iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Turkey Spared -- But Obama's Compassion For Humans Comes Up Short

First Posted: 11/24/10 12:26 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:15 PM ET

Obama Turkey Pardon

WASHINGTON -- In one of the White House's sillier annual rituals, Barack Obama on Wednesday pardoned the second Thanksgiving turkey of his presidency.

He has, however, yet to pardon a single human.

A president's power to grant clemency is broad, unilateral and absolute. Obama, a constitutional lawyer by training, and the first African-American president, could issue pardons and commutations that make a powerful statement about the justice system past and present.

Indeed, presidents have a responsibility to use their pardon power to correct the excesses and errors of a system that is inevitably imperfect, often overloaded, and especially in this era of mandatory sentences, overly rigid.

Obama's grants could speak volumes about fairness, forgiveness, rehabilitation and renewal. He could restore rights, right wrongs, and bring freedom to the unduly oppressed.

But he chooses not to.

And it's not just that he hasn't gotten around to it, either. In October, he formally denied 71 pardon requests and 605 commutation requests sent over by the Justice Department for his consideration.

On Wednesday, the 674th day of his presidency, Obama officially becomes the second-slowest president in history to use his clemency authority.

President Clinton issued his first round of pardons and commutations on Nov. 23, 1994, the same day he pardoned his second turkey.

The average for all presidents is 133 days. The only president in modern times slower than Obama was George W. Bush.

If Obama goes past Dec. 20 -- just 27 more days -- without any action, he'll surpass even that record. (Bush actually announced them on Dec. 23.) And Bush was notoriously uninterested in clemency, granting only 200 pardons or commutations, the least of any two-term president in modern history.

"I'm just baffled. I never would have expected this," said P.S. Ruckman Jr., the editor of the Pardon Power blog and a political science professor in Illinois. "With Bush, I never really expected much out of him, because he had a track record for being really stingy as governor."

But, recalling how Obama spoke out during his presidential campaign against mandatory minimum sentences and laws with racially discriminatory impact, Ruckman said, "He sounded like he was someone who was passionate about this -- and where that went, I just don't know."

Incarceration rates in the United States have skyrocketed over the three decades since the "war on drugs" was first declared, to the point where the U.S. has the world's largest prison population and the world's highest incarceration rates.

Surely it wouldn't be hard for Obama to find some deserving men and women among the nearly 5,000 petitions being processed by the Justice Department -- not to mention among the nearly 2.5 million Americans currently behind bars, or the millions more whose lives are blighted by the legal discrimination against felons even decades after their sentences are served.

Obama could even announce his intention to grant clemency to an entire class of people -- sort of like Jimmy Carter did in granting amnesty to those who dodged the draft during the Vietnam war.

The obvious move would be to commute the sentences of thousands of people convicted of crack cocaine possession, most of them black, who have already served as much time as they would have if they had been caught with powder instead.

A 1986 law famously set a 100-to-1 disparity between the amounts of crack and powder cocaine that trigger a mandatory 5-year prison term. Congress this summer reduced that disparity to 18-to-1; raising the threshold for crack cocaine from 5 grams to 28 grams, while the level for powder remains 500 grams. But that change is not retroactive (and isn't even being applied to earlier cases still in the judicial process.)

"If you say the old law was unjust, and now we have a new law, wouldn't it make sense to take a look at some of these cases and see if they would be good candidates for commutation?" asked former Clinton administration pardon attorney Margaret Colgate Love.

"I don't think there's any reason in the world that any first-time non-violent offender who has served past that 18-to-1 ratio should be in prison another day," Ruckman told HuffPost.

Love suggested another possible class of cases Obama should consider: Longtime legal immigrants facing deportation for old or minor criminal convictions. In New York, Gov. David A. Paterson earlier this year launched an effort to speed the granting of pardons to such immigrants at the state level.

Obama could either declare some sort of across-the-board commutation, or could simply announce his intention to consider such requests. "You don't have to search, all you have to do is say you're open for business," Love said.

Voices from the left and right are calling upon Obama to act.

Conservative columnist Debra J. Saunders, while acknowledging that presidential pardons carry political risk, wrote in the San Francisco Chronicle:

Obama can avoid those pitfalls by focusing on nonviolent drug offenders serving outrageously long time behind bars because of the draconian federal mandatory minimum sentencing system. He can limit clemency to inmates with clean prison records. He can commute prison terms but require that inmates be released under supervision.

