After last week’s breakthrough in mitigating the damage of the drug war–the U.S. Sentencing Commission offered an estimated 12,000 people incarcerated on crack charges a chance at a sentence reduction–advocates stressed that it’s still up to Congress to eliminate the crack-powder cocaine sentencing disparity altogether and to create more lasting prison reform.

The lack of reform isn’t due to a lack of bills, however. There are many ideas already in the congressional hopper, they just can’t get any attention from legislators. Here are five prison reform bills that were introduced in the last six months, but haven’t yet made it out of committee.

H.R. 223: Federal Prison Bureau Nonviolent Offender Relief Act of 2011
Introduced in January by Texas Democrat Sheila Jackson-Lee, H.R. 223 is a bill intended to get inmates who meet specific criteria out of jail sooner. Under the act, prisoners who have served half of their sentences would be released if they a) are at least 45 years old, b) have never been convicted of a violent crime, and c) haven’t broken any prison rules by engaging in violent conduct. As the prison population ages (one-third of inmates are over the age of 50) and drug offenders continue to sit in cells for decades because of sentencing disparities from the 80s and 90s, Jackson-Lee’s bill is aimed at creating some “relief” for prisoners and reducing the population overall. The congresswoman also introduced the bill in 2007 and 2009.

H.R. 1771: Justice Integrity Act of 2011
The Justice Integrity Act is a bill introduced in May by Tennessee Democrat Steve Cohen. Unlike bills that focus on prisoners, this bill is more interested in reforming the justice system itself. Introduced to “increase public confidence in the justice system and address any unwarranted racial and ethnic disparities in the criminal process,” the Justice Integrity Act of 2011 would first require that Attorney General Eric Holder to create a program in 10 states to determine whether race has an impact in prosecution and sentencing, then figure out what to do about it.

H.R. 1913: Byrne/JAG Program Accountability Act
This is another bill that was introduced in a previous session of Congress, then ignored. Tennessee’s Cohen submitted the bill again in May of this year. H.R. 1913 would amend a 1968 law that provides grants to law enforcement by requiring that officials track and work to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in the justice system.

H.R. 2065: Second Chance for Ex-Offenders Act of 2011
New York Democrat Charles Rangel won’t give up on the Second Chance Act, a bill that would expunge the record of any felon who a) hadn’t been convicted of a violent crime, b) served a full sentence and completed all court-ordered requirements, c) had been free of alcohol or drug dependency for at least a year, d) received a high school diploma or its equivalent, and e) completed a year of community service. Despite setting a bar that would be challenging for many inmates to meet, Rangel has introduced the bill multiple times in the last 10 years to little support.

H.R. 2242: Fairness in Cocaine Sentencing Act of 2011
This is the bill that advocates say is needed to eliminate sentencing disparities in crack cocaine sentencing. Introduced last month by Virginia Democrat Bobby Scott, H.R. 2242 would toss out mandatory minimum sentences and bring the sentencing disparity between crack and cocaine down from 18-to-1 to 1-to-1. This is a reintroduction of the bill Scott submitted in 2009, which, despite support from organizations like the American Bar Association, died in committee.

After last week’s breakthrough in mitigating the damage of the drug war–the U.S. Sentencing Commission offered an estimated 12,000 people incarcerated on crack charges a chance at a sentence reduction–advocates stressed that it’s still up to Congress to eliminate the crack-powder cocaine sentencing disparity altogether and to create more lasting prison reform.

The lack of reform isn’t due to a lack of bills, however. There are many ideas already in the congressional hopper, they just can’t get any attention from legislators. Here are five prison reform bills that were introduced in the last six months, but haven’t yet made it out of committee.

H.R. 223: Federal Prison Bureau Nonviolent Offender Relief Act of 2011
Introduced in January by Texas Democrat Sheila Jackson-Lee, H.R. 223 is a bill intended to get inmates who meet specific criteria out of jail sooner. Under the act, prisoners who have served half of their sentences would be released if they a) are at least 45 years old, b) have never been convicted of a violent crime, and c) haven’t broken any prison rules by engaging in violent conduct. As the prison population ages (one-third of inmates are over the age of 50) and drug offenders continue to sit in cells for decades because of sentencing disparities from the 80s and 90s, Jackson-Lee’s bill is aimed at creating some “relief” for prisoners and reducing the population overall. The congresswoman also introduced the bill in 2007 and 2009.

