HR 1528 vote next week---- Minimum 5 Years For Passing A Joint!

April 19, 2005

House Insanity - HR 1528: 5 Years For Passing A Joint!TalkLeft.com4-17-5

Republican Congressman James Sensenbrenner has launched his next assault on freedom. The full House Judiciary Committee is set to vote as early as next week on H.R. 1528, which creates a new group of mandatory miniumum penalties for non-violent drug offenses, including a five year penalty for passing a joint to someone who's been in drug treatment. That's right: Passing a joint to someone who used to be in drug treatment will land you in federal prison for a minimum of five years. The "Defending America's Most Vulnerable: Safe Access to Drug Treatment and Child Protection Act of 2005" (H.R. 1528) was introduced by House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) on April 6, and it has already passed out of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. We warned you about this bill last September. It's now coming home to roost. Please visit here to e-mail your U.S. representative and two U.S. senators today. Stop this bill in its tracks. Marijuana Policy Project reports: In addition to the shocking joint-passing provision described above,the bill would also create a 10-year mandatory minimum sentence for a first-time conviction of distributing a small amount of marijuana to a person under 18 years of age ... and a 10-year sentence for a second offense of distributing marijuana to a person under 21. By comparison, the average time served by convicted rapists in this country is about seven years. MPP does not condone the distribution of marijuana to minors, nor do we advocate the use of marijuana by people recovering from substance abuse problems. But we do believe that judges should have discretion to determine whether or not offenders in these circumstances deserve to be imprisoned for sentences as long as five or 10 years. If these mandatory minimum sentences are enacted, judges'hands will be tied. This bill has traction because it also contains a section that serves as the House Republican leadership's response to a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that made the Federal Sentencing Guidelines advisory, rather than mandatory.* The Republican leadership is highly motivated to pass this bill -- and with it, the harsh new penalties related to marijuana. The bill will now be debated and voted on by the full House Judiciary Committee and -- if the committee passes the bill -- the full House will then vote on it. Families Against Mandatory Minimums (FAMM) also has an action alert on this bill. Here are the gory details, courtesy of FAMM: * Makes the federal sentencing guidelines a system of mandatory minimum sentences through a "Booker-fix" provision. * Creates new mandatory minimums that further erode judicial discretion. * Eliminates the safety valve for low-level drug offenders. * Makes virtually every drug crime committed in urban areas subject to "drug free zone" penalties that carries a five-year mandatory minimum sentence. * Punishes defendants for the "relevant conduct" of co-conspirators that occurred BEFORE the defendant joined the conspiracy. As written, H.R. 1528 would: * Effectively make the federal sentencing guidelines a system of mandatory minimum sentences through a "Booker-fix" provision. This provision forbids judges from departing below the guideline sentence in all but a few cases. * Make the sale of any quantity of any controlled substance (including anything greater than five grams of marijuana) by a person older than 21 to a person younger than 18 subject to a ten-year federal mandatory minimum sentence. * Create a new three-year mandatory minimum for parents who witness or learn about drug trafficking activities, targeting or even near their children, if they do not report it to law enforcement authorities within 24 hours and do not provide full assistance investigating, apprehending, and prosecuting the offender. * Create a new 10-year mandatory minimum sentence for any parent committing a drug trafficking crime in or near the presence of their minor child. * Mandate life in prison for persons 21 years or older convicted a second time of distributing drugs to a person under 18 or convicted a first time after a felony drug conviction has become final. * Increase to five years the federal mandatory minimum sentence for the sale of a controlled substance within 1,000 feet of a school, college, public library, drug treatment facility (or any place where drug treatment, including classes, are held), or private or public daycare facilities - in short, almost anywhere in cities across the U.S. * Eliminate the federal "safety valve," granting it only when the government certifies that the defendant pled guilty to the most serious readily provable offense (the one that carries the longest sentence), and has "done everything possible to assist substantially in the investigation and prosecution of another person," and would prohibit the federal "safety-valve" in cases where drugs were distributed or possessed near a person under 18, where the defendant delayed his or her efforts to provide substantial assistance to the government, or provided false, misleading or incomplete information. This is absolutely sickening. As we said last week, Sensenbrenner is a one-man disaster for justice. He's been the driving force behind the Real ID Act and bills to strip judges of their discretion in sentencing and subpoena judges' records. In 2004, he wanted to add mandatory minimum penalties to non-violent drug offenses (one example: a five year mandatory minimum sentence for passing a joint to someone who had been in a treatment center.) Don't let him get away with it. http://talkleft.com/new_archives/010374.html