Love wrote in the Washington Post:

Pardoning people should not be that hard. In fact, it should be one of the happiest of your official duties. It requires no permission or negotiation with the other branches of government. It allows you to put your personal stamp on the justice system and to speak directly to the American people about it. Judicious pardoning has been an important legacy of some of our greatest presidents....

[T]here has never been a greater need for a robust and respectable pardon program. The federal prison population of roughly 200,000 includes many who have served decades for nonviolent drug offenses and others who deserve a second look to determine whether midcourse correction would be appropriate. Thousands of ordinary people living productive and law-abiding lives in this country are disqualified from opportunities and benefits because of a conviction record that may be decades old. These are people who have earned the second chance that a pardon represents.

Author George Lardner Jr. wrote in a New York Times op-ed on Wednesday:

It's difficult to understand why the president has been so unwilling to grant any clemency. As someone who has taught constitutional law, he knows that the founders gave him, and him alone, the power "to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States except in cases of impeachment." It is likely that he also knows that a disproportionate number of federal prisoners are black, that mandatory sentencing guidelines have left many of them with excessive sentences and that at least a few of them deserve clemency, whether they've asked for it or not.

The president has not only the power but also the responsibility to grant clemency when it is warranted. A pardon can help a worthy former prisoner qualify for a job or a license. But mainly it restores the person's civil rights, including the right to vote.

But the lack of pardons is a symptom of a more basic problem, Love told HuffPost. "This White House has shown itself really not very interested in criminal justice issues generally."

And Attorney General Eric Holder bears responsibility too. Holder, whose reputation was badly tarnished by his role in Clinton's last-minute pardon for a fugitive financier, seems averse to getting involved again. And among other things, he has allowed the Bush-era pardon attorney, Ronald L. Rogers, to stay on. Rogers, a longtime prosecutor, took over in 2008 after Bush's previous appointee was accused of mismanagement and of making racially offensive statements.

Obama "should appoint his own pardon attorney and decide how he wants to use his power," Love said.

Furthermore, a former attorney in that office recently complained in the Los Angeles Times that the current staff is actually biased against the very work they're supposed to be doing. Samuel T. Morrison wrote:

Having spent more than 10 years as a staff attorney in that office, I can say with some authority that the prevailing view within the Justice Department is that the pardon attorney's sole institutional function is to defend the department's prosecutorial prerogatives....

As a result, there is a strong presumption within the pardon office that the number of favorable recommendations should be kept to an absolute minimum, regardless of the equitable merits of any individual petition. This stance ignores the reality of a burgeoning federal prison population of more than 200,000 inmates, many serving lengthy sentences for nonviolent drug offenses, and the proliferation of collateral disabilities that hinder ex-offenders' ability to restart their lives, which the attorney general himself has criticized as a "recipe for high recidivism."

The work of the pardon attorney's office (which has a staff of 13) has historically been conducted in secrecy. A Freedom of Information Act filed by Lardner and upheld last month by the U.S. Court of Appeals promises to change some of that. But as of now, all we know is what's on the DOJ website, where a fairly inscrutable chart informs us that there were 1,287 pardon requests and 3,430 commutation requests pending as of Sept. 30, 2010.

Rumors are now swirling within pardon circles that at least some grants of clemency are expected soon. The vast majority of such grants in modern times have been issued in December.

Ruckman thinks that's a mistake. "These Christmas pardons, I think they send the wrong message, that pardons are gifts to people who may or may not deserve them," he said. "We think presidents should pardon on a regular basis, instead of fourth-year splurges and at Christmastime."


*************************

Dan Froomkin is senior Washington correspondent for the Huffington Post. You can send him an e-mail, bookmark his page; subscribe to RSS feed, follow him on Twitter, friend him on Facebook, and/or become a fan and get e-mail alerts when he writes.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
 
 
  • Comments
  • 2,022
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (39 total)
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
12:29 PM on 11/27/2010
I was doubtful about the quality of this article from just reading the headline, but found it a great and important read.

And it speaks VOLUMES about how Obama is NOT a liberal, much less a progressive.

