Republicans Spread Misinformation On Rockefeller Drug Law Reforms

by: robert.harding

Fri May 29, 2009 at 14:15:42 PM EDT

Now, Republican state senators are making sure that they spread misinformation so that they can reap the political benefits of that misinformation.

The Republicans are arguing that a provision in the deal that would allow those who complete a drug treatment program, such as a drug treatment court, alternatives to incarceration program or other non-prison-based treatment program, to have their drug conviction sealed so that they can re-enter society and obtain employment.

There are exceptions to that provision, however. The exceptions apply to all law enforcement purposes, background checks for police officers and those seeking a license to carry a firearm.

The goal of this provision wasn't to compromise public safety, as some Republicans would like you to believe. The goal of this provision was to allow those who successfully complete a drug treatment to have a chance at re-entering society and finding employment.

However, Republicans would make you believe that drug felons will be invading your schools and becoming teachers.

From The Buffalo News:

A group of Republican state lawmakers Thursday said they are unhappy about a new law that permits courts to seal the criminal records of certain drug felons so there will be no record of their conviction when the offender applies for a job.

"Cocaine dealers or crack heads could end up teaching your child at school, caring for your toddler at day care or attending to your sick grandmother in the nursing home as a result of this shocking new law that hides the past of criminals," said State Sen. Catharine M. Young, R-Olean.

When the Republicans are losing a battle, they resort to fear. That's exactly what they are doing here. The truth is that the Republicans are trying to benefit from the same idea that led to the creation of this legislation. Remember, it was Nelson Rockefeller who created these laws to try and make himself appear tough on crime and drugs at a time when he needed to show that he was conservative enough for the national stage.

Now, the GOP is trying to use public safety as a reason why we need to get rid of this provision.

While we all support public safety, the Republicans try to scare us into public safety. If doing it to protect our families isn't a good enough reason, they start to say things like "cocaine dealers or crack heads could end up teaching your child at school" or "caring for your toddler at day care or attending to your sick grandmother in the nursing home." If you have to scare someone to support your view, then you really have no real argument or view to begin with.

The reality is that this is nothing new. This provision has existed for some time, but it was previously handled by prosecutors, not judges. Now, thanks to the reforms passed by the New York State Legislature and signed into law by Governor David Paterson, the power is put back where it belongs: In the judge's hands.

And to be clear: This provision will not apply to anyone who is sentenced to prison. Also, the provision doesn't mean that records will be automatically sealed. Again, that is up to the judge. Even if an individual successfully completes a drug treatment program, the judge will still have the authority regarding the sealing of their records. So if an individual successfully completes the program, a judge can still, thanks to these reforms, deny their sealing request.

As for the claim by Sen. Young that drug dealers would be allowed to teach in schools and work at day care facilities, I have never heard of a drug dealer who has gotten off easy. Dealing drugs is worse than just being found in possession of drugs. Having a drug addiction is a problem, but the people who feed that addiction are a bigger problem. You won't see any drug dealers teaching in schools because they are likely to receive prison time, meaning they won't have the option of a sealing request when their time comes.

The Republicans are grasping at straws here and will continue to argue (incorrectly) that this provision puts us in danger. Actually, the provision doesn't put us in danger. It provides a judge with more power and gives those who have committed minor drug offenses an option to turn their life around.

That is what these reforms are all about. The Republicans didn't support this from the beginning. So it's no surprise they are picking this provision to oppose now.

VIDEO: Malcolm Smith On Rock Law Reform

by: phillip anderson

Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 13:14:33 PM EDT

It's Official: Rockefeller Drug Law Reform Deal Reached

by: phillip anderson

Fri Mar 27, 2009 at 12:48:22 PM EDT

New York Gov. David Paterson and legislative leaders have agreed to ease drug laws that were once among the harshest in the nation and led a movement more than 30 years ago toward mandatory prison terms.

The agreement rolls back some of the tougher sentencing provisions pushed through the Legislature in 1973 by then-Gov. Nelson Rockefeller, a Republican who said they were needed to fight a drug-related "reign of terror."

Critics have long claimed the laws were draconian and crowded prisons with people who would be better served with treatment.

Paterson says Friday that judges will now be able to use techniques like treatment and counseling that have proven more effective than prison for low-level offenders. At the same time, penalties will be toughened for drug kingpins.