Disclaimer

Email This Article MainPagehttp://www.rense.com

Plan great trips with Travel: Now over 17,000 guides!

April 19, 2005

The Supreme Court, in the Booker decision, has decided that in order to

make the Federal Sentencing Guidlines Constitutional, they would excise

the clause in the same Guidelines that made them all mandatory. The

Sentencing Guidelines are now something that the Federal Judges must

consult, but their penalties are not, NOT, mandatory. The judge now

has discretion again. But, what does this discretion mean?

Earlier this year, the Supreme Court made a decision in Blakely that

the Federal Sentencing Guidelines were not Constitutional. The basis

of the decision is that the guidelines implemented a mandatory

sentencing structure upon facts that a judge found after the trial was

over. These facts could be anything, but, their result was that men

and women are receiving sentences that a jury would not give, based on

facts that the jury did not find. Prosecutors present a certain amount

of facts to the jury (usually ones they think that they can most easily

" prove " ). The rest of the evidence is presented to the judge, after

trial, so that the judge can make a determination of fact based on

preponderance of evidence rather than the stricter criterion of truth

for the jury: beyond a reasonable doubt.

The judge then takes these new found facts and considers the

sentencing guidelines. The sentencing guidelines implement a point

system for each fact. A " judge " found fact can even be obstruction of

justice when a person fights hard within the court room for a not

guilty verdict. Or it might be that he was found guilty of possession

of a joint when he was 16. Then the judge adds up all these points and

makes a sentence. This sentence might be 3-5 times heavier than the

sentence made upon the facts found by the jury. This heavier sentence

includes both time served as well as seizing of funds and financial

punishment.

The judges discretion, or mandatoriness, the federal system is

devised to find people guilty, from the convention of a grand jury

where a prosecutor makes his assertions, allegations, all the way down

through the trial and sentencing. They have to keep a private prison

system well stocked with prisoners. American Capitalism at its finest.

This is why so many Americans go to jail. Its my own opinion that the

people in the criminal justice field are probably bought into this

prison system and its selling of bonds based on human activity,

slavery.

Ed

On Apr 19, 2005, at 4:52 AM, Bea Bernhausen wrote:

>

> House Insanity - HR 1528:

> 5 Years For Passing A Joint!

> TalkLeft.com

> 4-17-5

>

> Republican Congressman James Sensenbrenner has launched his next

> assault on freedom. The full House Judiciary Committee is set to vote

> as early as next week on H.R. 1528, which creates a new group of

> mandatory miniumum penalties for non-violent drug offenses, including

> a five year penalty for passing a joint to someone who's been in drug

> treatment.

>

> That's right: Passing a joint to someone who used to be in drug

> treatment will land you in federal prison for a minimum of five years.

>

> The " Defending America's Most Vulnerable: Safe Access to Drug

> Treatment and Child Protection Act of 2005 " (H.R. 1528) was introduced

> by House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) on

> April 6, and it has already passed out of the House Judiciary

> Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.

>

> We warned you about this bill last September. It's now coming home to

> roost. Please visit here to e-mail your U.S. representative and two

> U.S. senators today. Stop this bill in its tracks.

>

> Marijuana Policy Project reports:

>

> In addition to the shocking joint-passing provision described

> above,the bill would also create a 10-year mandatory minimum sentence

> for a first-time conviction of distributing a small amount of

> marijuana to a person under 18 years of age ... and a 10-year sentence

> for a second offense of distributing marijuana to a person under 21.

> By comparison, the average time served by convicted rapists in this

> country is about seven years.

