More than two decades as a federal prosecutor and after significant experiences, he served as an assistant District Attorney in both greensboro and their own. His experience will be invaluable to the task force consideration of federal penalties. The First AssistantUnited States attorney in the eastern district. When i joined the office in 2002, he was already leading the task force to these taskand lead forces. Throughout his tenure, he has demonstrated clearly that cooperative and sustained pressure on Drug Trafficking organizations could reduce the flow of drugs, remove the worst offenders, and drive down the crime rate to make our communities safer. Large numbers of serious drug traffickers and gained the cooperation of defendants whose information was critical to our ability to disrupt and dismantle these organizations. Received two directors awards from the department of justice for outstanding prosecutions and one from janet reno and one from eric holder in novembering 2013. I think his expertise and his deep knowledge of what works and what does not work will aid the committee as it considers issues currently facing our country in the area of gun control and policies. Im pleased to welcome my friend and colleague here today and i hope all the members of the task force will benefit from his perspective. Thank you. Witness, mr. Levin, director of the center for effect of justice of the Texas Public Policy Foundation and of thedirector initiative which he led the effort to develop in 2010. Mr. Levin help the fellow the blocked andhich was it has become a National Clearinghouse for conservative criminal Justice Reform with outlets such as the new york times, fox is this news, and the washington post. He has testified on sentencing reform and solitary confinement at separate hearings before the Senate Judiciary committee and has testified before state legislatures. He served as a law clerk on the u. S. Court of appeals for the fifth circuit and staff attorney at the texas Supreme Court. The next witness, mr. Bryan stevenson represents the equal justice initiative. He is a faculty member at the New York University school of law. He has represented capital defendants and death row prisoners since 1985 when he was a staff attorney with the Southern Center for human rights in atlanta. Since 1989 he has been executive director of the equal justice initiative, a private nonprofit Law Organization he founded that focuses on social justice and human rights in the context of criminal Justice Reform in the United States. Eji litigates on behalf of condemned prisoners, juvenile defenders, people wrongly convicted or charged, poor people denied effective representation, and others whose trials are marked by racial bias or prosecutorial misconduct. Mr. Bryan stevenson has served as the visiting professor of law at the university of Michigan School of law. He has published several widely disseminated manuals on capital litigation and written extensively on criminal justice, capital punishment, and civil rights issues. Mr. Stevenson is a graduate from harvard, with a masters from the Kennedy School of government and a j. D. From the school of law. The witnesses written statements will be entered into the record in their entirety. I will ask them to summarize each testimony in five minutes or less. To help you stay within that time, there is a light in front of you. The light will switch from green to yellow indicating you have one minute to complete your testimony. When the light turns red, it indicates the witness five minutes have expired. At this time unless there is objection, i want to offer a statement of our chairman, james sensenbrenner, for the Overcriminalization Task force. Know that our thoughts and prayers are for jim and his wife with the Health Issues that she has had for a week or so. Our hearts and prayers go out for both of them. I have a statement here that i have entered into the record. Hearing no objection, that will be so ordered. With that did you want to we will turn to the Ranking Member, mr. Scott, for his statement. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Even though the United States represents only 5 of the worlds population, we account for over 25 of the prisoners. Since 1980 our prison population has increased 1000 . The average federal sentence has doubled and drug convictions have tripled. The socalled war on drugs has been waged on minority and poor communities of color even though data shows minorities are no more likely to use or sell illegal drugs. The sentences are driven up by mandatory minimums. In fiscal year 2012 60 of convicted federal drug defendants were convicted of offenses carrying a mandatory minimum penalty. They are not the kingpins, leaders, and they are not organizers. The vast majority of couriers have the lowest criminal history category, and as a result many are nonviolent offenders. They are sentenced before they are charged or convicted, solely on the name or code section on the crimes. No consideration is given to the seriousness of the crime or how minor and role one may have played in the crime. The same code section that prohibits sex between a 40yearold and a 13yearold also prohibits sex between a 19yearold and a 15yearold high school student. They should not be given the same sentence, but mandatory minimums often require judges to impose sentences that violate common sense. The United States already locked up a higher portion of its population than any country. Pew research estimated that any ratio of over 350 per 100,000 in jail today, anything about that, the Crime Reduction value of increased incarceration begins to diminish. They tell us any ratio above 500 becomes counterproductive, that you have so many people locked up that youre adding to crime rather then diminishing crime. Youre actually adding to