Archives for 2004

TalkLeft also has this update on attempts to add more ‘mandatory minimums’ to the Federal Code. TChris notes:

Bad laws often seek cover in “feel good” names. So it is with Defending America’s Most Vulnerable: Safe Access to Drug Treatment and Child Protection Act of 2004 (Bill No. HR 4547). Masquerading as a law that champions drug treatment while protecting children, the bill is just another attempt to shift power from judges and the federal sentencing commission to federal prosecutors while implementing even harsher mandatory minimum sentences for drug crimes: this time, for the distribution of drugs (including marijuana) to minors.

Mandatory Minimums, Zero Tolerance, and all similar proposals are attempts to taking the justice out of justice. They replace the ability of people closest to the situation to make informed, reasonable decisions, and instead put in place a mechanistic approach to justice, doing far more damage than whatever little good might come from these ham-handed proposals.

Federal laws that make reasonable people do unreasonable things under the misguided ruse of ‘being tough on crime’ makes us all accomplices in a growing police state. As usual, this is being packaged as election-year fodder, and you will see spineless and misguided members of Congress on both sides of the aisle voting for this bad legislation:

This bill is the brainchild of Jim Sensenbrenner, who controls the House Judiciary Committee. Sensenbrenner worked hard for the passage of the Feeney Amendment, and he’s likely to do everything he can to jam this one down the throats of Representatives with the expectation that they won’t want to seem soft on drugs (or unsympathetic to children) in an election year.

Please tell your Congressman: Just Say No to Mandatory Minimums.

Commenter Chris P. writes:

From an e-mail describing the law:

“For example, it would make the sale of any quantity of any controlled substance (including marijuana) by a person older than 21 to a person younger than 18 subject to a 5-year minimum mandatory sentence. The punishment for a second offense of underage marijuana distribution would be mandatory life imprisonment.”

Amazing. You could sell a joint to a high school senior and go to prison for life. Or you could molest a kindergartener and canvas door-to-door for ACT.

Mandatory MinimumsPost + Comments (2)

My ire at those who grand-standed about the need for the god-awful McCain-Feingold CFR bill is well documented- it was and is a bad bill, and any restriction on political speech is hideous. I guess the usual suspects are finally getting to reap what they have sown:

Michael Moore may be prevented from advertising his controversial new movie, “Fahrenheit 9/11,” on television or radio after July 30 if the Federal Election Commission (FEC) today accepts the legal advice of its general counsel.

At the same time, a Republican-allied 527 soft-money group is preparing to file a complaint against Moore’s film with the FEC for violating campaign-finance law.

In a draft advisory opinion placed on the FEC’s agenda for today’s meeting, the agency’s general counsel states that political documentary filmmakers may not air television or radio ads referring to federal candidates within 30 days of a primary election or 60 days of a general election.

The opinion is generated under the new McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law, which prohibits corporate-funded ads that identify a federal candidate before a primary or general election.

The proscription is broadly defined. Section 100.29 of the federal election regulations defines restricted corporate-funded ads as those that identify a candidate by his “name, nickname, photograph or drawing” or make it “otherwise apparent through an unambiguous reference.”

IS this the worst piece of legislation ever passed? And must add how furious I still am at Bush for signing this damned bill, cynically expecting the Supremes to strike it down.

(via TalkLeft)

CFR Fall-OutPost + Comments