BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  SB 1010
                                                                  Page  1



          Date of Hearing:   June 17, 2014
          Counsel:        Gabriel Caswell


                         ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
                                 Tom Ammiano, Chair

                       SB 1010 () - As Amended:  March 17, 2014


           SUMMARY  :  Provides that the penalty for possession for sale of  
          cocaine base shall be the same as that for possession for sale  
          of cocaine hydrochloride powder cocaine.

          1)Changes the penalty for possession for sale of cocaine base to  
            two, three, or four years of incarceration.  

          2)Specifies that probation can only be granted to a person  
            convicted of possession for sale of 28.5 grams or more of  
            cocaine base, or 57 grams or more of a substance containing at  
            least 5 grams of cocaine base, if the court finds unusual  
            circumstances demonstrating that probation promotes justice.

          3)Authorizes seizure and forfeiture of a vehicle, boat or  
            airplane used as an instrumentality of drug commerce involving  
            cocaine base weighing 28.5 grams or more, or 57 grams or more  
            of a substance containing at least 5 grams of cocaine base.

          4)Makess legislative findings that powder cocaine and cocaine  
            base are two different forms of the same drug, each producing  
            the same effects when ingested and that imposing higher  
            penalties and greater forfeitures on persons convicted of  
            crimes involving cocaine base is unjustified. 


           EXISTING LAW  :  
           
           1)Provides penalties for the following conduct involving  
            controlled substances:  possession, possession for sale or  
            distribution, sale or distribution, and, manufacturing.   
            (Health & Saf. Code  11350-11401.)  

           2)Classifies controlled substances in five schedules, with  








                                                                  SB 1010
                                                                  Page  2



            generally lesser restrictions and penalties from Schedule I  
            through V.  Schedule I controlled substances are deemed to  
            have no accepted medical use and cannot be prescribed.   
            Examples of drugs in the California schedules drugs follow:   
            (Health & Saf. Code  11054-11058.)  

              a)   Heroin, LSD, cocaine base and marijuana are Schedule I  
               drugs.
              
              b)   Oxcycodone, cocaine, methamphetamine, and codeine are  
               Schedule II drugs.  

              c)   Barbituates (tranquilizers, anabolic steroids and  
               specified narcotic, pain medications are Schedule III  
               drugs.  

              d)   Benzodiazepines (Valium) and phentermine (diet drug) are  
               Schedule IV drugs.  

              e)   Specified narcotic pain medications with active  
               non-narcotic active ingredients are Schedule V drugs.   

           3)Includes in federal law, the following explanations:  (21  
            U.S.C., Section 812 (b))  |

             a)   Schedule I  controlled substances have no currently  
               accepted medical use in treatment in the United States,  
               have a high potential for abuse, and there is a lack of  
               accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance  
               under medical supervision.  Schedule I drugs include but  
               are not limited to cannabis, heroin, GHB, and ecstasy.   

             b)   Schedule II  controlled substances have a currently  
               accepted medical use in treatment, a high potential for  
               abuse, which may lead to severe psychological or physical  
               dependence.  Schedule II drugs include but are not limited  
               to Cocaine, Ritalin, oxycodone, morphine, and amphetamines.  

             c)   Schedule III  controlled substances have a currently  
               accepted medical use in treatment, a potential for abuse  
               that is less than that for Schedule I and II drugs, and  
               abuse may lead to moderate or low physical dependence or  
               high psychological dependence.  Schedule III drugs include  








                                                                  SB 1010
                                                                  Page  3



               but are not limited to anabolic steroids, prescriptions  
               that combine codeine or hydrocodone with aspirin or another  
               non-narcotic ingredient, ketamine, and testosterone.   

             d)   Schedule IV  drugs have a currently accepted medical use  
               in treatment, have a low potential for abuse relative to  
               the substances in Schedule III, and abuse may lead to  
               limited physical dependence or psychological dependence.   
               Schedule IV drugs include but are not limited to Xanax,  
               Librium, Valium, and Phenobarbital.   

             e)   Schedule V  drugs have a low potential for abuse, have a  
               currently accepted medical use in treatment, and abuse of  
               the drug may lead to limited physical dependence or  
               psychological dependence.  Schedule V drugs include but are  
               not limited to narcotic drugs containing active medicinal  
               qualities other than those possessed by narcotic drugs  
               alone, such as cough suppressants containing small amounts  
               of codeine.  
              