H.R. 1771: Justice Integrity Act of 2011
The Justice Integrity Act is a bill introduced in May by Tennessee Democrat Steve Cohen. Unlike bills that focus on prisoners, this bill is more interested in reforming the justice system itself. Introduced to “increase public confidence in the justice system and address any unwarranted racial and ethnic disparities in the criminal process,” the Justice Integrity Act of 2011 would first require that Attorney General Eric Holder to create a program in 10 states to determine whether race has an impact in prosecution and sentencing, then figure out what to do about it.

H.R. 1913: Byrne/JAG Program Accountability Act
This is another bill that was introduced in a previous session of Congress, then ignored. Tennessee’s Cohen submitted the bill again in May of this year. H.R. 1913 would amend a 1968 law that provides grants to law enforcement by requiring that officials track and work to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in the justice system.

H.R. 2065: Second Chance for Ex-Offenders Act of 2011
New York Democrat Charles Rangel won’t give up on the Second Chance Act, a bill that would expunge the record of any felon who a) hadn’t been convicted of a violent crime, b) served a full sentence and completed all court-ordered requirements, c) had been free of alcohol or drug dependency for at least a year, d) received a high school diploma or its equivalent, and e) completed a year of community service. Despite setting a bar that would be challenging for many inmates to meet, Rangel has introduced the bill multiple times in the last 10 years to little support.

H.R. 2242: Fairness in Cocaine Sentencing Act of 2011
This is the bill that advocates say is needed to eliminate sentencing disparities in crack cocaine sentencing. Introduced last month by Virginia Democrat Bobby Scott, H.R. 2242 would toss out mandatory minimum sentences and bring the sentencing disparity between crack and cocaine down from 18-to-1 to 1-to-1. This is a reintroduction of the bill Scott submitted in 2009, which, despite support from organizations like the American Bar Association, died in committee.

The U.S. Sentencing Commission’s decision yesterday to retroactively apply an amendment from the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 to inmates is a potential boon for crack offenders who were hit with the old 100-to-1 sentencing guidelines before the law was passed.

The commission voted to apply the 18-to-1 crack sentencing disparity reduction — which was enacted last year after 25 years of the 100-to-1 disparity in punishment of crack offenders and cocaine offenders — to cases where inmates were sentenced before August of last year.

Laura Murphy of the American Civil Liberties Union warns that this doesn’t mean all eligible people will be freed. “Not every crack cocaine offender will have his sentence reduced,” she said in a call yesterday. But more than 12,000 people, 96 percent of whom are black and Latino, are now able to go before a judge to seek a reduction.

Judges will decide whether to reduce sentences by weighing behavior in prison, the nature of the offense, and whether a weapon was involved. Federal judge Patti B. Saris, the chair of the commission, said that they expect the average sentence reduction to be by about 3 years, and that offenders will now average around 10 years in prison.

Still, Murphy says, “what we really need is statutory retroactivity,” meaning that Congress has to vote to make the entire Fair Sentencing Act retroactive. The Sentencing Commission vote only applied certain amendments from the act retroactively — leaving things like mandatory minimums in place. “There will be efforts to eliminate the U.S. Sentencing Commission,” she says, which is why having the statute changed by Congress is critical.

And the commission warns, “Many crack offenders will still be required under federal law to serve mandatory five- or 10-year sentences because of the amount of crack cocaine involved in their offenses.”

As Adam Serwer pointed out, the 12,000 men and women eligible for sentence reduction are “less than a fraction of a percent of the more than two million Americans in prison or jail.”

Advocates for prison reform praised the vote as a big step in the right direction. But the NAACP’s Hilary O. Shelton said it’s time to end to the crack cocaine sentencing disparity: “Close the gap and bring it down to 1-to-1.”

Other prison reform ideas are in the pipeline. Murphy says “we need to get rid of mandatory minimums altogether.” And Shelton praised the Justice Integrity Act, a bill introduced by Tennessee Democrat Steve Cohen that would “promote fairness and the perception of fairness in the federal criminal justice system.” He also called for a reintroduction of 2010′s End Racial Profiling act, suggesting that racial profiling often leads to the encounters that introduce young men of color into the justice system for minor or perceived offenses.