Obamabots take note! How do you explain this one? And what of it if he surpasses GWB - shrub - as the bottom? The mere thought that there could be ANYTHING for which Junior was more "liberal" or "progressive" on than Obama is just a horribly frightening thought!
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
davidpkronmiller
07:54 AM on 11/27/2010
Numbers can be fun.

Consider this -

Looking at that chart from the DOJ Clinton denied 175 pardon petitions in 1994 out of 392 submitted - the rest he  let expire without reviewing and did not pardon or grant clemency. (he received 656 clemency requests and turned down 400 and let the rest expire and not pass)

Obama has denied any petitions for clemency nor pardons - he has let many of them lapse but, and get this, nearly 200 of the 494 pardon requests that Obama has received (versus pending) he still has not weighed in on - and there are still a couple thousand clemency requests pending - meaning he's still reviewing many.

By this point Clinton had denied 175 pardons - Obama - zero - Clinton had denied 400 clemency requests - Obama zero.


 http://www.justice.gov/pardon/actions_administration.htm
06:17 AM on 11/26/2010
If this is the best you can do I suggest a different line of work.
05:31 AM on 11/26/2010
Obama is very strategic and has a long vision. I wonder if there is a legit reason for this.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
cybersense
07:17 AM on 11/26/2010
I honestly started to look up information regarding this. Although I have posted on here where to look for some factual information regarding how this process works, and were to look at real statistics, this story did make me check deeper into this. So, for that I do thank Dan. And I heard Public radio's story on this as well. But, as I dug around there are a lot of things to consider:
 
I found out how understaffed the Pardon Attorney's department is. They do work along with the DOJ, and we know that the Legal Councel there has had appointments held up by the GOP.
I look at the incredible amount of work it takes to fill out a petition for Clemency as well. If you don't have a laywer or money for one, it looks like some of these petitions get denied for the very reason of improper paper work. More then that - the Pardon Attorney has to review and investigate every case. This is before the President sees any of those petitions.
 
Apparently, under other Presidents - those who had public focus had a bigger chance of being either Pardoned, or comm. (change of sentence, or partially pardoned). This is because there is so much to look at, not just politics - but because it is so well known, they focus on those cases for that reason. Some who also had public awareness did get denied. I read some stories of those in the past that seemed like they should have been pardoned. First time offender, non violent and no direct involvement in a drug related sentence that seem terribly extreme. This didn't seem like justice to me, it seemed like whoever sentenced some of these people where on some power kick.
 
However, we do not know all the details. (I did say seemed), it seems crazy to put some people in such extreme senteneces - especially since we know that jail hardley reforms anyone, but often teaches intiates them more into the same mentality of much worse offenders. Not in all cases - but it is credible to say to a large extent.
 
Pardons/Comms used to be more frequent per president, until Reagan became President. (not blaming him) for whatever reason. President Clinton was blamed for being a little unconsistant, but still had more Clemency actions. Our President was just recently condemened for giving a Thanksgiving message, I cannot think of one President that has been so critized on everything he does, as much as President Obama. This President cannot win, so in the mean time - it would be nice if DAN would actually do some critical work and let us know about some of those who are asking for Clemency that we can help pressure those that have been waiting too long.
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
12:38 PM on 11/27/2010
"This is before the President sees any of those petitions."

But the article indicated that Obama in October "denied 71 pardon requests and 605 commutation requests sent over by the Justice Department for his consideration."

These are requests that have been fully vetted.

Do you refute that number?

I also note you said, "I cannot think of one President that has been so critized on everything he does, as much as President Obama." Frankly, you sound like an Obamabot.

I, on the other hand, am not an Obamabot, but neither am I his opponent. Rather, I'm a concerned citizen who knows the realities, knows things take time, etc, but feel completely justified in highly targeted criticism when it is appropriate. On this point, specifically, he has had the opportunity and has _chosen_ not to act.