crime. The data shows in the United States our ratio is not only about 500, but above 700, leading the world. Some minority communities have incarceration rates of over 4000 per 100,000, creating what is called the cradletoprison pipeline. Since 1992 the average prison costs have gone to over 65 billion a year, and the rate of increase for prison costs was six times more than the increase in higher education. The rates of incarceration we have in this country, looking at crime and simply suggesting the main crime is we are not lucky enough people does not accord with science or common sense. All Research Shows that when compared to traditional proportional sentencing, mandatory minimums waste money, disrupt rational sentencing considerations, discriminate against minorities, and require judges to impose sentences that violate common sense. Even when a prosecutor or judge all agree that after hearing all the evidence the mandatory minimum is too severe for particular case, there is no choice. The judges hands are tied. Congress is still trying to pass more mandatory minimums, even though there are more than 195 on the books. I believe what they call the first law of hole, when you find yourself in a hole, you need to stop digging. We just passed a new mandatory minimum last week. The grant of federal sentencing is the right thing to do. Theyre closer to the facts in each case. We also have to confront the fact that over the past 40 Years Congress has been playing politics rather than working to reduce crime in a smart way. We have seen alternative strategies that could be used, like the youth act that takes a proactive approach. It puts costeffective approaches in Crime Reduction into play at the Community Level with full community involvement. This strategy will not only reduce crime, but also save money. It will essentially dismantle the cradle to prison pipeline and create a cradle to college and career pipeline. In terms of Justice Reform, we need to focus efforts on distinctly federal interests and ensure that the sentences are being legislated. We need to make sure that federal collateral consequences of convictions are not served as a continuing punishment and burden on individuals who have already served their time, but most of all we have to oppose mandatory minimums so we can eliminate the over incarceration that violate come in sense and increases rather than decreases crime. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Scott. I would ask mr. Conyers, do you wish to make an Opening Statement . Yes, mr. Chairman, i would, please, if it meets with your approval. Thank you. Thank you. This is so important, and i welcome the witnesses and look forward to their testimony. But the Overcriminalization Task force finally focuses today on what is the most critical failing of our nations criminal Justice System, the continuing prevalence of racism as evidenced by federal charging and sentencing regimes that clearly discriminate against people of color. The racism has permeated our nations history since the beginning. The constitution, of course, referred to slaves as 3 5 of a man. The civil war was fought to abolish slavery. And then the jim crow raised its ugly head and the segregation and tactics that follow are a matter of fact. We are now approaching the 60th anniversary of brown v. Board of education, which struck down separate but equal as the law for land, and just last year, we celebrated the 50th anniversary of the march on washington and the passage of the civil rights act. As a nation, we have come so far. We would like now to think that our justice is colorblind, that our system is race neutral, but whether overt or subconscious, the vestiges of racism are still reflected in our federal criminal Justice System, and it is all the more insidious for it. That is because criminal justice is meted out by human beings with human failings, including bias. No longer does jim crow and overt racism rule the day. But rather, coded phrases, such as policing highcrime areas and stop and frisk policies are the norm, and combined with mandatory minimums, so expertly referred to by our colleague mr. Scott, and stacking enhancement penalties and the socalled three strikes statutes, it is these concepts that disproportionately affect communities of color, drawing more and more people into an antagonistic and unforgiving criminal Justice System. To provide some perspective regarding this problem, i just want to breeze through this. The last 40 years, in the last 40 years, the United States prison population has grown by 700 . And now it accounts for 25 of the worlds prisoners. The number of federal prisoners alone grew by nearly 50 from 2001 to 2010. Not only 4 of the federal crimes carry mandatory sentences, 34 of those in federal prison are serving mandatory sentences. Moreover, the ratio impact of the federal penalty system is wildly disproportionate. One in three black men and one in six latinos will spend some part of their lives in prison, compared to one in 23 white men. Blacks represent 12 of total drug users in the country, but account for a fraction of drugrelated arrests. Now, these numbers so before we identify solutions, we must recognize how we institutionalize and normalize racism today. That is what makes this discussion this morning so important. I want to focus on how racism, unconscious or not, has a disproportionate impact on criminal penalties on minority communities. Bias can begin with the decision of where and what offenses are investigated. With enough time, and officers in a certain location, it is only a matter of time before they find reasonable suspicion to stop him it detain, and arrest someone or many people. At the prosecutorial phase, this can be magnified by decisions about what charges to bring, what plea deal to offer, and whether