Pubdate: Fri, 17 May 2002 Source: South Florida Sun Sentinel (FL) Copyright: 2002 South Florida Sun-Sentinel Contact: http://www.sun-sentinel.com Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1326 ONE DOWN, TOO MANY STILL LEFT In a year of bad election-related news, Florida voters finally have something to smile about: An already-clogged Election Day ballot Nov. 5 will have one less state amendment to be decided. That only leaves about 10, way too many for even the most politically savvy and dedicated people to keep track of. To cut the overload, state legislators should ask voters to limit how many amendments can be on any future ballot to eight or less. The good news is that one amendment's sponsors decided recently to delay a referendum two years, to November 2004. The Campaign for New Drug Policies had only collected about 100,000 of the 489,999 voter signatures they needed by the Aug. 9 deadline. If enough voters sign up, ballot position in 2004 will be assured. On Thursday, the Florida Supreme Court ruled 4-3 that the amendment meets the required tests: It deals only with a single subject and matters directly related. And its ballot language is not ambiguous or misleading. Regrettably, the high court has no authority to rule if any such amendment is good, necessary or effective public policy, or if it belongs in the state Constitution at all. This amendment is not and does not. It's an example of an excellent idea ruined by being carried too far. The idea is now being used successfully by Drug Courts in counties like Broward, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach. Such courts offer drug addicts treatment and rehabilitation to help kick their habits, with the promise of avoiding a criminal conviction and prison if they succeed. But the amendment is overkill. It represents a policy that belongs only in state law. It effectively decriminalizes purchase, possession and use of illegal drugs for first and second offenses. It doesn't even make drug offenders successfully complete treatment; they just have to attend a program for 18 months. It overrides existing drug courts that have begun to show high degrees of success. It prevents judges from using their most effective deterrent weapon, "shock sentencing" of people caught using drugs during treatment. The two-year delay in bringing this amendment to a vote provides valuable time for Drug Courts to be implemented in all judicial circuits and do an even better job in helping addicts. The delay also provides time for Drug Court supporters to make their case to voters that this amendment is not needed and would be harmful to the war on drug abuse. - --- MAP posted-by: SHeath(DPFFlorida)