>

> MPP does not condone the distribution of marijuana to minors, nor do

> we advocate the use of marijuana by people recovering from substance

> abuse problems. But we do believe that judges should have discretion

> to determine whether or not offenders in these circumstances deserve

> to be imprisoned for sentences as long as five or 10 years. If these

> mandatory minimum sentences are enacted, judges'hands will be tied.

>

> This bill has traction because it also contains a section that serves

> as the House Republican leadership's response to a recent U.S. Supreme

> Court ruling that made the Federal Sentencing Guidelines advisory,

> rather than mandatory.* The Republican leadership is highly motivated

> to pass this bill -- and with it, the harsh new penalties related to

> marijuana.

>

> The bill will now be debated and voted on by the full House Judiciary

> Committee and -- if the committee passes the bill -- the full House

> will then vote on it.

>

> Families Against Mandatory Minimums (FAMM) also has an action alert

> on this bill. Here are the gory details, courtesy of FAMM:

>

> * Makes the federal sentencing guidelines a system of mandatory

> minimum sentences through a " Booker-fix " provision.

> * Creates new mandatory minimums that further erode judicial

> discretion.

> * Eliminates the safety valve for low-level drug offenders.

> * Makes virtually every drug crime committed in urban areas subject to

> " drug free zone " penalties that carries a five-year mandatory minimum

> sentence.

> * Punishes defendants for the " relevant conduct " of co-conspirators

> that occurred BEFORE the defendant joined the conspiracy.

>

> As written, H.R. 1528 would:

>

> * Effectively make the federal sentencing guidelines a system of

> mandatory minimum sentences through a " Booker-fix " provision. This

> provision forbids judges from departing below the guideline sentence

> in all but a few cases.

>

> * Make the sale of any quantity of any controlled substance

> (including anything greater than five grams of marijuana) by a person

> older than 21 to a person younger than 18 subject to a ten-year

> federal mandatory minimum sentence.

>

> * Create a new three-year mandatory minimum for parents who witness

> or learn about drug trafficking activities, targeting or even near

> their children, if they do not report it to law enforcement

> authorities within 24 hours and do not provide full assistance

> investigating, apprehending, and prosecuting the offender.

>

> * Create a new 10-year mandatory minimum sentence for any parent

> committing a drug trafficking crime in or near the presence of their

> minor child.

>

> * Mandate life in prison for persons 21 years or older convicted a

> second time of distributing drugs to a person under 18 or convicted a

> first time after a felony drug conviction has become final.

>

> * Increase to five years the federal mandatory minimum sentence for

> the sale of a controlled substance within 1,000 feet of a school,

> college, public library, drug treatment facility (or any place where

> drug treatment, including classes, are held), or private or public

> daycare facilities - in short, almost anywhere in cities across the

> U.S.

>

> * Eliminate the federal " safety valve, " granting it only when the

> government certifies that the defendant pled guilty to the most

> serious readily provable offense (the one that carries the longest

> sentence), and has " done everything possible to assist substantially

> in the investigation and prosecution of another person, " and would

> prohibit the federal " safety-valve " in cases where drugs were

> distributed or possessed near a person under 18, where the defendant

> delayed his or her efforts to provide substantial assistance to the

> government, or provided false, misleading or incomplete information.

>

> This is absolutely sickening. As we said last week,

>

> Sensenbrenner is a one-man disaster for justice. He's been the

> driving force behind the Real ID Act and bills to strip judges of

> their discretion in sentencing and subpoena judges' records. In 2004,

> he wanted to add mandatory minimum penalties to non-violent drug

> offenses (one example: a five year mandatory minimum sentence for

> passing a joint to someone who had been in a treatment center.)

>

> Don't let him get away with it.

>

> http://talkleft.com/new_archives/010374.html

>

> Disclaimer

>

> Email This Article

>

> <purp_bar.gif>

>

> MainPage

> http://www.rense.com

>

> Plan great trips with Travel: Now over 17,000 guides!