It's long overdue and I'm very curious to see the reactions to the details from those who have been following this decades long tragedy closest.

The full press release from the Three Men is in the extended entry.

UPDATE: Senator Liz Krueger (D-Manhattan) just released this statement:

"I am very proud to be a part of history today and finally see the Rockefeller Drug Laws reformed.  The reforms announced today will restore judicial sentencing discretion and substantially expand alternatives to incarceration for non-violent drug offenders.

It has been a long hard fight to reform these archaic drug laws and today is the culmination of decades of hard work and advocacy from countless people, all of whom deserve praise for helping to achieve these needed reforms."

Finally: Rockefeller Drug Law Deal Reached

by: phillip anderson

Thu Mar 26, 2009 at 02:49:27 AM EDT

Albany Reaches Deal to Repeal '70s-Era Drug Laws

Gov. David A. Paterson and New York legislative leaders have reached an agreement to dismantle much of what remains of the state's strict 1970s-era drug laws, once among the toughest in the nation.

The deal would repeal many of the mandatory minimum prison sentences now in place for lower-level drug felons, giving judges the authority to send first-time nonviolent offenders to treatment instead of prison.

The plan would also expand drug treatment programs and widen the reach of drug courts at a cost of at least $50 million.

New York's drug sentencing laws, imposed during a heroin epidemic that was devastating urban areas nearly four decades ago, helped spur a nationwide trend toward mandatory sentences in drug crimes. But as many other states moved to roll back the mandatory minimum sentences in recent years, New York kept its laws on the books, leaving prosecutors with the sole discretion of whether offenders could be sent to treatment.

...

Passing drug law revisions would give Senate Democrats a significant legislative victory at a time when Republicans are hammering them, saying they are disorganized and ineffective.

Senator Eric T. Schneiderman, a Manhattan Democrat who has led the effort in the Senate to overhaul the drug statutes, said he was confident he had support in the Senate to pass the plan.

"It's no secret the Senate's old majority was the primary barrier to reforming our drug laws," he said. "But this is one of the reasons we fought so hard to take the majority. This is what our supporters have expected us to do."

This four decade long experiment proved to be an utter disaster that destroyed families, especially those of people of color, denied judges the discretion to serve justice and led to the distortion of the state's political system by taking poor urban drug offenders from their communities and placing them in rural upstate prisons where they were counted as residents for purposes of apportionment, funding and redistricting.

It's profoundly disappointing that it has taken so long to finally repeal much of this sad abomination, but I guess it's better late than never. And let's face it, those folks in Albany needed this pretty bad as well, particularly Paterson and Smith.

Must Read Rock Law Report From NYCLU

by: phillip anderson

Wed Mar 11, 2009 at 16:52:06 PM EDT

There has emerged over the last decade a broad consensus among policy experts, criminal justice scholars and lawmakers that the War on Drugs, with its singular emphasis on incarceration, has failed.

In 1993, on the 20th anniversary of the Rockefeller Drug Laws, New York State Corrections Commissioner Thomas Coughlin, III, said the state was "lock[ing] up the wrong people ... for the wrong reasons."

Former Republican state senator John Dunne was a sponsor of the state's mandatory sentencing scheme for drug offenses. He subsequently organized a coalition that has advocated for fundamental reform of the Rockefeller Drug Laws. In 2004 he observed, in a television spot, "the Rockefeller Drug Laws have been a well-documented failure."

Yet, as the 36th anniversary of these laws approaches, the state continues locking up the wrong people for the wrong reasons.

This report presents and marshals the empirical evidence that demonstrates New York's mandatory-minimum drug sentencing scheme has failed, utterly, to accomplish its stated objectives. It has not reduced the availability of drugs or deterred their use; it has not made us safer.

The overwhelming majority of those serving time for drug offenses have been convicted of low-level, nonviolent offenses. Many of those individuals have substance abuse problems, and many suffer from a range of disabilities that will not be addressed in prison.

They leave prison prepared for little else but failure and re-incarceration. These individuals are all but guaranteed a vastly diminished earning capacity, if any at all. Families come apart. And because prosecution of drug offenses targets neighborhoods that are already under great social and economic stress, the drug war destabilizes entire communities.

