On the anniversary of Joe Biden’s crime bill, are we heading down the same harmful path?

Tuesday was the twenty eighth^vol anniversary of the signing of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, commonly often known as the Crime Act 1994. This controversial laws comprises many provisions in its 356 pages and at the moment was “the largest criminal justice bill in U.S. history.” Then-Senator Biden, who chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee, authored the “tough on crime” language that was later signed into law by President Clinton.

More than a quarter-century later, opponents of the law remain critical, with many arguing that it has fundamentally contributed to our nation’s mass incarceration problem, as evidenced by the incontrovertible fact that the United States “imprisons more of its citizens – disproportionately black people – than any other nation in the world ”

While the law did establish a ban on assault weapons and included a big provision on violence against women that greatly helped reduce incidents of domestic violence, the law consisted of language that: “[s]through an enormous injection of federal funds, local and native governments were encouraged to construct more jails and prisons and to enact so-called truth-in-sentencing laws and other punitive measures that concurrently increased the number and length of prison sentences while limiting the possibility of early release. for the imprisoned,” he writes Center for American Progress.

The 1994 Act was particularly problematic given its links to and reinforcement of the 1986 Drug Abuse Act, “which created huge sentencing disparities between crack and powder cocaine. Under this Act, a person was sentenced to at least five years in prison for five grams of crack cocaine, but 500 grams of powder cocaine was sufficient to impose the same sentence.” Because crack is cheaper than its powder form, it is more prevalent in lower-income communities that are “more prone to be predominately black.”

U.S. President Bill Clinton (left) hugs Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, Sept. 13, 1994, during a crime bill signing ceremony on the South Lawn of the White House. – President Clinton said the crime bill would “stop this terrible wave of violence” in the US. (Photo by PAUL J. RICHARDS/AFP via Getty Images)

According to Brookings Institution“[m]understandably, everyone sees the 1994 Crime Act as the primary source of the problems discussed here, even when the truth is way more complicated.

Reflecting on the legacy of the 1994 crime bill, ESSENCE sat down with Congressman Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D-VA) and Dr. Amara Enyia, policy and research director at Movement for Black Liveswhich is “an ecosystem of individuals and organizations creating a shared vision and political agenda to achieve rights, recognition and resources for Black people.”

In his first 12 months in Congress, Congressman Scott, then the only member of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) on the Crime Subcommittee, became the leading opponent of the 1994 crime bill. When asked about that point, Congressman Scott said, “Everyone was in favor of the crime bill aside from a number of who, like me, didn’t understand the message. The 1994 Crime Bill was essentially a political document, consisting of all the poll-tested slogans and sound bites put together and called the Crime Bill.

According to Dr. Enya, “we are still living under the impact of the 1994 Crime Bill when we talk about the role that mass incarceration has played in destabilizing families and entire communities and has an impact for generations. Everything from the conditions that labeled people, especially Black people, as super predators, to the development of the three-strikes rule, to a criminal legal system that was already unjust, fundamentally supported and provided with even more resources to continue these actions that devastated the community Black people.”

During the conversation, Dr. Enyia strongly emphasized the incontrovertible fact that “we need to invest in things that actually create strong individuals, strong families, strong communities, and that doesn’t just require investing in police and police infrastructure.”

“We know what it looks like when generations of people are separated from their families or don’t have that stability in their community. We cannot support or advocate for measures that are inhumane or unconstitutional because they will always further harm Black people, who will always bear the brunt of it,” Dr. Enyia continued.

Regarding current criminal justice reform efforts, Congressman Scott stays eager for the future, stating: “I think people have learned the lessons of the 1994 Criminal Justice Act. [President] Bill Clinton doesn’t even try to defend it anymore. It served a political purpose but had no concern for actually reducing crime or the impact it had on minorities. We’ve come a long way since then – back in the day, when you talked about evidence-based crime policy, you were thought of as being soft on crime. But I think enough people now actually support a smart, evidence-based approach to crime policy that relies heavily on prevention and early intervention.”