The sentencing disparity between convictions for crack cocaine and powder cocaine is discriminatory toward African-Americans. Federal policy is responsible for this disparity, the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 and Public Law 104-38 (Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Amendment, Disapproval) being the most significant contributors. Differences in the consumption and marketing patterns of crack cocaine and powder cocaine do not justify stiffer penalties. Ironically, the inequitable sentencing of African-Americans has done little to remedy the problem of cocaine trafficking in the United States.
Government officials justify the disparity in sentencing between powder cocaine and crack cocaine based on the devastating effect that the latter drug exerts at the community level. According to testimony at a recent Congressional hearing, "We believe that sound drug sentencing policy should reflect a reasoned judgment as to the relative harms to our society of each illicit substance" (U.S. Congress 63). Crack cocaine is purported to be 100 times stronger than powder cocaine. Crack, which is smoked rather than snorted, produces an intense, short-lived high. The intensity of the high creates a greater psychological dependence on crack than experienced by users of powder cocaine.
Powder cocaine can be easily converted to crack with the addition of common baking soda, once taken through a heating and cooling process. Crack can be broken down and packaged into small quantities for distribution. Single doses can be sold on the streets for as little as $5 to $20. The affordability of crack cocaine has made it readily available to low-income segments of society, whereas powder cocaine is used mostly by those who are affluent.
The enormous profits from crack cocaine prove an irresistible lure for some low-income communities, thus minimizing the effect of stiff penalties for its possession. For example, an ounce of powder cocaine purchased...