By E. LEO MILONAS
First published: Friday, May 21, 2004

Recently state lawmakers announced plans to form a conference committee to negotiate the reform of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. This should be welcome news to all, and is long overdue.
Until now, we spent the legislative session baffled that in the current fiscal crisis, a reform that can both improve justice while saving state money was getting nowhere in Albany. The Rockefeller Drug Laws often send low-level nonviolent drug offenders to prison for long periods, thereby depriving them of opportunities for rehabilitation. While the number of offenders serving time for the state's most serious drug offenses is falling, there are still thousands of New Yorkers convicted of lower-level offenses languishing in jail for far too long.

Recently, lawmakers from Texas visited New York to explain how their drug law reform was effective at both saving costs and reducing crime. When New Yorkers need to learn a lesson on rehabilitation and compassion from Texans, we are left to wonder how we got so far behind.

Perhaps it is because New York's drug laws are among the harshest in the nation that we can find rare consensus among Manhattan District Attorney Robert M. Morgenthau, defense attorneys, Gov. George Pataki, Democrat leaders, celebrities, community advocates and, most recently, Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno, on the need for reform.

The most compelling arguments against these laws are the human toll taken on families split apart by prison cells and the opportunities lost when prison takes priority over rehabilitation. But the monetary arguments cannot be understated. It costs $32,000 a year to imprison each offender, but it costs far less over a shorter period of time to rehabilitate. New York spends more than $590 million a year to imprison these offenders. Several other states have learned this fiscal lesson and already have reformed their drug laws to reduce budget deficits.

The savings being discussed don't include the dollars to be gained when drug offenders are rehabilitated into productive tax-paying citizens. While that number might be hard to quantify, turning inmates who are housed and fed by the state into tax-paying citizens is bound to lead to substantial savings. This is particularly true when combined with the decrease in foster care and welfare payments to the families now left behind.

Recognizing the major cost savings and the consensus on the need for change, the passage of reform legislation should be a no-brainer. The announcement of a conference committee was certainly encouraging. But those of us who follow Albany closely know that it's too early to get our hopes up, as partisan politics can derail the best of intentions. But perhaps this year, the weak fiscal climate combined with the Republican National Convention focusing the eyes of the nation on New York (a star-studded drug law reform rally is planned for the start of the convention if reform isn't achieved) will lead the politicians to care enough to bridge the last gaps that separate the various proposals.

It is true that there are some substantial differences between the pending bills. Questions relating to the degree of judicial discretion and eligibility criteria for defendants seeking to be diverted to treatment must be hammered out.

The Assembly needs to compromise and settle for far less than total repeal, while the Senate must give more in the way of judicial discretion. A conference committee is by far a much better sign than the usual political tactic of parties issuing one-house bills, then offering knee-jerk criticism of everything that is wrong with the alternative proposals.

Instead, our legislative leaders must use this opportunity to sit down, reconcile their conflicting ideologies and find common ground. The rewards will be well worth it if they can deliver both justice and cost savings all on one plate.

E. Leo Milonas is president of Association of the Bar of the city of New York.