Members of the Georgia General Assembly have introduced a bill designed to reduce criminal justice spending without jeopardizing public safety. The bill incorporates many of the recommendations made last November by a special task force created by Gov. Nathan Deal and the Legislature. The bill, however, does not include one of the task force’s most valuable recommendations: a sentencing “safety valve.”
A safety valve allows courts in certain circumstances to sentence a defendant to less prison time than would otherwise be required. This is important because, in some cases, a mandatory minimum prison sentence simply does not fit the crime or the offender.
A good example would be a law targeting major drug dealers that sweeps up first-time, low-level offenders. Some mandatory minimums not only over-punish minor offenders, but taxpayers as well — all of us who are forced to shoulder the burden of paying millions of dollars per year to shelter, feed and care for individuals who would be better off working.
To avoid these problems, several states and the federal government have passed sentencing safety valve laws. The federal provision, which only applies to low-level drug offenders, has been extraordinarily successful. Since 1995, more than 74,000 federal drug offenders facing mandatory minimums have received more appropriate sentences. While they still served prison time, the federal government (and we who fund it) have saved some $28,000 per prisoner for each year shaved off disproportionate sentences.
During that same period, violent crime rates dropped to record lows. Of course, the safety valve didn’t cause that drop, but it didn’t prevent it, either.
Given this track record, I was encouraged when the Georgia task force included a safety valve among its recommendations. The task force found that the majority of admissions to Georgia prisons in recent years are drug and property offenders, and that these offenders are serving longer sentences.
The task force report suggested that the Legislature authorize courts to depart from mandatory minimum sentences for drug trafficking offenses, but only if three conditions are met: the interests of justice are served by a reduced minimum sentence; public safety is likely to be improved with expedited access to drug treatment or job training programs; and the court specifies the specific reasons warranting a departure.
It is not clear why lawmakers did not include the safety valve in their bill, but it may be that some district attorneys have expressed concerns with the task force’s proposal. These concerns, however, should not force lawmakers to forgo passing a safety valve. Instead, they should look to the federal provision, which sets forth five specific criteria for when a court is permitted to impose a below-minimum sentence. For example, the defendant must be a first-time offender and the offense can’t involve violence.
If lawmakers are serious about trying to cut criminal justice spending while maintaining public safety, they should add a safety valve provision to their reform bill.
Bob Barr is a lawyer in Atlanta and a former U.S. attorney.
About the Author