           4)Provides the following penalties for conduct involving cocaine  
            and cocaine base: 

              a)   Simple possession (for personal use) of cocaine or  
               cocaine base:  Felony, with a jail term (Pen. Code  1170,  
               subd. (h)) of 16 months, 2 years or 3 years.  (Health &  
               Saf. Code  11350.)  

              b)   Possession for sale of cocaine:  Felony jail term of 2,  
               3 or 4 years.  (Health & Saf. Code  11351.)  

              c)   Possession of cocaine base for sale - Felony jail term  
               of 3, 4 or 5 years.  (Health & Saf. Code  11351.5.)  

             d)   Sale or distribution of cocaine or cocaine base:  Felony  
               jail term of 3, 4 or 5 years.  (Health & Saf. Code   
               11352.)  

              e)   Transportation for sale across noncontiguous counties of  
               cocaine or cocaine base:  Felony jail term of 3, 6 or 9  
               years.  (Health & Saf. Code  11352(b).)  

           5)Provides for seizure and forfeiture of a vehicle, boat or  








                                                                  SB 1010
                                                                  Page  4



            airplane used as an instrumentality of drug commerce.   
            Specified provisions are triggered where the amount of cocaine  
            base involved in the offense weighed 14.25 grams  
            (approximately  ounce) or more and where the amount of  
            cocaine weighed 28.5 grams (1 ounce).  (Health & Saf. Code   
            11470, subd. (e.).)  

           6)Provides that the court can only grant probation to a person  
            convicted of certain crimes if unusual circumstances exist  
            establishing that a grant of probation promotes justice.  The  
            restriction applies to any case involving 14.25 grams or more  
            of cocaine base, or 57 grams or more of a substance containing  
            at least 5 grams of cocaine base.  By comparison, the  
            restriction applies to any case involving 28.5 grams or more  
            of cocaine, or 57 grams or more of a substance containing  
            cocaine.  (Pen. Code  1203.073, subds. (b)(1) and (5).)  

          FISCAL EFFECT  :   Unknown

           COMMENTS  :   

           1)Author's Statement  :  According to the author, "SB 1010 will  
            correct the groundless disparity in sentencing, probation and  
            asset forfeiture guidelines for possession of crack cocaine  
            for sale versus the same crime involving powder cocaine that  
            has resulted in a pattern of racial discrimination in  
            sentencing and incarceration in California. 

            "Crack and powder cocaine are two forms of the same drug.   
            Scientific reports, including a major study published in the  
            Journal of the American Medical Association, demonstrate that  
            they have essentially identical effects on the human body.   
            Powder cocaine can be injected or snorted.  Crack cocaine can  
            be injected or smoked, and is a product derived when cocaine  
            powder is processed with an alkali, typically common baking  
            soda.  Gram for gram, there is less active drug in crack  
            cocaine than in powder cocaine.

            "Whatever their intended goal, disparate sentencing guidelines  
            for two forms of the same drug has resulted in a pattern of  
            institutional racism, with longer prison sentences given to  
            people of color who are more likely than whites to be arrested  
            and incarcerated for cocaine base offenses compared to powder  








                                                                  SB 1010
                                                                  Page  5



            cocaine offenses, despite comparable rates of usage and sales  
            across racial and ethnic groups.

           2)Background on the Disparity between Cocaine Base and Powder  
            Cocaine  :  Len Bias was an extraordinarily gifted college  
            basketball player at the University of Maryland in the  
            mid-1980s.  Just a few days after being selected by the Boston  
            Celtics as the second player in the 1986 NBA draft, Bias died  
            after suffering a seizure when ingesting cocaine with friends  
            and teammates in a dorm room.  Media reports initially stated  
            or speculated, and then repeated as though confirmed, that  
            Bias had used crack cocaine or freebased cocaine and that he  
            had never used cocaine before.  The investigation of the  
            incident and prosecutions related to the incident indicate  
            that Bias had used cocaine before - perhaps introducing the  
            drug to friends - and that cocaine had been found in his  
            leased car.  His companions testified that after Bias snorted  
            the last of numerous lines of powder cocaine, he stood up to  
            go the bathroom, stumbled back on his bed and had a seizure.    
             