For this dysfunctional approach to criminal justice policy, New York taxpayers pay dearly. Based on cost estimates calculated by the New York State Commission on Sentencing Reform, taxpayers will pay about $600 million to incarcerate drug offenders in 2009 alone.

The costs are not only fiscal. The selective enforcement of the drug laws has done great damage to the integrity of the criminal justice system. The state's drug sentencing laws are the legacy of a grim racial history. And the nature of the injustice worked by these laws can only be fully understood in this historical context.

From the late 19th Century into the 1960s, Jim Crow laws were enforced with the objective of denying blacks equal protection of the laws and full participation in civil society. By the late 1960s the legal infrastructure of Jim Crow had been dismantled. But over the subsequent decades a successor was revived in statutes prohibiting drug use. Prosecution under these statutes has led to massive, unprecedented rates of incarceration - and prisons populated almost exclusively by people of color.

The Rockefeller Drug Laws are the Jim Crow laws of the 21st Century. This report includes demographic maps of urban centers throughout the state that depict in bold relief the racial and ethnic bias that informs the state's drug-law policy.

The Rockefeller Drug Laws are unjust, irrational and ineffective. Period.

The racial and ethnic profile of the population sent to prison for drug offenses is particularly striking. It is well established in scientific literature that the demographics of those who use or sell illicit drugs reflect the demographics of the general population. In other words, there are greater numbers of whites - as compared with blacks and Latinos - who use and sell drugs. However, nearly 90 percent of those incarcerated for drug offenses in New York State are black or Latino. And in this respect the year 2007 was unexceptional. Gross racial and ethnic disparities among those sent to prison for drug offenses have become statistical constants - both in New York State and nationwide.

The enactment of the Rockefeller Drug Laws in 1973 was a bold, albeit simplistic, political response to a complex public policy problem. The politics of this initiative were driven in part by then-Governor Nelson Rockefeller's aspiration for national office. Any such candidate must demonstrate a commitment to upholding law and order. And in the early 1970s there was concern among New Yorkers, and Americans generally, that a sharp rise in heroin use and property crime posed a growing threat to public safety. The governor responded by promoting, and ultimately signing into law, the nation's most harsh and inflexible drug sentencing statutes.

Here's a map of NYC from the report.

Twenty-five percent of NYC adults sent to prison in 2006 came from neighborhoods with just 4 percent of the adult population. More than half were admitted for drug offenses, and 97 percent were black or Latino - even though whites use and sell drugs in far greater numbers than blacks or Latinos

...

Community District 5, which includes East New
York, is populated largely by people of color. Just 5 percent of residents are non-Latino white. In 2006, at least 400 residents of the district were incarcerated; 40 percent of those individuals were sent to prison for drug offenses.

Community District 12, which includes the neighborhoods of Kensington and Borough Park, is 63 percent non-Latino white. In 2006, just 39 people living in the district were sent to prison. Approximately 25 percent of those individuals - about 10 - were sent to prison for drug offenses.

There's tons more data in the report and I really can not recommend it highly enough.

On the web: The Rockefeller Drug Laws: Unjust, Irrational, Ineffective

Senate Dems Roll Rock Reform To Budget

by: phillip anderson

Fri Mar 06, 2009 at 13:49:27 PM EST

"Our Conference gathered Wednesday night to discuss proposed reforms to the Rockefeller Drug Laws, including the Governor's proposed bill and the Aubry/ Schneiderman legislation (A.3984/S.2855). The conversation was thoughtful and frank, and our members expressed a consensus that we need to undertake Rockefeller Drug reform. At the conference, our members raised a number of issues and concerns that must be taken into consideration, specifically the importance of investing new economic development resources into the communities that currently house the potentially thousands of non-violent offenders who would instead enter drug treatment facilities under proposed Rockefeller Drug Law reform.

It became clear in our discussions that this is as much a budgetary and economic issue as it is a sentencing issue. For this reason, the Senate intends to include the key provisions of Rockefeller Drug Law reform in our upcoming budget resolution to ensure that:

·          There is adequate funding for treatment facilities;

·          We invest in communities that currently house non-violent offenders who will instead enter drug treatment facilities to mitigate any economic impact and diversify the local economy with new economic development initiatives;

·          We secure additional funding for counties that incur additional costs because of local treatment and incarceration requirements. The proposed Executive Budget cuts back on funding for local probation-we will restore those funds to protect local municipalities from another unfunded mandate; and

·          Expand judicial discretion to ensure that judges can make informed sentencing decisions.

