[LWV] League of Women Voters®
of the District of Columbia

SENTENCING REFORM NATIONAL PROGRAM PLANNING CONCURRENCE PROPOSAL

SENTENCING REFORM CONCURRENCE PROPOSAL FOR NATIONAL PROGRAM PLANNING & CONVENTION 2012

NATIONAL PROGRAM PLANNINGPROPOSED CONCURRENCE - SENTENCING POLICYLWVUS BOARDWHY CONCURRENCE?ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORTMANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCESPLEASE DISTRIBUTE WIDELY.


ALL LEAGUES! PLEASE SUPPORT SENTENCING REFORM

The LWVUS has no position on sentencing reform; therefore, The League of Women Voters of the District of Columbia - LWVDC (Washington, D.C.) and the ad hoc committee on sentencing reform formed at Convention 2010 propose that Convention 2012 adopt through concurrence the following position based on LWVDC positions adopted in 1982 and reaffirmed in 2009.
---------------------

PROPOSED CONCURRENCE

"Title: Sentencing Policy

1)The LWVUS believes alternatives to imprisonment should be explored and utilized, taking into consideration the circumstances and nature of the crime.

2) The LWVUS opposes mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses."

CLICK HERE TO PRINT THIS PAGE

CLICK HERE FOR MORE DETAILED INFORMATION

---------------------

LWVUS BOARD NEEDS TO HEAR FROM US

In order for our Sentencing Policy to be recommended by the LWVUS Board to Convention 2012, they need to hear from us.
Please discuss Sentencing with your state and local Leagues during the National Program Planning process & recommend this concurrence to the Board on the submission form.
---------------------

WHY CONCURRENCE?

League Rules allow Convention to adopt a local or state League's position providing that the position was adopted after study and consensus.

Rule 10 C. Provides for the Procedure for Concurrence at Convention:

1. Proposals for concurrence at convention may be moved for adoption at the Sunday plenary meeting.

2. Debate and action on proposals for concurrence motions shall take place at the same time as debate and action on proposed program. A two-thirds vote is required to adopt the concurrence statement.

---------------------

ARGUMENTS FOR SUPPORTING ALTERNATIVES TO IMPRISONMENT FOR APPROPRIATE OFFENDERS

ARGUMENTS FOR SUPPORTING ALTERNATIVES TO IMPRISONMENT FOR APPROPRIATE OFFENDERS: Alternatives include drug and mental health courts, halfway houses and day reporting centers, restitution requirements, rehabilitative services, etc. They save taxpayers money. They keep offenders with their families and jobs, instead of in prison or jail with inmates convicted of violent crimes.
---------------------

ARGUMENTS FOR OPPOSING MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES FOR DRUG OFFENSES

Harsh mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses have led to an overrepresentation of drug offenders in the criminal justice system, many of whom are low-level and nonviolent. Restoring judicial discretion in drug cases would allow judges to determine punishments that are proportional to the offenses committed. BACKGROUND: The United States has 5% of the world's population, but 25% of the world's prisoners--it is the world's biggest jailer. More than half the growth in the prison population over the last 30 years is due to changes in sentencing policies that prioritize long, mandatory sentences, including for drug and nonviolent offenses. Mass incarceration has led to huge financial costs to taxpayers, and millions of ex-offenders who carry lifelong, daunting burdens of a criminal record after release. Moreover, appalling racial disparity pervades the criminal justice system, and excessively impacts communities of color. Please recommend concurrence with the two positions proposed above on your response form for the LWVUS so that the LWVUS and all chapters can address sentencing issues, which they cannot do now without undertaking individual state or local chapter studies, since the LWVUS has no position on sentencing except opposition to the death penalty.
---------------------

PLEASE DISTRIBUTE THIS INFORMATION WIDELY

CLICK HERE TO PRINT THIS PAGE

CLICK HERE FOR MORE DETAILED INFORMATION

Comments, suggestions, questions? Contact our webmaster. Last revised: January 20, 2012 07:48 PST.

© Copyright League of Women Voters of the District of Columbia. All rights reserved.