            Len Bias' death sparked a nation-wide outcry about the  
            prevalence and dangers of cocaine use, especially the use of  
            crack cocaine in African-American communities.  Congress very  
            quickly passed the Ant-Drug Abuse Act of 1986.  The law was a  
            bi-partisan measure with the full support of Speaker Tip  
            O'Neil, a Bostonian.  The law included very long mandatory  
            minimum sentences.  The penalties for crack cocaine or cocaine  
            base were triggered when a case involved much less of the drug  
            (1/100th) than powdered cocaine (cocaine hydrochloride).  Five  
            grams of cocaine base triggered the penalties compared to 500  
            grams of cocaine hydrochloride.  In 1986, imprisonment of  
            African Americans for cocaine exceeded Caucasians for the  
            first time.  Crack was seen as a cheaper and much more  
            dangerous substance than powder cocaine.  

            California separately defined, scheduled and punished powder  
            cocaine in contrast with other forms of cocaine in 1986.  In  
            1987, cocaine base was specifically referenced in Schedule I  
            and possession for sale of cocaine base was placed in Health  
            and Safety Code Section 11351.5, with higher penalties than  
            for cocaine hydrochloride. 









                                                                  SB 1010
                                                                  Page  6



           3)Possession for Sale vs. Simple Possession of Cocaine Base and  
            Powder Cocaine  :  Under California law, whether a drug was  
            possessed for purposes of sale is determined by all the  
            factors of the charged incident, not by a specified weight or  
            volume of the drug possessed.  Typically, a law enforcement  
            witness trained in drug cases explains to the jury the facts  
            on which the prosecution is relying on to prove that the  
            defendant possessed a drug for sale.  The weight or volume of  
            the drug is typically one of the many factors noted by the  
            witness.  Law enforcement witnesses usually refer to "indicia"  
            of sale, such as scales for weighing material, ledgers of  
            payments, the manner in which the drug is packaged and the  
            amount and denominations of currency the defendant was  
            carrying.

            Cocaine base is essentially made by mixing powder cocaine and  
            baking soda to form a solid, brittle, rock-like substance.  A  
            defendant could be arrested for possession for sale of cocaine  
            base because he carried a number of  individual "rocks" in  
            small plastic baggies, wrote names and dollar amounts on a  
            piece of paper and carried a number of bills in the  
            denomination for which cocaine base "rocks" of that size  
            typically sell.  Cocaine base is often sold on street corners  
            in open view.  Law enforcement officers can readily see such  
            activity.  

            It may be more difficult to establish a case of possession for  
            sale of powdered cocaine - cocaine hydrochloride - than  
            cocaine base.  Powder cocaine does not naturally come in a  
            form for ready retail sales.  Powder cocaine, unlike cocaine  
            base, would not typically be sold as a single dose.  Cocaine  
            hydrochloride is often sold in 1-gram "bindles" from which the  
            user can obtain multiple doses.  Powder cocaine is thus not  
            easily sold hand-to-hand on the street.

           4)History of Discriminatory Impact of Current Law  :  There is a  
            long and well documented history of a discriminatory impact in  
            the current California law related to cocaine base vs. powder  
            cocaine.  According to a 2005 statement by the Drug Policy  
            Alliance, "California is one of only 13 states that make a  
            distinction in sentencing between powder cocaine and cocaine  
            base ("crack"), which results in a pattern of  
            institutionalized racism."  According to Progressive  








                                                                  SB 1010
                                                                  Page  7



            Christians Uniting, "In 2003, 70 men and women of Caucasian  
            descent were convicted for possessing rock cocaine in  
            California.  In that same year, 1,125 African Americans were  
            convicted for the same crime."
             
             According to a 2005 statement by the California State  
            Conference of the National Association for the Advancement of  
            Colored People,  "The primary difference between these two  
            drugs is the pattern of institutionalized racism inherent in  
            the disparate sentencing guidelines that impose longer prison  
            sentences to persons charged with offenses involving the  
            possession for sale of crack cocaine, who are 66.5%  
            African-American and poor, and those imposed on persons  
            involved with powder cocaine, who tend to be in the majority  
            white and upper income."

