd who have been victimized by the war on some drugs. At just 23, Nodd, who had no previous criminal record, was sentenced to 30 years in prison for helping her boyfriend deal crack cocaine. Two decades later, she remains behind bars.

Congress has already acted to reduce the crack-powder disparity, with only Texas Republican and noted hypocrite Lamar Smith speaking out against it. That means the hard work of convincing 434 demagogues to reduce the punishment for drug offenses has already been done; now we just need to convince our esteemed leaders to help out those they've already admitted to needlessly harming over the last few decades.

As FAMM President Julie Stewart says, "It's a matter of simple fairness."

Help free people like Stephanie Nodd by demanding Congress make the new cocaine sentencing guidelines retroactive.

Photo Credit: Jenn Vargas