100 Days. Nothing from Obama.

 

 

While political scientists have long recognized something like a "honeymoon effect" in some presidential administrations and a worldof data suggests presidential popularity declines throughout the term,no political scientist attaches any particular importance to the 100 day mark. It is purely a media concern, first propped up in the administration of Franklin Roosevelt. But far be it from us to not play the game ...

100 days into his own administration, Barack Obama has not granted asingle pardon or commutation of sentence. As a result, at this point, there doesn't appear to be much "hope and change" for the thousands of clemency applicants who were ignored in the administrations of Clinton and Bush (See chart here). On the other hand, Mr. Obama continues to "make history." He is already among the Nation's slowest presidents (see chart here) and, in a matter of weeks, his administration will be a mere generic extension of the Clinton / Bush era of clemency controversy and neglect.

Of course, for all we know, Mr. Obama may wind up granting more pardons and commutations of sentence than any president in history. There is plenty of time left for all of that. But the fact remains that the longerhe waits to exercise the pardon power, the more of an afterthought it will appear to be. And, if he decides to spit out pardons in the month of December and in the last year of the term, clemency will continue to be viewed as a "gift," especially for partisan supporters, cronies and those with access to the White House in the chaotic last days of an administration.

Meanwhile, thousands of individuals who have served their time, taken care of fines and have been productive members of society for years sit, waiting on the Department of Justice, the Office of the Pardon Attorney and the President to allow them to once again have the right to vote, run for public office, serve on a jury or own a firearm. They are not properly viewed as standing in line for a "gift." They are best described as unnecessarily waiting for what they well deserve: justice. The only civics lesson they are learning is that politicians have the energy, political will and resources to "crack down" and convict, but lack the time or wit to mail a single piece of paper saying, "enough is enough."

It is so important to understand that the inexcusable backlog of federal clemency applications is not the by-product of carefully pursued policy, or even ideology. It is not a monument to retribution, deterrence or incapacitation. It is simply the byproduct of failed institutions and complacency. It is universally recognized that the Office of the Pardon Attorney is understaffed. There are additional reasons to believe the level of morale in that office leaves a lot to be desired. The U.S. Pardon Attorney, Ronald L. Rodgers, is - very oddly - a holdover from the Bush administration. Close observers of the clemency process see very little evidence that Rodgers or the U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, have any interest in pardons, or give them any significance. The federal clemency program all but completely dried up when Holder headed it up as Deputy Attorney General and left us with the memory of FALN and Marc Rich and Clinton's last-minute pardon bonanza.

Mr. President, put down the NCAA brackets, the golf clubs and leave the dog shopping to someone else. Take 10 seconds - that's right, just 10 seconds - to write a note demanding 100 positive clemency recommendations from your Department of Justice. Repeat on a regular basis.

April 2, 2009 -- Truthout (US)

The Fall of the Presidential Pardon

By Maya Schenwar, Truthout

In the last throes of the Bush presidency, reporters and citizens  
alike waited restlessly for the announcement that many were sure  
would come: the long list of pardons for administration officials at  
risk of prosecution, GOP pols mired in scandal (hello, Ted Stevens)  
and white-collar criminals with lucky Bush links. The list never  
arrived. The former president issued a mere two commutations on his  
last day in office, both to border agents convicted of assaulting a  
Mexican drug dealer.

Although all recent presidents have granted few pardons, Bush's rate  
was exceptionally low. He tied with his father for the lowest-ever  
percentage of granted pardons (conviction reversals) -- 9.8 percent  
-- and he granted an astonishingly tiny number of requested  
commutations (shortened sentences): 0.012 percent.

Bush's abstinence on the pardon front had some of his friends  
grumbling (Dick Cheney complained, poetically, that the president had  
left Scooter Libby "hanging in the wind"), but it was a relief to  
many of his critics. The word "pardon" conjured up images of Libby,  
Stevens and GOP Congressman-turned-felon Randy Cunningham -- not the  
thousands of nonviolent offenders languishing in federal prisons  
across the country.

