Contrary to popular belief, most bills on Capitol Hill are pretty easy to support or oppose. A gun control bill comes up and conservatives pan it while leftists embrace it. An abortion restrictions bill comes up and conservatives embrace it while leftists pan it. But the First Step Act, the latest attempt at criminal justice reform, has both the left and right split among themselves.
Conservative stalwarts such as Senators Tom Cotton (R-AR) and Mike Lee (R-UT) are on opposite sides of the debate. They’ve aired their arguments at one another on Twitter the last couple of days. The latest volley from Cotton is worth noting:
Proponents of the First Step Act have said that "nothing in the First Step Act gives inmates early release." But look at what the bill does to a fentanyl trafficker convicted of trafficking 1lb (enough to kill >100K people) under §841(b).
— Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) November 20, 2018
Next, trafficker is eligible for expanded "good time" credits because bill allows offenders to earn 54 days credit for each year sentenced instead of each year served. This section is applied retroactively, too. pic.twitter.com/RIGN8BSEdH
— Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) November 20, 2018
Some offenders ineligible for this, but fentanyl traffickers are eligible. Only fentanyl organizers—under 10% of traffickers—are excluded. This was sticking point in negotiations. @NationalSheriff & I wanted all excluded. Drafters said no. pic.twitter.com/z9OsaPmkkz
— Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) November 20, 2018
If the trafficker in “low-risk” category, he can use credits to transfer into "pre-release custody or supervised release." In other words, he's out early. If high-risk, trafficker still gets 25% 841(b) reduction. pic.twitter.com/Z52w29VLZL
— Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) November 20, 2018
All of this makes sense and highlights some of the information that is being withheld by proponents of the bill. Claims that it does not reduce prison sentences for serious drug offenders is an outright lie. But it was in his final Tweet from the thread that we get the crux of the issue.
This trafficker went from 20-year sentence to out in about 10 years (or less, if combined with programs already in law) if low-risk and out in 15 years if high-risk. Yet proponents claim there’s “no early release.” Should we not hold a hearing on this bill?
— Tom Cotton (@SenTomCotton) November 20, 2018
This is the first major bipartisan action that has a serious chance of reaching the President’s desk, yet the information on it seems so ambiguous, Americans should be asking questions. There should never be a time when Americans ignore legislation that will directly affect us, but this bill should be grabbing our attention even more than others. It’s our streets that could get an infusion of criminals.
Lt. Col. Allen West opposed the bill until some on Capitol Hill reached out to him over the weekend.
Legislators tell Allen West: Next version of First Step Act will cut loopholes
The legislators echoed our concerns and said the version that is currently available doesn’t reflect the changes that cut the loopholes. They say it will be impossible for these two groups – serious violent offenders and criminal illegal immigrants – to get the benefits of the bill. Many felons will be released early. Future felons will be given lighter sentences. That makes sense for many, but by no means should anyone in either of the two most dangerous groups receive sentence reductions, according to the letter to West.
Call me cynical, but lately I’ve changed my general rules regarding promises of politicians. It used to echo President Reagan’s stance on nuclear disarmament: “Trust but verify.” I now have to go with a more adversarial stance on political promises: “Show me proof, then we’ll talk.”
This should not be debated solely on Twitter. We need to hear much more about it before formulating our own opinions. Public hearings would give interested Americans an opportunity to hear both sides debate the issue rather than relying on one-sided op-eds and paid ads. On this issue, we need the whole truth with opponents and proponents both asking questions and sorting through the facts in a public forum.
If Senator Cotton is correct (and the evidence he’s shown on Twitter seem to indicate he is) then we’re not being told the truth, even by conservatives. A public hearing isn’t too much to ask… unless proponents really don’t want us to know something.