When will Obama become the president he told us he would be during the campaign?
08:43 PM on 11/27/2010
really thoughtful post, thank you
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Leah Watts
05:10 AM on 11/26/2010
If Obama were revealed to be Jesus Christ, himself, it wouldn't be enough for some people, many of whom are found here and for a particular agenda. Then there's the projection issue. Maybe this writer has a problem with his former employer not having pardoned hiim for the little journalistic faux pas he committed.

http://www.myspace.com/virginiadem
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
cybersense
07:38 AM on 11/26/2010
we cannot access that link Leah.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:16 AM on 11/27/2010
If he were "revealed" to be JC, I suspect that would confirm all my worse fears and I would become an even bigger critic of his failures. After all, then he would be g-d to several and still done less than Carter.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:37 AM on 11/26/2010
I was trying to figure out the attack Obama theme for 2011. It's now obviously "cruel Obama". Fromkin's article is a repeat of accusations made to Bush reported by the BBC some years ago: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7752594.stm.
Allthough "pardon season" (how cruel of me to mock this vestige of royal power granted by the founders of our republic !) is yet to start, the season for speculative journalism seems never to end; let me give it a try. A few days ago it was posted that Obama has become "bird of Prey", this should explain his solidarity towards turkeys.
12:21 AM on 11/26/2010
Those who want to defeat President Obama are trying to find ways to bring blacks on board.
photo
colourful
To Change or Make a Difference
12:06 AM on 11/26/2010
“Obama, a constitutional lawyer by training, and the first African-American president, could issue pardons and commutations that make a powerful statement about the justice system past and present.”

I tried to read beyond this sentence, but couldn’t. What do you mean when you say this president “Could issue pardons and commutations to make a powerful statement about the justice system past and present?”

President O does what a president does, past and present. Yet when he does it, somehow his motives are different. Why would his decision represent anything more or less than his predecessors? This is the same mindset that gives us the Birthers.

To you and the like, he is just different, different, different!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Leah Watts
05:15 AM on 11/26/2010
Yes, and the key word is "different." The Right uses this "difference" to de-legitimise this President. It's certainly nice to know that people who purport to be on the Left are doing the same thing, and doing it by highlighting this "difference". Dan needs to bleach his sheets some more.
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
12:43 PM on 11/27/2010
"This is the same mindset that gives us the Birthers. "

??

What on earth are you talking about?

The man is both saint and sinner, like very nearly absolutely every single one of the rest of us. As such, he has some legitimate criticism due him - just like every single one of us. Yet some people take valid criticism and try and make it into some kind of blanket attack. It isn't.

This is about thoughtful, legitimate criticism, and if you can't take that, you shouldn't be president. And you, as his appologist, aren't helping things.
photo
colourful
To Change or Make a Difference
05:11 PM on 11/27/2010
So, let me see if I understand you. Are you saying that the comment, "The first African-American president, could issue pardons and commutations that make a powerful statement about the justice system past and present," is ordinary? A statement you would use for President Clinton? President Bush? Really?
My point is that people are too preoccupied with this president’s ethnicity, and its statements like the one I’m pointing out that demonstrate this. The statement serves no other purpose than to influence people to see him as black first. Not just black, but as a black activist.

Apologist – not hardly.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Randy Wetzel
09:34 PM on 11/25/2010
Though this is not a statement on the points, valid or not, of this article, I have to say its a shame that if someone on the left critizes Obama many of the others from the left jump them like a piranha, even if what is said isn't that bad. I'm a Dem and I, like many, get called a racist among other things if we say ANYTHING against BO. I guess some lefties need to get over themselves.
Whats even sadder is, when a complete i-diot on the right won't call out Bush, because he is one of them, we let him know how st-upid he is for wearing blinders, yet if we can't call out Obama, that makes many on the left the same hypocrites we accuse the Republicans of being , and personally I refuse to behave as blindly loyal and ig-norant as they. If you wish to be a mirror image of a Republican, complete with the st-upid gene, go right ahead.
10:01 PM on 11/25/2010
List your complaints. I'll listen.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
cybersense
07:32 AM on 11/26/2010
Randy, I would agree with you partially, but there is more information that Dan dosn't list here. What Dan's rant focus on this issue did do for me was that I found more credible information. I also found out reasons that perhaps - didn't start with Obama. I also found out that there are those who have been put into jail that were not pardoned in any extent under Bush that seemed they should have been. So, for that - I thank Dan, but this article doesn't do any justice in the realm of what is really going on. If you go to the site I have listed on here repeatedly, you will find how the process works and the real statistics. When you that the amount of petitions that have been reviewed by the Pardon Attorney/DOJ. It goes through two understaffed departments. The Legal Councel appointments were delayed, the Pardon Attorney's department, apparently - has been understaffed for some time, and not just with this president either.
 