However, although Bush disappointed some guilty crony hopefuls with  
his meager list of pardons and commutations, he disappointed a far  
greater number of long-serving prisoners with no other hope of  
release. An ever-growing percentage of the US's 2.3 million prisoners  
-- including more than half of the 200,000 inmates in federal prison  
-- are drug offenders, many of them charged on vague counts of  
"conspiracy." Since parole was abolished on the federal level in  
1987, drug prisoners serving drastic sentences are told to apply for  
a presidential pardon: It's their only option.

Take Clarence Aaron, a nonviolent drug prisoner denied clemency by  
Bush. Aaron was a 23-year-old college student in 1993 when he was  
convicted of drug conspiracy, for introducing two major traffickers  
and being present during the transaction. He was handed three federal  
life sentences -- no parole.

Aaron submitted a petition for commutation of sentence in 1999. He  
waited nine years for an answer, waking up each morning hoping he  
might soon be free. Meanwhile, he was featured on the Frontline  
documentary Snitch, about the drug war policy of rewarding informants  
and severely punishing those whose names they drop, sometimes  
regardless of guilt.

"I was advised through my attorney [to request a pardon]," Aaron told  
Truthout. "We were very hopeful due to the circumstances surrounding  
my case, and the fact that I was a first-time nonviolent offender."

On December 23, 2008, after a Bush-administration-long wait, Aaron  
received notice: His petition had been denied. After a year, he may  
submit a new request and begin the waiting game anew.

"We believe that the justice system in our country has not served me  
well thus far," Aaron said.

With the stingy-pardoning Bush era in the past, many nonviolent  
lifers see the advent of the Obama presidency as a ray of hope. His  
message of change and his immediate action toward closing the  
military prison at Guantanamo Bay are optimistic signs for Danielle  
Metz, a first-time nonviolent offender serving three life sentences  
plus 20 years for cocaine conspiracy.

"In his first week in office he talked about closing down Gitmo,"  
Metz told Truthout. "Mr. Obama doesn't like their policies there, so,  
he's going to do something to change that. I look at that as  
something positive for me. I feel once the president gets around to  
taking care of everything he has to for the American people, he'll do  
what he can for the people who are still in the US judicial system  
with lengthy sentences like myself."

As the Obama administration comes into its own, federal prisoners and  
justice policy experts alike are hoping he'll resurrect the  
presidential pardon, returning it to its intended place as a critical  
piece of the grand puzzle of the judicial system.

Pardon's Potential

Pardon was not originally intended as a backdoor exit for the  
president's convict friends. According to a recent Congressional  
Research Service report, the power to grant clemency was included in  
the Constitution to make room for individual cases served badly by  
the justice system. James Iredell, one of the original Supreme Court  
justices, stated in an address, "There may be instances where, though  
a man offends against the letter of the law ... peculiar  
circumstances in his case may entitle him to mercy."

According to Margaret Colgate Love, who served as US pardon attorney  
from 1990 to 1997, pardon plays an integral part in the framers'  
system of checks and balances.

"The fact is that the federal sentencing scheme assigns a central  
role to pardon, if only by default, because it provides no other way  
to take a second look at sentences that have become final, or to  
release a federal offender from the collateral consequences of  
conviction," Love writes in her 2007 report, Reinventing the  
Presidential Pardon Power. "No legal system should have to rely on  
executive clemency to do justice, but ours does."

Metz agrees: Despite her nonviolent-first-offender status, she'll  
remain in prison for life unless a commutation or pardon comes to the  
rescue. Her absurd sentence is the result of poverty, racism,  
negligent public defenders and an ingrained pattern of unjust  
sentencing practices, she says.

"My lawyer never was on my side to begin with," Metz said. "Had he  
been on my side this never would have happened. My story is like a  
lot of stories you see, but can't really put a face on. In  
communities where I'm from this type of thing happens all the time."

Although in theory, sentencing guidelines mean equal time for equal  
crimes, cases like Metz's are not uncommon: multiple life sentences  
laid down for drug "conspiracy" charges, sometimes for schemes in  
which the defendant played only a peripheral role.

Former Texas restaurateur Sharanda Jones has spent the past ten years  
in prison for crack cocaine conspiracy. Police intercepted a phone  
call in which a small-time-dealing friend of Sharanda's asked her if  
she knew anyone who wanted to buy drugs. With that one short call,  
Jones was swept up in a massive, high-profile string of drug raids  
careening through her community, spearheaded by actor Chuck Norris.  
Now her only hope is presidential clemency.

"There is no relief for me coming from the courts," Jones told  
Truthout. "At the present time I am working on advocates to help me  
support my commutation."

Unlike most other components of the checks-and-balances system, the  
pardon is ultimately controlled by only one factor: the president's  
word. According to the recent CRS report, the president can grant  
pardons at any time, before or after a sentence is served -- or even  
before charges have been pressed. He or she can also grant clemency  
to a large group. Theoretically, the president could pardon all  
prisoners serving time for marijuana possession, or commute the  
sentences of all nonviolent drug offenders who have served more than  
10 years.

In this line, Abraham Lincoln pardoned all Southern rebels who  
returned their allegiance to the union after the Civil War. He also  
pardoned or commuted the sentences of a number of union military  
offenders, such as soldiers sentenced to death for desertion or  
sleeping on the job.

Lincoln's pardons serve as an example of another purpose for pardons  
besides simply the granting of mercy: They boosted the country's  
morale and inspired rebel soldiers to return their loyalty. Lincoln  
used the pardon as a political tool.

The president's use of the pardon power can also make policy  
statements and demonstrate the administration's priorities.

"Historically, pardon has played a policy role in raising awareness  
of shortcomings in the law in the context of a particular case," Love  
writes. "Used wisely, the pardon power can reveal flaws in the legal  
system, influence attitudes and build consensus for change."

Pardoning prisoners like Aaron, Metz or Jones could cast a sharp  
light on all prisoners serving life sentences for nonviolent drug  
charges, calling into question the practice as a whole.

The Fall of the Pardon

Throughout most of US history, according to Love, the pardon was used  
frequently. Only in recent years has it acquired its shady reputation  
-- a development that coincided with a marked drop in the use of the  
power. From FDR's presidency until the Reagan administration, the  
grant rate for pardons was always 30 percent or higher. In the years  
since, a "tough on crime" mentality has increasingly pervaded  
politics and the public mindset, and the pardon rate has dropped  
accordingly, according to Tekla Lewin of Citizens United for the  
Rehabilitation of Errants.

"Politicians and the media have spent decades hyping crime as the  
worst problem society faces, demonizing criminals as utter scum and  
encouraging an atmosphere of vengeance on criminals," Lewin told  
Truthout. "I think that in part this is deliberate obfuscation on the  
part of many elites, to distract people from the really serious  
problems people face, and that in part being 'tough on crime' has  
been an easy vote-getter for politicians."

Crime-fighting's "easy vote-getter" potential has a flip side: the  
enormous risk of losing votes if one is perceived as being lenient.  
Lawmakers are wary of the "Willy Horton effect," so named for the  
inmate who committed armed robbery and rape when released on a  
Massachusetts weekend furlough program, severely damaging the  
presidential campaign of Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis.

According to Lewin, the "war on crime" dealt a blow to the concept of  
mercy, and thus to the pardon. When vengeance is valued over  
compassion, appearing weak on crime is a risk not many politicians  
are willing to take.

Although there have been a smattering of clemency grants for drug  
offenders in recent years, they don't add up to a policy statement  
disavowing the drug war -- in fact, they may do the opposite,  
according to Tom Murlowski of the November Coalition, a nonprofit  
organization that combats drug war injustice. Murlowski points to  
President Clinton, who commuted the sentences of 22 drug offenders on  
his last day in office, following up on a handful of previous drug- 
related clemency grants.