We believe the best way to comprehensively achieve each of those goals would be to include these provisions as part of the State Budget.

As savings from Rockefeller Drug Law reform are realized, that funding   will be dedicated to meeting the costs that may be incurred as a result of the reforms initiated. However, the Senate is currently working with our colleagues in government to determine what streams of funding in the federal stimulus package are also available to offset upfront costs that are incurred.

Rockefeller Drug Reform can be a win-win. We are addressing this issue in a diligent and prudent manner to protect communities, save taxpayers millions of dollars, and reduce the high rate of recidivism that occurs under the current policy. We look forward to negotiating an agreement with the Assembly and the Governor that helps us simplify and improve outdated sentencing laws."

I'm honestly not sure what this means for the prospect of finally repealing these laws that have quite obviously failed. I suspect that ultimately this is good news and the reasoning put forward by the Majority Leader appears sound. That said, I'd love to hear from anyone who can shed a bit more light on exactly what just happened here.

Little help?

NYCLU On Rockefeller Reforms: Good First Step, But More Is Needed

by: robert.harding

Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 10:20:01 AM EST

But do these reforms go far enough? While the New York Civil Liberties Union praises the Assembly bill as a "good first step", the NYCLU says that more needs to be done to realize true reforms.

In anticipation of the passage of a bill later today, the New York Civil Liberties Union applauded the State Assembly for taking the first significant step in dismantling the draconian Rockefeller Drug Laws.

"New York State is closer to justice today than we were yesterday," said NYCLU Executive Director Donna Lieberman. "By passing this bill, our state's Assembly is letting go of 36 years of failure and moving toward meaningful reform of the Rockefeller Drug Laws."

Enacted in 1973, the Rockefeller Drug Laws mandate extremely harsh prison terms for the possession or sale of relatively small amounts of drugs. Though intended to target drug kingpins, most of the people incarcerated are convicted of low-level, nonviolent offenses. Many of the thousands of New Yorkers in prison under these laws suffer from substance abuse problems; many others struggle with issues related to homelessness, mental illness or unemployment.

For decades, the NYCLU, criminal justice advocates and medical experts have fought to untie the hands of judges and allow addiction to be treated as a public health matter. As noted in the New York State Sentencing Commission's recent report, sentencing non-violent drug offenders to prison is ineffective and counterproductive, and has resulted in unconscionable racial disparities: Blacks and Hispanics comprise more than 90 percent of those currently incarcerated for drug felonies, though most people using illegal drugs are white.

"The Rockefeller drug laws have failed by every measure - cost, drug use, public safety,"said Robert Perry, NYCLU legislative director. "With the passage of Jeff Aubry's bill, the Assembly has acted on Governor Paterson's directive to fundamentally reform the state's failed drug policy.   The bill shifts the paradigm, away from mass incarceration and toward a public health model."

The NYCLU found that the bill does "restore the authority of a judge to divert some people into substance abuse treatment or other community-based programs that best address the person's needs" and "provides for retroactive relief for those sentenced under the old Rockefeller sentencing scheme." The bill also provides re-entry assistance to those already in prison and establishes a "crime reduction fund" to help fund prevention and treatment services.

However, the NYCLU also found that the bill still leaves in place a sentencing system that allows for harsh and lengthy sentences for low-level, non-violent offenders. The bill also disqualifies people from treatment who might need it the most and "creates an unnecessarily burdensome procedure for sealing a criminal record after someone has completed a substance abuse program."

While there is a lot more that can still be done, this is a good starting point. Reforming the Rockefeller drug laws requires a few different approaches, so having a piece of legislation to lay the foundation for more is a good thing. That's what this bill has the potential to do. Hopefully, more can be done in the future.  

Just Say Yes

by: phillip anderson

Tue Mar 03, 2009 at 09:44:19 AM EST

Just say yes to drug law reform

To listen to the three people who effectively run state government, this ought to be the year when New York finally reforms the Rockefeller era drug laws.

Put Governor Paterson, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver or even Senate Majority Malcolm Smith before a microphone, a camera or two and the right audience, and they'll express their passionate opposition to what amounts to 36 years of failure.

