In 1986 Congress enacted mandatory minimum sentencing laws, which force judges to deliver fixed sentences to individuals convicted of a crime, regardless of culpability or other mitigating factors. The original intent of mandatory sentencing laws was to reduce inequities in sentencing and target major drug offenders. However, mandatory sentencing laws have failed in that regard and have created a host of other problems.

Federal mandatory drug sentences are determined based on three factors: the type of drug, weight of the drug mixture (or alleged weight in conspiracy cases), and the number of prior convictions. Judges are unable to consider other important factors such as the offender's role, motivation, and the likelihood of recidivism. Only by providing the prosecutor with "substantial assistance", (information that aids the government in prosecuting other offenders) may defendants reduce their mandatory sentences. This creates huge incentives for people charged with drug offenses to provide false information in order to receive a shorter sentence.

Although Congress intended mandatory sentences to target "king pins" and managers in drug distribution networks, the U.S. Sentencing Commission reports that only 5.5 percent of all federal crack cocaine defendants and 11 percent of federal drug defendants are high-level drug dealers. This is because the most culpable defendants are also the defendants who are in the best position to provide prosecutors with enough information to obtain sentence reductions - the only way to reduce a mandatory sentence. Low-level offenders, such as drug mules or street dealers, often end up serving longer sentences because they have little or no information to provide the government.

The U.S. Sentencing Commission and the Department of Justice have both concluded that mandatory sentencing fails to deter crime. Furthermore, mandatory minimums have contributed greatly toward prison overcrowding. According to Department of Justice statistics, over 80 percent of the increase in the federal prison population from 1985 to 1995 is due to drug convictions.

Mandatory sentencing has exacerbated the racial and gender disparities that are prevalent in the war on drugs. In 1986, the year Congress enacted federal mandatory drug sentences, the average federal drug sentence for African Americans was 11 percent higher than for whites. Four years later, the average federal drug sentence for African Americans was 49 percent higher.

Between 1986 and 1996, the number of women in prison for drug law violations increased by 421 percent. This prompted U.S. Bureau of Prisons Director Kathleen Hawk-Sawyer to testify before Congress, "The reality is, some 70-some percent of our female population are low-level, nonviolent offenders. The fact that they have to come into prison is a question mark for me. I think it has been an unintended consequence of the sentencing guidelines and the mandatory minimums."

In 1994, Congress responded to the injustices of mandatory sentencing by creating a "safety valve" to exempt certain first-time, nonviolent drug offenders. Unfortunately, the safety valve was not made retroactive and there are still several hundred people serving unjust sentences that date back before the safety valve was enacted.

Mandatory minimum sentencing is costly and unjust. Mandatory sentencing does not eliminate sentencing disparities; instead it shifts decision-making authority from judges to prosecutors, who operate without accountability. Nor does mandatory sentencing deter crime. Although mandatory sentences were designed for drug king pins, only 11 percent of federal drug defendants are high-level dealers. Finally, mandatory sentences have exacerbated the racial and gender inequalities, sending record numbers of women and people of color to prison. Congress should make the safety valve retroactive and repeal mandatory minimum sentencing laws.