"There were thousands of cases as deserving, or more so, than the few  
that got released, and most of those drug offenders released were  
those that had some solid media support behind them -- they had  
virtually all been featured in mainstream media in some way,"  
Murlowski told Truthout. "Our fear was that, when these few stories  
were featured and, ultimately commuted, it sent the erroneous message  
that these were isolated cases of drug war injustice, when the  
reality was a systemic injustice as a result of fundamentally flawed  
policies."

Leading up to Clinton's final days, the November Coalition led a  
campaign urging the president to call for a blanket release of  
nonviolent drug offenders. However, Murlowski notes, such a move  
could prove "political suicide" in a country where "toughness" is  
still the barometer when it comes to crime -- any crime.

Another little-noted factor has contributed to the dearth of recent  
pardons: The Office of the Pardon Attorney has long been underfunded  
and understaffed. Clemency and pardon requests go through several  
steps before they reach the president -- they must be investigated by  
government agencies, then reviewed by the pardon attorney, the  
attorney general and finally the president -- and qualified support  
personnel at each of these levels is essential. According to Marc  
Mauer, executive director of The Sentencing Project, more pardons  
might be granted if the department was simply funded adequately.

"There's been a huge backlog under the [Bush] administration, which  
is basically a resource issue; not providing sufficient staff to  
review applications," Mauer told Truthout.

Instead of prompting more hires, the backlog has perpetuated a  
shoddy, negligent review process, according to former Pardon Attorney  
Love.

"These cases are not getting fully reviewed," Love told Truthout. "It  
seems like the main objective of the current pardon attorney is to  
manage the backlog by getting rid of cases as soon as he can; turning  
them around at the door. I've heard he's not even getting the pre- 
sentence report in most cases."

Compounding the situation, the pardon attorney in office for the past  
10 years was known for discriminatory behavior, and was recently  
removed from office following accusations of racism. A report by the  
department's inspector general stated that Pardon Attorney Roger  
Adams described a drug offender requesting a pardon as "about as  
honest as you could expect for a Nigerian.... Unfortunately, that's  
not very honest."

According to the inspector general's report, "Adams' comments -- and  
his use of nationality in the decision-making process -- were  
inappropriate." Considering most long-serving drug offenders are  
minorities, Adams's behavior calls into question the handling of the  
entire pardon evaluation process in recent years.

"My Time Is Now"

Clemency applicants stress the lack of logic that seems inherent in  
the pardon system; the application process is partially just a game  
of risk. For George Martorano, the longest-serving nonviolent first  
offender in federal prison -- and an author, yoga instructor and  
writing teacher -- a six-year pardon wait ended painfully in December.

"I put in a request with Bush and it languished there for a good long  
time," Martorano told Truthout. "The denial was handed to me on my  
birthday. Nice birthday present. I can't see why I didn't get it. If  
a person like me doesn't get it, who does?"

However, Martorano and many other previously denied applicants are  
planning to begin the process anew, with a president in office who  
may be more sympathetic to their cause. Moreover, some drug offenders  
who felt a Bush-administration request would be futile are now  
casting their clemency lot with Obama. Sharanda Jones, the first-time  
nonviolent offender netted by the Chuck Norris scheme, is one of these.

"Several ladies here filed pardons with President Bush," Jones told  
Truthout. "All were denied within months. I feel my time is now."

Mauer notes that, should Obama wish to revive the power of the  
pardon, he'll need to spend some time laying the groundwork. One  
essential step: educating the public.

"He should first make it clear that the pardon power is a  
longstanding and important function of the executive, and one that is  
necessary to provide justice and remedy any injustices that may have  
occurred in the past," Mauer said.

This "message from the top" is essential when it comes to justice  
system issues, according to Mauer: If the president indicates an  
interest in revitalizing the pardon, it will likely channel more  
resources toward the department and encourage government agencies,  
the pardon attorney and the attorney general to produce favorable  
recommendations.

As the volume of pardons increases, the public's distrust of the  
pardon will likely decrease, according to Love, who notes that if the  
practice is routinely used to remedy flawed sentences and negate  
wrongly determined verdicts, its true intent will become clear.