>

> «¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«

> ¤»¥«¤»

>

> § - PULSE ON WORLD HEALTH CONSPIRACIES! §

>

> Subscribe:......... -

> To :.... -

>

> Any information here in is for educational purpose only, it may be

> news related, purely speculation or someone's opinion. Always consult

> with a qualified health practitioner before deciding on any course of

> treatment, especially for serious or life-threatening illnesses.

> **COPYRIGHT NOTICE**

> In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107,

> any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use

> without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest

> in receiving the included information for non-profit research and

> educational purposes only.

> http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

>

April 19, 2005

With all the interest in obtaining signatures to oppose these stupid and insane laws, when I went to include my signature, I was required to include a "9" digit area code. A five digit area code was insufficient! What kind of stupidity is that?

When I sought to obtain the 9 digit number, which I couldn't remember, by accessing a site that supplied it, when I entered my name, address, etc., I got a notice back, that the offices that supplied the 9 digit number were closed, and I've have to wait to get the number. In the meantime, the 5 digit number is not acceptable, and my vote doesn't get included. I'm sure you have some assinine and long-winded "reason" why you need the 9 digits. But I don't want to know about it.

JP

-

Ed Siceloff

Tuesday, April 19, 2005 4:38 AM

Re: HR 1528 vote next week---- Minimum 5 Years For Passing A Joint!

The Supreme Court, in the Booker decision, has decided that in order to make the Federal Sentencing Guidlines Constitutional, they would excise the clause in the same Guidelines that made them all mandatory. The Sentencing Guidelines are now something that the Federal Judges must consult, but their penalties are not, NOT, mandatory. The judge now has discretion again. But, what does this discretion mean?Earlier this year, the Supreme Court made a decision in Blakely that the Federal Sentencing Guidelines were not Constitutional. The basis of the decision is that the guidelines implemented a mandatory sentencing structure upon facts that a judge found after the trial was over. These facts could be anything, but, their result was that men and women are receiving sentences that a jury would not give, based on facts that the jury did not find. Prosecutors present a certain amount of facts to the jury (usually ones they think that they can most easily "prove"). The rest of the evidence is presented to the judge, after trial, so that the judge can make a determination of fact based on preponderance of evidence rather than the stricter criterion of truth for the jury: beyond a reasonable doubt. The judge then takes these new found facts and considers the sentencing guidelines. The sentencing guidelines implement a point system for each fact. A "judge" found fact can even be obstruction of justice when a person fights hard within the court room for a not guilty verdict. Or it might be that he was found guilty of possession of a joint when he was 16. Then the judge adds up all these points and makes a sentence. This sentence might be 3-5 times heavier than the sentence made upon the facts found by the jury. This heavier sentence includes both time served as well as seizing of funds and financial punishment. The judges discretion, or mandatoriness, the federal system is devised to find people guilty, from the convention of a grand jury where a prosecutor makes his assertions, allegations, all the way down through the trial and sentencing. They have to keep a private prison system well stocked with prisoners. American Capitalism at its finest. This is why so many Americans go to jail. Its my own opinion that the people in the criminal justice field are probably bought into this prison system and its selling of bonds based on human activity, slavery. EdOn Apr 19, 2005, at 4:52 AM, Bea Bernhausen wrote:

House Insanity - HR 1528: 5 Years For Passing A Joint!TalkLeft.com4-17-5 Republican Congressman James Sensenbrenner has launched his next assault on freedom. The full House Judiciary Committee is set to vote as early as next week on H.R. 1528, which creates a new group of mandatory miniumum penalties for non-violent drug offenses, including a five year penalty for passing a joint to someone who's been in drug treatment. That's right: Passing a joint to someone who used to be in drug treatment will land you in federal prison for a minimum of five years. The "Defending America's Most Vulnerable: Safe Access to Drug Treatment and Child Protection Act of 2005" (H.R. 1528) was introduced by House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) on April 6, and it has already passed out of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. We warned you about this bill last September. It's now coming home to roost. Please visit here to e-mail your U.S. representative and two U.S. senators today. Stop this bill in its tracks. Marijuana Policy Project reports: In addition to the shocking joint-passing provision described above,the bill would also create a 10-year mandatory minimum sentence for a first-time conviction of distributing a small amount of marijuana to a person under 18 years of age ... and a 10-year sentence for a second offense of distributing marijuana to a person under 21. By comparison, the average time served by convicted rapists in this country is about seven years. MPP does not condone the distribution of marijuana to minors, nor do we advocate the use of marijuana by people recovering from substance abuse problems. But we do believe that judges should have discretion to determine whether or not offenders in these circumstances deserve to be imprisoned for sentences as long as five or 10 years. If these mandatory minimum sentences are enacted, judges'hands will be tied. This bill has traction because it also contains a section that serves as the House Republican leadership's response to a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that made the Federal Sentencing Guidelines advisory, rather than mandatory.* The Republican leadership is highly motivated to pass this bill -- and with it, the harsh new penalties related to marijuana. The bill will now be debated and voted on by the full House Judiciary Committee and -- if the committee passes the bill -- the full House will then vote on it. Families Against Mandatory Minimums (FAMM) also has an action alert on this bill. Here are the gory details, courtesy of FAMM: * Makes the federal sentencing guidelines a system of mandatory minimum sentences through a "Booker-fix" provision. * Creates new mandatory minimums that further erode judicial discretion. * Eliminates the safety valve for low-level drug offenders. * Makes virtually every drug crime committed in urban areas subject to "drug free zone" penalties that carries a five-year mandatory minimum sentence. * Punishes defendants for the "relevant conduct" of co-conspirators that occurred BEFORE the defendant joined the conspiracy. As written, H.R. 1528 would: * Effectively make the federal sentencing guidelines a system of mandatory minimum sentences through a "Booker-fix" provision. This provision forbids judges from departing below the guideline sentence in all but a few cases. * Make the sale of any quantity of any controlled substance (including anything greater than five grams of marijuana) by a person older than 21 to a person younger than 18 subject to a ten-year federal mandatory minimum sentence. * Create a new three-year mandatory minimum for parents who witness or learn about drug trafficking activities, targeting or even near their children, if they do not report it to law enforcement authorities within 24 hours and do not provide full assistance investigating, apprehending, and prosecuting the offender. * Create a new 10-year mandatory minimum sentence for any parent committing a drug trafficking crime in or near the presence of their minor child. * Mandate life in prison for persons 21 years or older convicted a second time of distributing drugs to a person under 18 or convicted a first time after a felony drug conviction has become final. * Increase to five years the federal mandatory minimum sentence for the sale of a controlled substance within 1,000 feet of a school, college, public library, drug treatment facility (or any place where drug treatment, including classes, are held), or private or public daycare facilities - in short, almost anywhere in cities across the U.S. * Eliminate the federal "safety valve," granting it only when the government certifies that the defendant pled guilty to the most serious readily provable offense (the one that carries the longest sentence), and has "done everything possible to assist substantially in the investigation and prosecution of another person," and would prohibit the federal "safety-valve" in cases where drugs were distributed or possessed near a person under 18, where the defendant delayed his or her efforts to provide substantial assistance to the government, or provided false, misleading or incomplete information. This is absolutely sickening. As we said last week, Sensenbrenner is a one-man disaster for justice. He's been the driving force behind the Real ID Act and bills to strip judges of their discretion in sentencing and subpoena judges' records. In 2004, he wanted to add mandatory minimum penalties to non-violent drug offenses (one example: a five year mandatory minimum sentence for passing a joint to someone who had been in a treatment center.) Don't let him get away with it. http://talkleft.com/new_archives/010374.htmlDisclaimerEmail This Article <purp_bar.gif>MainPagehttp://www.rense.comPlan great trips with Travel: Now over 17,000 guides! «¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§ - PULSE ON WORLD HEALTH CONSPIRACIES! §Subscribe:......... - To :.... - Any information here in is for educational purpose only, it may be news related, purely speculation or someone's opinion. Always consult with a qualified health practitioner before deciding on any course of treatment, especially for serious or life-threatening illnesses.**COPYRIGHT NOTICE**In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107,any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml