part ii

If I Ruled the World – Parity with Criminal Sentencing – Part II: Federal Regulation

Part one of this handled parity in sentencing from a state standpoint.  We will assume that we are now after the initial 3-year directive and all states have complied mainly because they don’t want to lose federal funding.  However, I believe this initiative can be refined further.  The federal government would review the new state sentencing guidelines and have 2 years to come up with a universal maximum for each criminal offense that each state must not exceed.  Once this is established the states would have 2 years to update sentencing as needed to stay within the parameters.  Again, any state that doesn’t abide by this will lose some federal funding.  Additionally, states that are repeat offenders would have their percentage penalty doubled with the occurrences tally not resetting for 10 years.  So, for example, if in 2027 a state didn’t comply and fell sure 3%, in 2028 complied, and in 2029 fell short 3% again they would be penalized a total of 6% (3% x 2) in federal funding.  This is to deter states from thinking they can avoid the double luxury penalty by complying every other year.