"Few public safety initiatives have failed as badly and for as long as the Rockefeller Drug Laws," Mr. Paterson said in his State of the State speech two months ago.

This week, especially, is the time for the governor to act upon such forceful and unequivocal words. In the Assembly, where Mr. Silver vows to "break this state's addiction to mandatory prison sentences for nonviolent offenders," the membership is ready to pass legislation that would give judges the discretion to send those found guilty of having smaller amounts of illegal drugs to treatment rather than prison and to allow thousands of inmates to seek reduced or commuted sentences.

The Senate, which finally has a leader who supports drug law reform, is expected to consider a bill later this session that also would give judges more discretion in sentencing.

...

Their fate is largely in the hands of governor who, as a state senator, used to favor much more sweeping reform. In a radio interview last year, just two months after becoming governor, Mr. Paterson said his opposition to the Rockefeller Drug Laws hadn't changed at all.

So why wouldn't he embrace Mr. Silver's plan? Why wouldn't Mr. Smith support it as well? Some 6,000 or so people could then get the treatment they need more than anything else. All it requires, really, is the leadership that's been absent for so long.

It's long past time to do this.  

Legislation That Would Reform Rockefeller Drug Laws Nearing Passage

by: robert.harding

Sun Mar 01, 2009 at 18:15:23 PM EST

The Assembly is expected to pass legislation on Tuesday that would once again give judges the discretion to send those found guilty of having smaller amounts of illegal drugs to substance-abuse treatment instead of prison and allow thousands of inmates convicted of nonviolent drug offenses to apply to have their sentences reduced or commuted.

Meanwhile, the governor's office is preparing legislation that it plans to present to Senate leaders on Monday that would also give judges discretion in sentencing, according to a senior administration official involved in drafting the bills. But for now, the governor is not taking a position on whether sentences should be reduced for some prisoners.

For its part, the Senate is expected to take up legislation in the coming weeks that would also be aimed at strengthening judges' roles in sentencing.

...

The State Legislature has already eliminated the stiffest provisions of the laws, doing away in 2004 with life sentences for drug crimes and reducing other penalties for the most serious offenses.

But now Democratic leaders see an opportunity to take aim at the judicial underpinnings of the laws by untying the hands of judges, who are often bound to mandatory minimum sentences even for less serious drug crimes.

The mere thought of someone serving a long prison sentence for a nonviolent offense related to drugs boggles the mind. These reforms, if enacted, would be long overdue.  

NYCLU On Sentencing Commission Report

by: robert.harding

Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 08:13:34 AM EST

The New York State Sentencing Commission released their report yesterday and it has already drawn criticism for not going far enough in drug law reform. Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, who has a policy paper on the Rockefeller Drug Laws, said the Sentencing Commission's report did not go far enough.

But the NYCLU made a great argument in their response to the commission's report. In their response, the NYCLU calls for reforming the Rockefeller Drug Laws and said that the commission's report fell short of making those reforms.

The New York State Commission on Sentencing Reform's final report, released today, falls short of Governor Paterson's call for a complete overhaul of the notorious Rockefeller Drug Laws.  

The New York Civil Liberties Union urges fundamental reform of the Rockefeller Drug Laws, which mandate extremely harsh prison terms for the possession or sale of relatively small amounts of illegal drugs. Intended to target major drug traffickers, the drug laws have instead caused the large-scale incarceration of low-level, nonviolent drug users. As noted in the Sentencing Commission's report, the laws have produced unconscionable racial disparities: Blacks and Hispanics comprise more than 90 percent of those currently incarcerated for drug felonies, though most people using illegal drugs are white.

"The State Sentencing Commission claims to embrace the principles of drug law reform, but its proposals just perpetuate the status quo. Sadly, the commission has squandered a historic opportunity to address this shameful blight on our criminal justice system," said NYCLU Executive Director Donna Lieberman. "New York cannot correct its unjust, cruel and wasteful drug sentencing scheme without overhauling the laws that created it. We encourage Governor Paterson to improve on the commission's report by supporting reforms that provide true judicial discretion in drug sentencing, expand and fund alternative to incarceration programs, and provide long-sought justice to the thousands of families that have been torn apart by the Rockefeller Drug Laws."