            In several reports to Congress, the United States Sentencing  
            Commission (Commission) has supported eliminating the  
            sentencing disparity between powder and crack cocaine on the  
            federal level.  In 1997, the Commission's report stated, "If  
            the impact of the law is discriminatory, the problem is no  
            less real regardless of the intent.  This problem is  
            particularly acute because the disparate impact arises from a  
            penalty structure for two different forms of the same  
            substance.  It is a little like punishing vehicular homicide  
            while under the influence of alcohol more severely if the  
            defendant had become intoxicated by ingesting cheap wine  
            rather than scotch whiskey.  That suggestion is absurd on its  
            face and ought to be no less so when the abused substance is  
            cocaine rather than alcohol."  

            The Commission report further stated, "Bad laws weaken respect  
            of good laws.  Consequences follow.  Sooner or later, all  
            those people who feel alienated as a result of receiving what  
            they believe to be unfair treatment and unjust sentences will  
            be released from jail.  Does this country really expect them  
            to become productive members of society or might we anticipate  
            some retributive behavior?" 

            According to an article in the San Francisco Examiner,  
            published March 23, 2007, California's sentencing statistics  
            overall reveal a clear pattern of racially discriminatory  
            impact.  The article quotes Jeff Adachi, San Francisco Public  








                                                                  SB 1010
                                                                  Page  8



            Defender, on the racially discriminatory impact of sentencing  
            overall, "Numerous studies, both national and statewide, have  
            shown that African-Americans and Latinos are more likely to  
            receive maximum sentences than their white counterparts.   
            Whites sentenced to drug offenses serve an average of 27  
            months while blacks serve an average of 46 months.  Latino  
            youth are 13 times more likely to be sentenced to a juvenile  
            state facility than whites, where they serve up to the maximum  
            term."  

           5)Ethnicity of Incarcerated Inmates for Possession for Sale of  
            Cocaine Base and Powder Cocaine  :  The California Department of  
            Corrections and Rehabilitation has produced in 2013 data on  
            the number of inmates from fiscal year 2005-2006 through  
            2009-2010 imprisoned for possession for sale of powder cocaine  
            and those imprisoned for possession for sale of cocaine base.   
            The data was disaggregated by ethnicity and sex of the  
            inmates.  The data is set out without reflecting the sex of  
            the inmate:

           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Race/Ethnic|African      |Caucasian    |Latino      |Other       |
          |ity        |American     |             |            |            |
          |-----------+-------------+-------------+------------+------------|
          |Cocaine    |2061         |829          |3285        |181         |
          |-----------+-------------+-------------+------------+------------|
          |Cocaine    |4152         |96           |972         |142         |
          |Base       |             |             |            |            |
          |-----------+-------------+-------------+------------+------------|
          |Total      |6213         |925          |4257        |323         |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 

            African Americans were imprisoned for possession of cocaine  
            base for sale at a rate 43.25 times that for Caucasians.   
            African Americans were imprisoned for possession of cocaine  
            hydrochloride for sale at a rate 2.5 times that for  
            Caucasians.  African Americans were imprisoned for possession  
            of cocaine base for sale at a rate 4.3 times that for Latinos.  
             Latinos were imprisoned for possession of cocaine  
            hydrochloride for sale at a rate 1.6 times that for African  
            Americans. 

           6)Drug Use and Commerce by College Students and Adolescents,  








                                                                 SB 1010
                                                                  Page  9



            Analyzed by Race and Ethnicity; Racial Disparities in Juvenile  
            Drug Prosecutions  :  In 2007, the National Center on Addiction  
            and Substance Abuse at Columbia University published a study  
            of drug and alcohol use by college students.  The study showed  
            substantially higher use of drugs by whites than African  
            Americans.  For example, white students were twice as likely  
            to illicitly use prescription drugs, marijuana and MDMA  
            (ecstasy) than African American students.  Students at  
            traditionally Black colleges had particularly low drug use  
            rates. 

            The 2011 National Institute of Health (NIH) study of  
            adolescent drug use found that "African American students have  
            substantially lower rates of use of most ? drugs than do  
            whites at all three grade levels [10th-12th grades]."   
            (Monitoring the Future, National Results on Adolescent Drug  
            Use, Johnston, et al., NIH, 2012, p. 45.)  