So, this article that Dan has posted does come up short. It is also pretty similar to a few other articles out there - so I have to ask Dan how much work he did on this. It isn't fair if we compare his work to others who do the same, but it is fair to ask why he didn't do more. His work kind of follows this same path. Some of us do read his work. It would be really be nice to learn about some of these people who are asking for some sort of clemency. Hopefully, someone will take the bull by the horns and do so.
 
President Obama was just slammed for his Thanksgiving Message to America. I have not ever heard of any President so critized by so many for any reason.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Randy Wetzel
09:47 AM on 11/26/2010
I was speaking in more general terms and less about the article, I found the article rather lacking personally. My post had more to do with when a progressive makes a post here that says something unfavorable about Obama, there are many here who attack them for doing so (and usually racist is the first word used) and those people just made me think of the thick headed Republicans who can't ever see anything wrong when it involves their side of the aisle.
I do think all the attacks against Obama from the right are ridiculous and just push their hate and boogeyman agenda. Its just sad that so many on the left are just as blind as the right, I expected us to be better then they.
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
12:53 PM on 11/27/2010
You raise a valid point, but you ignore the article's statement that:

"And it's not just that he hasn't gotten around to it, either. In October, he formally denied 71 pardon requests and 605 commutation requests sent over by the Justice Department for his consideration."

Do you refute that point? (No, not yet you haven't, though I have asked you several times now.)

So one of the main tenants of your argument that the criticism of Obama on this point isn't valid isn't particularly valid.

Face it, you are an Obamabot apologist.

Some appropriate and valid criticism is HEALTHY. And in this instance
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rebt
a liberal in the bible belt. Oh the humanity.
09:09 PM on 11/25/2010
Just a side thought. Wonder if they dope these turkeys' before they place them in front of our presidents? Hate to see one of them go all ape snit on everybody. A passing wonder.
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
davidpkronmiller
08:44 PM on 11/25/2010
Dan's facts are off according at least to the chart he links to. Clinton's first pardon was in 1995 and most presidents have little to no pardons their first two years. Clinton also got significantly less requests.
06:39 PM on 11/25/2010
lol
I find it funny all of the people defending the president in this thread.
I wonder what they said when W. hit his record? Suppose it was, "Quit trying to discredit the president!" Probably not...
While I'm all for giving the guy a chance, he's already had it. I can't imagine all the people here defending his administration actually being in favor of the execution of citizens without trial, back door meetings with industries to write legislation, allowing torture to continue,
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
cybersense
07:37 AM on 11/26/2010
Because lylo, some of us actually do look up real information. This isn't about executions by the way. Some of us spend time actually finding out what is going on in congress ourselves. Some of us have been around in this political arena and know what to expect. Those who just started to learn, or haven't yet are usually the ones who are easily swayed into believing something different. Hang in there - whatever you decide.
RTIII
Poster of over 0.0135% of all HufPost comments
12:54 PM on 11/27/2010
Obamabot reactionary.

Your criticisims of others are mostly wrong.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jennifer Mead
Girls dig unix
06:06 PM on 11/25/2010
I stopped being surprised by Obama's campaign rhetoric and actual work at President a long time ago. I guess there are still some people are still "hoping".
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:40 PM on 11/25/2010
A very interesting aspect of this presidency, but it's been clear from the beginning that he doesn't stick his neck out for anyone, despite the campaign rhetoric.

In fact, the discrepancy between the campaigner and the actual presidency is so vast that I fear he may be a GOP mole.

I also believe that President Timid should resign to save whatever is left of the Democratic Party.

He does have one more thing to do though: grant tax cuts to the wealthy without extending any unemployment benefits to the desperate. Then we will be officially through the looking glass and beyond the Rubicon.

We'll know next week.
06:41 PM on 11/25/2010
The funny thing is, I would be surprised if somehow the tax cuts didn't go through but unemployment did.
That's how far right our "liberals" in Congress and the White House are.....
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:56 AM on 11/26/2010
You make no sense here whatsoever.