Mauer also recommends a review of the Office of the Pardon Attorney's  
resources, followed by adjustments to speed up the flow of  
applications and improve transparency.

In the meantime, as the pardon process shuffles on with little  
accountability and few overarching principles, the best move for  
prisoners seeking a pardon is to get publicity, and lots of it.

"As a rule, it seems, the more famous a case is, the better the  
chances of relief," Murlowski said. "I was always struck by how many  
more federal drug law violators were worthy of relief after the 2000  
commutations, but didn't have the media exposure that the select few  
enjoyed."

The case of Amy Ralston, the manager of an LA promotional company who  
was convicted on conspiracy charges after her estranged husband was  
arrested for manufacturing ecstasy -- got enough publicity to put her  
on Clinton's clemency list. Her story was chronicled on 60 Minutes,  
on Court TV and in Glamour magazine.

Ralston sought out publicity and support from influential people. She  
obtained letters backing her clemency request from 16 politicians.

"I think Clinton picked my case because there was a lot of pressure,"  
she told Truthout. "People were coming at him from all angles,  
including 60 Minutes."

Ralston's case matches Murlowski's characterization of clemency  
recipients: offenders that are so widely publicized that, when  
granted a pardon or commutation, they appear to be an exception to  
the rule; the rare "good prisoner" stranded among the masses that  
deserve to be incarcerated.

Dorothy Gaines, whose sentence was also commuted by Clinton, has a  
similar story. She describes how her case "caught fire": an avalanche  
of media attention sparked a massive public outcry to "free Dorothy  
Gaines." She was featured on PBS's Frontline and interviewed on NPR.  
Her case became one of the "exceptions."

"I consider myself blessed," Gaines told Truthout. "The day I was  
released, they told me that thousands and thousands of applications  
for clemency had come in [during the Clinton administration]."

However, even a media spotlight doesn't guarantee a pardon or  
commutation. Clarence Aaron, the drug prisoner saddled with three  
life sentences for introducing two traffickers, received coverage  
from Frontline, The San Francisco Chronicle and even Fox News. His  
clemency denial came as a brutal surprise.

Ralston tells prisoners seeking clemency to "never give up,"  
especially since Bush is out of office. President Obama has indicated  
that he'll push for a shift from punishment to treatment for drug- 
related crimes, and his mantras of "hope" and "change" infuse  
optimism into prisoners' conversations about their chances for release.

However, Obama has not made any specific statements about reforming  
the pardon process, and so far, it's tough to predict any major  
systemic changes.

"I like to come back to the fact that there's always hope," Martorano  
said. "But the problem with requesting a pardon is you never even  
know if you're being considered. My request languished for a good  
long time. It sat on somebody's desk for six years, while I was  
hoping. What is hope when it's false hope?"

For more information, please see:

The November Coalition: http://november.org

Dorothy Gaines's Web site: http://dorothygaines.org

The Sentencing Project: http://sentencingproject.org

The We Believe Group: http://webelievegroup.com

Maya Schenwar is an editor and reporter for Truthout.

I look to the future to make sense of the past.  In my heart I believe in the power of the world to make the right decisions for itself.  Who knows why or how I got here.  All I know is that there is a sense of inner-peace that is coming over the nation and the world regarding cannabis and its many therapies.  I am inspired by the thoughts of a better tomorrow.

Maybe I have one more miracle in the tank, maybe I don't, but the fight is coming to an end.  We must open the door to possibility and remember that this entire situation is out of my control.  I look at my sons for the motivation I need to carry on and say on the righteous path.

I was asked today to envision where I see myself when this madness finally comes to an end.  Besides being a lot more gray in the head i think I will be here, there, or somewhere doing what I love.  I am amazed at the pace in which this new administration has began laying framework for more sense and sensibility.  I await the trickle-down sensibility and to be freed from the clutches of government control.  Light a candle for freedom and wish me the best in my next adventure on this journey that is my crazy life.