            Despite the fact that white adolescents use drugs at much  
            higher rates than minority adolescents, the United States  
            Department of Justice Office of Juvenile Justice and  
            Delinquency Programs (OJJDP) found that in 2006 "juvenile  
            arrests disproportionately involved minorities."  African  
            American minors were arrested for drug offenses (30% of all  
            drug arrests) at a rate approximately 3 times their proportion  
            of the population.  (Juv. Justice Bulletin, Nov. 2008, U.S.  
            DOJ, OJJDP, p. 10.) 

            Another study published in the American Journal of Alcohol and  
            Drug Abuse in March of 2010 analyzed data from the National  
            Survey on Drug Use and Health.  According to a summary  
            published by NIH, the study found that white and African  
            American youth engaged in drug commerce at equivalent rates.   
            However, white youth used and sold a wide range of drugs.   
            African American youth were more likely to use and sell  
            marijuana.  White youth who were engaged in drug commerce were  
            also likely to be "entrenched" users of drugs such as cocaine.

            The most recent drug trend statistics from the National  
            Institute on Drug Abuse - last revised in December, 2012 -  
            found that non-marijuana drug use has stayed relatively steady  
            in recent years.  Cocaine use, however, is down:  Use of most  
            drugs other than marijuana has not changed appreciably over  








                                                                  SB 1010
                                                                  Page  10



            the past decade or has declined.  In 2011, 6.1 million  
            Americans aged 12 or older (or 2.4 percent) had used  
            psycho-therapeutic prescription drugs nonmedicaly (without a  
            prescription or in a manner or for a purpose not prescribed)  
            in the past month-a decrease from 2010.  And 972,000 Americans  
            (0.4 percent) had used hallucinogens (a category that includes  
            Ecstasy and LSD) in the past month-a decline from 2010.    
            Cocaine use has gone down in the last few years; from 2006 to  
            2011, the number of current users aged 12 or older dropped  
            from 2.4 million to 1.4 million.  Methamphetamine use has also  
            dropped, from 731,000 current users in 2006 to 439,000 in  
            2011.

           7)Rates of Drug Use by Race and Ethnicity  :  Blacks, whites and  
            Latinos use drugs at relatively similar rates, with Latinos'  
            usage the lowest of the three.  Asians use illicit drugs at a  
            lower rate than other ethnic or racial groups.  The data in  
            the following chart is from the National Survey on Drug Use  
            and Health published by United States Department of Health and  
            Human Services (DHHS), including the most recent available  
            data from 2011:  
           

           ------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |YEAR            |Rate of Drug    |Rate of Drug    |Rate of Drug    |
          |                |Use - Whites    |Use - Blacks    |Use - Latinos   |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |2002            |8.5%            |9.7 %           |7.2%            |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |2003            |8.3%            |8.7%            |8.0%            |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |2004            |8.1%            |8.7%            |7.2%            |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |2005            |8.1%            |9.7%            |7.6%            |
                  |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |2006            |8.5%            |9.8%            |6.9%            |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |2007            |8.2%            |9.5%            |6.6%            |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |2008            |8.2%            |10.1%           |6.2%            |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |2009            |8.8%            |9.6%            |7.9%            |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|








                                                                  SB 1010
                                                                  Page  11



          |2010            |9.1%            |10.7%           |8.1%            |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |2011            |8.7%            |10%             |8.4%            |
          |                |                |                |                |
           ------------------------------------------------------------------- 


           8)Incarceration Rates in Drug Offenses by Race and Ethnicity  
            (White, Black and Latino Defendants)  :  According to a  
            1999-2005 Sentencing Project Study, African Americans are  
            imprisoned for felony drug crimes at a rate five times greater  
            than their proportion of the population.  Whites are  
            incarcerated for felony drug crimes at rate that is one third  
            or one quarter their proportion of the population:  
           
           ------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |YEAR            |Whites -        |Blacks -        |Latinos -       |
          |                |Percentage of   |Percentage of   |Percentage of   |
          |                |State Prison    |State Prison    |State Prison    |
          |                |Drug Crime      |Drug Crime      |Drug Crime      |
          |                |Populations     |Population      |Population      |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |1999            |20.2%           |57.6%           |20.7%           |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |2000            |23.2%           |57.9%           |17.2%           |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |2001            |23.3%           |56.8%           |19.1%           |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |2002            |24.3%           |47.5%           |23.3%           |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |2003            |25.9%           |53.0%           |20.0%           |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |2004            |26.4%           |45.1%           |20.8%           |
          |----------------+----------------+----------------+----------------|
          |2005            |28.5%           |44.8%           |20.2%           |
          |                |                |                |                |
           ------------------------------------------------------------------- 