UPDATE @ 2:18 ET: The U.S. Sentencing Commission voted today to apply retroactively sentencing reform for crack cocaine convictions that Congress passed last year. This will give more than 12,000 inmates–85 percent of whom are black–the opportunity to go before a judge and seek a reduction in their sentences. The Commission estimates that the decision will reduce sentences by an average of more than three years, and could save the government $200 million in the next five years. We’ll follow up with more details on the ruling, and what comes next for drug sentencing reform, tomorrow.

+++

A decision expected today from the U.S. Sentencing Commission could potentially free thousands of inmates convicted of crack felonies, if the commission decides to apply retroactively Congress’ 2010 reform of drug sentencing laws.

The Fair Sentencing Act, signed into law in August 2010, was an effort to reduce the huge disparity in punishment of those convicted with cocaine possession or use versus those caught with crack. The law gets rid of so-called “mandatory minimums” and knocks down the disparity in length of sentences from 100-to-1 to 18-to-1. So punishment for crack offenders is now 18 times as harsh as it is for cocaine offenders.

“We hope that they will support full retroactivity for the over 12,000 people that would be eligible,” says Jesselyn McCurdy, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

There are three possible outcomes, McCurdy says. One, the commission could decide on full retroactive application of the law. Two, it could settle on limited retroactive application, meaning inmates with extensive criminal records or a weapon involved in their arrest would not be eligible, reducing the number eligible for release to 45 percent. Or three, it could decide to not allow retroactive application at all.

The last outcome is what Texas Republican Lamar Smith and some of his colleagues are hoping for. Smith is one of several who wrote a letter to the commission coming out against retroactivity. Early release, his letter says, “merely gets criminals back into action faster.”

But there’s no evidence that keeping people in jail longer will prevent recidivism. In fact, precedent suggests the opposite is true: In 2007, when the Sentencing Commission last retroactively reduced the length of sentencing for some crack offenders, “recidivism was slightly less than average,” McCurdy says.

Moreover, McCurdy points out, all 12,000 individuals will have to go before a judge who will decide whether to release them, based on a number of factors like behavior in prison or their records. “A judge can say, ‘No, this particular person doesn’t deserve to benefit from retroactivity.’ “

McCurdy says Attorney General Eric Holder’s personal testimony was an encouraging sign. While he only advocated for limited retroactivity, “He came and testified himself. We felt like that was a signal this was an important issue for him.”

She added that Holder was “bucking the trend,” and a letter from the Association of Assistant United States Attorneys in opposition to retroactivity is a sign Holder is facing internal pressure. (The main argument of that group seems to be that U.S. attorneys worked hard to put these people in jail, so don’t let them out.)

A decision in favor of retroactive application would mean more than just giving 12,000 inmates an opportunity to plead for release. Prisoners who were arrested and charged before Aug. 3 of last year–when the Fair Sentencing Act was signed–are in limbo because courts aren’t sure whether to sentence them at the old 100-to-1 rate or the new 18-to-1 rate. This decision could clear that up.

And, perhaps even more important, McCurdy says a decision to reduce prison numbers would be “a great step forward to breaking the addiction this country has to incarceration.”

This morning President Obama signed the Fair Sentencing Act, a bill that reduces the disparities in sentencing for crack and powder cocaine offenses. Although he didn’t make a statement as he signed the new legislation, the president did say in a speech last week that the legislation would “help right a longstanding wrong” and was “the right thing to do,” reports the New York Times.

The new law mandates that the ratio in sentencing be lessened to 18 to 1 from 100 to 1 –a reluctant compromise by drug sentencing reform advocates.

We’ve reported before that since 1986, a person convicted of simple possession of crack cocaine has gotten the same mandatory sentence as a person with 100 times that amount of powder cocaine — often a five-year mandatory minimum sentence for simple possession, not dealing. Those sentences were deeply racially skewed: 85 percent of people convicted of crack offenses are black, even though blacks make up just 30 percent of crack users.

“By signing this reform into law, President Obama will save taxpayer money, reduce racial disparities and better prioritize federal law enforcement towards major crime syndicates instead of low-level offenders,” Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, told The Times.

Congress still has to decide whether to apply the law retroactively.