Pubdate: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 Source: San Francisco Bay Guardian (CA) Copyright: 2000 San Francisco Bay Guardian Contact: 520 Hampshire, San Francisco, Ca 94110 Fax: (415) 255-8762 Website: http://www.sfbg.com/ Author: A. Clay Thompson Bookmark: Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act http://www.mapinc.org/prop36.htm PROP. 36 BACKERS PUSH DRUG REFORM If passed by voters this November, California proposition 36 would mark a major de-escalation in the nation's war on drugs, funneling tens of thousands of drug users into rehabilitation programs rather than prison cells. Under Prop. 36, those busted on drug possession charges both misdemeanor and felony would have the option of going into a judge-monitored treatment program for 12 to 18 months. The initiative, which would provide $120 million annually for rehab, covers only nonviolent offenders. "The drug treatment professionals who really had the central hand in crafting this look at drug abuse much as you would look at diabetes or obesity," said Dan Abrahamson of the Lindesmith Center, a drug law think tank that helped draft the initiative. "They don't conceive of a central role for incarceration there; they see a central role for good, trained medical professionals establishing strong relationships with patients and working with them over a period of time." The measure could make a sizable dent in California's burgeoning 162,000 and growing penitentiary population, keeping some 25,000 people out of prison each year and lowering the number of county jail inmates by 12,000 annually, according to the state legislative analyst. The Golden State, notorious for its hellish lockups, leads the country in per capita drug arrests and prison sentences. While the plan may not revolve around jail, those who flunk out of treatment under current law do face sentencing and a potential prison sentence of one to three years. Pouring in some $3 million, a trio of justice system reformers New York financier George Soros, Cleveland insurance executive Peter Lewis, and University of Phoenix president John Sperling are bankrolling Prop. 36. Backers cover the ideological spectrum, ranging from staunch Reaganite George Schultz to lefty L.A. congressperson Maxine Waters, with defense lawyers, rehab centers, and medical groups making up a good chunk of the endorsement list. While West Wing star Martin Sheen is the public face of the No on Prop. 36 campaign, underwriting for the effort comes from the cops-and-courts lobby, notably the prison guards union, narcotics officers, and prosecutors in short, the same people who brought you "Three Strikes, You're Out" and Proposition 21. Most bigwig Dems and GOP-sters are dogging Prop. 36 no surprise given our Dirty Harry political climate but the most damaging criticism has been leveled by judges and doctors working in existing drug courts. The 107 drug courts that have sprung up across the state over the past six years mix rehab with justice, pushing offenders to get clean and sober. Judges say the initiative will supplant the much lauded courts with an unworkable system that doesn't give the bench enough discretion. "To work effectively with substance abusers, we should increase the resources for something that works, rather than trying something we know will fail," said Santa Clara County Judge Stephen Manley, who heads the California Association of Drug Court Professionals. The proposed law allows judges to impose jail or prison time only after a subject has flunked out of two treatment programs or committed a nondrug offense. "It would tie judges' hands," said Dr. Davida Coady, an M.D. with Berkeley's drug court. "The problem with a badly addicted person is you have to get their attention. If you don't have the threat of incarceration, it's been well documented that you lose two-thirds of the people who you could get clean and sober." Prop. 36 foes like Coady are misrepresenting the measure, says campaign chief Dave Fratello, who points out that offenders who fail out of treatment under the proposed law still face hard time in state prison. "Our opponents would love to get the message to voters that there's no teeth in the measure," Fratello told us. Responding to the judicial slams, Prop. 36 backers point to the limited reach of the current drug courts, saying they handle only 5 percent of eligible defendants. "It's a system created by and for judges and prosecutors," Fratello said. "They reach a tiny number of people." - --- MAP posted-by: Thunder