               These data must be viewed in light of the proportion of  
               whites, blacks and Latinos in the population.  According to  
               the United States Census:

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








                                                                  SB 1010
                                                                  Page  12



          |All whites,   |Non-Hispanic    |African        |Latino/Hispanic  |
          |including     |whites          |Americans      |                 |
          |Hispanics of  |                |               |                 |
          |European      |                |               |                 |
          |origin        |                |               |                 |
          |--------------+----------------+---------------+-----------------|
          |72.4%         |63.7%           |12.6%          |16.3%            |
          |              |                |               |                 |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 

            In 2000, Human Rights Watch researchers found that through  
            1996 African Americans were 13 times more times more likely to  
            be imprisoned for drug crimes than whites.  The Sentencing  
            Project study indicates that that disparity has been reduced  
            somewhat in recent years, although     the disparity is still  
            striking.  These disproportionate prosecution rates exist  
            despite the fact that African Americans and whites use drugs  
            in roughly equivalent proportions.  Other studies have  
            reported that white youth sell drugs at a much higher rate  
            than African American youth.

           9)Drug Control through Criminal Penalties Generally  :  This bill  
            continues a decades-long history of expanded criminal  
            penalties for commerce in drugs of intoxication.  Numerous  
            studies have concluded that criminal penalties have not  
            substantially limited drug abuse, but prohibition has  
            generated substantial profits for illicit trade.  

             President Nixon declared a war on drugs in 1971.  California  
            adopted the federal controlled schedules and set penalties  
            based on the federal schedules in 1972.  Nixon established the  
            Drug Enforcement Administration in 1973.  President Reagan  
            signed legislation establishing mandatory minimums for drug  
            crimes in 1986.  George H.W. Bush appointed the first drug  
            czar in 1989.  Inherent in these policies is a belief that  
            relatively severe penalties for drug crimes, including drug  
            possession, deter people from using or selling drugs.   
            (Timeline, America's War on Drugs, NPR, April 2, 2007; Health  
            & Saf. Code  11054-11058; 11350-11383.7, 11351.5.)  
           
            In June 2011, the Global Commission on Drug Policy released a  
            report, "War on Drugs," examining global drug policy over the  
            past half-century.  The Commission is comprised of current and  








                                                                  SB 1010
                                                                  Page  13



            former heads of state, public officials, and experts.

            The report states: "The global war on drugs has failed, with  
            devastating consequences for individuals and societies around  
            the world.  Fifty years after the initiation of the UN Single  
            Convention on Narcotic Drugs, and 40 years after President  
            Nixon launched the US government's war on drugs, fundamental  
            reforms in national and global drug control policies are  
            urgently needed.

            Vast expenditures on criminalization and repressive measures  
            directed at producers, traffickers and consumers of illegal  
            drugs have clearly failed to effectively curtail supply or  
            consumption.  Apparent victories in eliminating one source or  
            trafficking organization are negated almost instantly by the  
            emergence of other sources and traffickers.  Repressive  
            efforts directed at consumers impede public health measures to  
            reduce HIV/AIDS, overdose fatalities and other harmful  
            consequences of drug use.  Government expenditures on futile  
            supply reduction strategies and incarceration displace more  
            cost-effective and evidence-based investments in demand and  
            harm reduction."  (Global Commission on Drug Policy, War on  
            Drugs (June 2011), italics added.)

           10)Argument in Support  :  According to the  American Civil  
            Liberties Union  , "SB 1010 will correct the groundless  
            disparity in sentencing, probation and asset forfeiture  
            guidelines for possession for sale of crack cocaine versus the  
            same crime involving powder cocaine that has resulted in a  
            pattern of racial discrimination in sentencing and  
            incarceration in California.  Moreover, the nonpartisan  
            Legislative Analyst's Office estimates that, by equalizing the  
            penalty, the state and local governments would save millions  
            of dollars annually.  
             