The commission's report acknowledges that sentencing non-violent drug offenders to prison may be ineffective and counterproductive; but the report's proposals would preclude judges from considering alternatives to incarceration for thousands of individuals who would benefit from treatment and rehabilitation. Specifically, the committee's recommendations would:

·         Preclude youthful offenders with certain prior convictions from diversion to rehabilitation.

·         Require a "certification of addiction" procedure that will result in a complex and costly factual dispute that prosecutors will always be better armed to win.

·         Exclude from eligibility for diversion those who are not addicted but could nevertheless be better served by community based rehabilitation programs. Successful diversion models employed across the country and in New York State demonstrate that providing mental health, vocational and educational services offer the best outcomes.

The Rockefeller Drug Laws' mandatory minimum sentencing scheme compels judges to hand out fixed sentences regardless of the circumstances surrounding an individual's arrest. The criteria for guilt is not the offender's role in the drug transaction or whether the offender poses a genuine threat to others, but simply the quantity of drugs in his or her possession at the time of arrest. The discretion to impose sentences based upon the unique circumstances of each case and to divert nonviolent offenders into suitable alternative-to-incarceration programs should be returned to the judiciary in order to ensure fair and appropriate sentences.

Enacted in 1973, the Rockefeller Drug Laws were intended to target drug kingpins, but most of the people incarcerated under these laws are convicted of low-level, nonviolent offenses, and many of them have no prior criminal record.

"The Rockefeller Drug Laws are destroying lives and wasting tax dollars, and have neither curbed drug use nor enhanced public safety," Lieberman said. "Unfortunately the Sentencing Commission's report will result in more of the same."

The Rockefeller drug laws are a top priority in the New York State Legislature. Governor David Paterson mentioned the laws in his State of the State Address when he said, "I can't think of a criminal justice strategy that has been more unsuccessful than the Rockefeller drug laws."

It is time for reform. The Rockefeller drug laws were created by Nelson Rockefeller who, in an attempt to come off as a hardliner on drugs, created stiff punishments for drug offenders. He did this so that he could woo members of the Republican Party. I think it's safe to say that it worked to his benefit, but it left New York with a huge mess.

It is time to clean up that mess and reform the Rockefeller drug laws.

A 35th anniversary no one celebrated

by: Exile on Ericsson St.

Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 10:39:08 AM EST

Here is testimony from New York State Corrections Commissioner Thomas A. Coughlin:

Let me summarize the impact of the Rockefeller drug laws. . . upon the prison population . . . and why I think we desperately need to modify our approach to the drug epidemic plaguing New York State.

[....]

My position has long been that prison space is a finite resource. We should be filling them with the people we built them for -- the violent predator and repeat offenders. Not the guy who got caught with a few bucks worth of crack. The time is long overdue for the Legislature to recognize this distinction and enact some basic reforms to our sentencing structure.

I firmly believe that drug addiction affecting the street level addict can be far more successfully treated in community settings, instead of the prison environment. It used to be that offenders came to prison and got the high school diploma they never earned on the outside. Now, street addicts are coming to $100,000 prison cells that cost $27,000 a year to operate . . . to get the same drug treatment that could be available at $5,000 to $10,000 per person on the street.

Depressingly enough, that was 15 years ago!  And Pataki's 2004 reforms to the law did little to change the essential nature of the laws.  

Does Anyone Care About America's Prison Industrial Complex?

by: Intrepid Liberal Journal

Sun Mar 04, 2007 at 09:36:56 AM EST

The topic below was originally posted in my blog, the Intrepid Liberal Journal and is als an issue of great importance to New York State.

Citizens across the political spectrum are preoccupied by numerous high stakes issues such as Iraq, Afghanistan, corruption, corporatist greed, genocide, global warming and healthcare to name a few. There is also the ongoing rule of an administration subverting the Constitution and undermining our democracy. As a result, some topics of importance have dropped off our radar screens. One subject meriting renewed scrutiny is the prison industrial complex.

The prison industrial complex are entities or organizations that have a stake in construction of correctional facilities, such as prison guard unions, construction companies and vendors specializing in surveillance technology. Just as sectors in the military industrial complex are more concerned with profit than national security, players inside the prison industrial complex are more concerned about making money than actually rehabilitating criminals or reducing crime rates.