Pubdate: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 Source: Washington Post (DC) Copyright: 2000 The Washington Post Company Contact: 1150 15th Street Northwest, Washington, DC 20071 Feedback: http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/edit/letters/letterform.htm Website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ Author: Judy Mann DRUG WAR'S FAILURE OPENS DOOR TO NEW TACTIC California has the highest rate of drug use of any state and the highest rate of incarceration for drug offenses, with a 25-fold increase since 1980, according to a new report by the nonprofit Justice Policy Institute. These facts, an overwhelming indictment of the failed war on drugs, help explain why that state has become the latest battleground in efforts to treat nonviolent people convicted of possessing or using drugs instead of jailing them. There are now twice as many people in California prisons for drug offenses as the entire state prison population 20 years ago. California has built 21 prisons during that time, and the political action committee of the prison guards' union has become the biggest contributor to California political campaigns--giving a cool $2 million to Democratic Gov. Gray Davis's campaign alone. Not surprisingly, the union has come out in opposition to the measure, which will appear on the Nov. 7 ballot as Proposition 36. This would provide $120 million a year, for the next 5 1/2 years, for community-based substance abuse treatment programs. According to the state's Legislative Analyst's Office, this initiative will divert 37,000 state and county prisoners into treatment programs instead of jails, resulting in a net saving of about $1.5 billion in that period. Persons convicted of drug possession will receive probation and the judge will assign them to a treatment program. Parolees who violate a condition of parole can also be diverted into a treatment program. Offenders will be supervised by probation officers. "Treatment goes beyond addiction therapy," says William Zimmerman, who is heading the California Campaign for New Drug Policies. "It will include job training, literacy training and family counseling. The idea is we don't want to just send these people into a 12-step program and urine samples. We want to get to the underlying causes of addiction and see if they can be returned to society as law-abiding citizens." Arizona passed similar legislation in 1996, and it required the state's Supreme Court to do an analysis of how the reform was working every two years. The first report, which came out in 1999, found a 71 percent success rate for people going through treatment and remaining off drugs and a 98.2 percent matching rate between recommended treatment and what the person actually got. The court also concluded that Arizona was safer because there were fewer addicts committing crimes to feed their addictions, Zimmerman says. He says a poll taken in June and focus group results are showing extreme voter dissatisfaction with current nail 'em and jail 'em drug policies. "We begin with a large lead. About 80 percent of people polled believe it has failed, and about 70 percent of voters feel it can't work. People also feel that law enforcement should not be playing a role in making policy. There is too much of a conflict of interest. Voters are also concerned with overcrowded jails and the potential it creates for the early release of violent criminals." "Given that voters are more or less on the side of the initiative, the opposition has to distort what it is," he says. Among the more unbelievable distortions is that it would divert people caught with a date-rape drug into treatment programs instead of throwing the book at them. The initiative applies only to people caught with drugs for personal use and to people who are not committing concomitant crimes, in this case, assault. The opposition is also claiming offenders will be given fly-by-night treatment, he says, although the treatment programs would have to be certified by the state or county. A further criticism is that it will do away with drug courts, in which judges have great latitude in sending drug offenders into treatment. "Unlike the drug courts, this is confined to offenders convicted of possession," Zimmerman says. "The drug courts take concomitant crimes. As a result, the drug courts can continue to function." But, he says, drug courts are only serving between 2 percent and 5 percent of the people who need treatment. The drug court judges are opposing the initiative. Zimmerman has headed successful campaigns in seven states to legalize the medical use of marijuana. "In all of this, the opposition has come from law enforcement officers," he says. A Field poll done in June found that 64 percent of Californians were in favor of the initiative, 20 percent opposed and the remainder undecided. "This is another issue where the public is far ahead of the politicians," Zimmerman says. Vincent Schiraldi, director of the Justice Policy Institute, says it has studied 26 states and found a consistent pattern of states having the highest rates of incarceration also having the highest rates of drug use. "In California, it's a watershed for the prison and drug reform issue if voters say yes. It will really say something to legislators in the whole country." Schiraldi makes the point that millions of Americans have smoked dope. "It's an experience a lot of people can relate to." But politicians are terrified of being labeled soft on crime if they back drug policy reform. The upshot is that Americans are being deprived of the ability to debate how we deal with one of our largest public health problems. "People chafe at not being allowed to have a discussion," he says. "It's un-American." It's clear from the polls that people are deeply dissatisfied with the $40 billion a year being spent on the drug war and the results that they are getting. Past California initiatives have had impact far beyond the state. Proposition 36 could lead the way across the country for drug policies that emphasize treatment, rather than jail, for offenders who are harming only themselves. - --- MAP posted-by: Jo-D