             "Crack and powder cocaine are two forms of the same drug.   
            Crack cocaine is a product derived when cocaine powder is  
            processed with an alkali, typically common baking soda.  Gram  
            for gram, there is less active drug in crack cocaine than in  
            powder cocaine.  Whatever their intentional goal, disparate  
            sentencing guidelines for two forms of the same drug has  
            resulted in a pattern of institutional racism, despite  
            comparable rates of usage and sales across racial and ethnic  








                                                                  SB 1010
                                                                  Page  14



            groups.  

            "According to the CDCR, there are about 1,000 people in state  
            prison for possession for sale of crack cocaine; 98% of people  
            entering a California prison for this offense are people of  
            color."   

           11)Argument in Opposition:   According to the  California  
            Narcotics Officers' Association  , "Senate Bill 1010 will lower  
            penalties for trafficking in cocaine base to the level that  
            currently exists for powder cocaine trafficking.  Although we  
            agree with you that there is no rational basis for having  
            different levels of punishment for trafficking in the same  
            product, we must respectfully disagree with the remedy that is  
            embodied in Senate Bill 1010:  the reduction of penalties for  
            drug traffickers dealing in cocaine base.  
           
             "We believe that the preferable approach is to raise the  
            penalties for powder cocaine trafficking to the same level  
            that currently exists for trafficking in cocaine base.   
            Candidly, the damages done to individuals, families and  
            neighborhoods by virtue of cocaine trafficking are severe.   
            Although we support equalizing the penalty structures, we do  
            not believe that drug traffickers - who visit real harm on  
            communities - should be the beneficiaries of legislation that  
            equalizes the penalty structure."  
             
           12)Prior Legislation  :  

             a)   AB 337 (Dymally), of the 2007-2008 Legislative Session,  
               equalized the penalties for violations of the laws related  
               to the possession or purchasing for sale of powder and  
               crack cocaine to eliminate the racially disparate impact of  
               existing law.  AB 337 was never heard on the Assembly  
               floor.

             b)   AB 125 (Dymally), of the 2005-06 Legislative Session,  
               equalized the penalties for violations of the laws related  
               to the possession or purchasing for sale of powder and  
               crack cocaine to eliminate the racially disparate impact of  
               existing law.  AB 337 was never heard on the Assembly  
               floor.
           








                                                                 SB 1010
                                                                  Page  15



          REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   

           Support 
           
          A New PATH 
          Alpha Project 
          American Civil Liberties Union 
          American Friends Service Committee
          Asian American Drug Abuse Program, Inc.
          California Association of Alcohol and Drug Program Executives
          California Communities United Institute   
          California NAACP 
          California Public Defenders Association 
          California Society of Addiction Medicine
          Californians for Safety and Justice 
          Californians United for a Responsible Budget  
          Children's Defense Fund of California 
          Center for Health Justice 
          Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice 
          Center on Policy Initiatives 
          Centro Legal de la Raza 
          Community Coalition 
          Courage Campaign 
          Fair Chance Project 
          Friends Committee on Legislation of California 
          Greenlining Institute
          HealthRIGHT360  
          Hermandad Mexicana Humanitarian Foundation 
          Homeboy Industries 
          Homeless Health Care Los Angeles
          Hope of the Valley Rescue Mission
          Islamic Shura Council  
          Justice Not Jails 
          Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
          Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights  
          Legal Services for Prisoners with Children
          Los Angeles Community Action Network  
          Los Angeles District Attorneys Association 
          Los Angeles Regional Reentry Partnership
          Mexican American Political Association  
          National Employment Law Project 
          New Way of Life Project 
          PICO California 








                                                                  SB 1010
                                                                  Page  16



          Pillars of the Community Employee Rights Center
          Presente.org  
          Progressive Christians Uniting
          Project Inform  
          Prototypes 
          San Diego Organizing Project 
          Taxpayers for Improving Public Safety 
          Watts/Century Latino Organization 
          Women's Foundation of California 

          Tarzana Treatment Centers 
          William C. Velasquez Institute 

          49 private citizens 

           Opposition 
           
          California Narcotics Officers' Association 
          California Police Chiefs Association 
           

          Analysis Prepared by  :    Gabriel Caswell / PUB. S. / (916)  
          319-3744