mandatory minimums and enhancements apply. People from poor communities of color are more likely to receive harsher charges and mandatory penalties. The mandatory minimums and statutory enhancements so ingrained in the code that were intended to target kingpins do no such thing. They are now focused on nonviolent offenders who are disproportionately people of color. The threat of these de facto life sentences coerces defendants into pleading guilty. They oppose a penalty on those who use their constitutional right to a jury trial. I am almost there, mr. Chairman, and i thank you for your indulgence. Finally, at sentencing, people of color receive harsher sentences than would whites for the same conduct through mandatory minimums and other sentencing enhancements. Racism in america has for the most part ceased to be overt. But the prevalence of institutionalizing discrimination by writing it into law is as present today as it was 100 years ago. The question is this what can we as a congress do about these pressing issues . Finding solutions to unconscionably institutionalized racism in the criminal Justice System is not an easy task, but there are steps we can take. We can begin by rolling back mandatory minimums and stacking enhancement sentencing that result in cruel and unusual punishments for what are too often lowlevel offenses. We can use the judiciary with discretion in sentencing. We can reinvest the judiciary with discretion in sentencing. Not all judges are immune to bias, but in doing so we allow the possibility of proportional sentencing and the ability to overturn unduly harsh sentences due to abuse of discretion. I conclude on this point you are double your time, and if we do that, we are not going to get through because of the folks that are coming. All right, i would just omit the rest of my statement. I have waived giving my statement and offered mr. Sensenbrenners for the record, but with this discussion about racism. I will make this point. I was a judge for 10 years. I tried three capital murder cases in tyler, texas. Two were of anglos. One was an africanamerican. The two anglos got the death penalty. The africanamerican got life. So i do not always have the appreciation for racism entering into every aspect. Someone had raised an issue of, gee, since the judge appoints the grand jury foreman, who have the leadership role in the grand juries, so i was attacked before they check my record. I never ever considered race in appointing foremen for my grand juries. They found i had a much higher percentage of africanamericans as it turned out we were grand jury foremen, not just because of race, but because they were foremen on the grand jury, i do not find an issue in the courtroom at all. I would ask the chairman of the full committee, you wish to make your full statement . Yes, thank you, mr. Chairman. I am pleased to be here at the third hearing of the Overcriminalization Task force following its reauthorization earlier this year. This hearing will focus on the penalties imposed for violations of federal law. As others have noted, the subject of penalties is a very broad topic covering a wide array of complex legal and policy issues. Many of these issues have already been covered in detail by this task force, including the need for adequate intent in the federal criminal law, the problems regulatory crime, and the need for criminal code reform. The issue of adequate mens rea is of particular interest to me, and is significant when considering penalties of violations of federal law. As i and other members of this task force have stated repeatedly, no american citizen should be subjected to a federal criminal penalty without the intent to do something the law forbids. Today we hear from our panel about these and many other issues associated with federal entities. Federal minimum sentences are a significant part of this. Advocates for reform to minimums have argued that these reforms are necessary to ensure lowlevel nonviolent offenders, particularly in drug cases, are not serving long prison sentences. I have some concerns about many of the proposals to reform the federal sentencing scheme in this way. I am open to hearing arguments on both sides of this issue. One everpresent hurdle to reform in this and other areas is the repeated actions by this administration to circumvent Congress Constitutional role in drafting, considering them, and passing legislation important to the american people. At the Judiciary Committees Doj Oversight Committee hearing last month, i questioned the attorney general at length about the holder justice departments persistent attempts to change the law. I do not believe any of us received satisfactory answers. It will be difficult to find support for reform if congress cannot trust the administration will abide by these reforms for i can assure everyone that under my leadership the house Judiciary Committee will continue to closely monitor and analyze this and other issues associated with the imposition of federal criminal penalties, and im confident the task force will continue its outstanding work. I want to thank our distinguished panel of witnesses, and i look forward to their testimony. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, mr. Chairman. With that, we are ready to proceed under the fiveminute rule with questions. At this time, mr. Otis, you may proceed. Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member scott and members of the committee, im honored you have invited me here today to talk with you is the green light on your microphone . If you would pull that closer so we could so everybody here could hear. We have spent too much time getting here for people not to hear what you have to say. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, members of the committee, it is an honor for you to have invit