Pubdate: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 Source: Arizona Republic (Phoenix, AZ) Copyright: 2006 The Arizona Republic Contact: http://www.arizonarepublic.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/24 Author: Jim Walsh Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/meth.htm (Methamphetamine) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/rehab.htm (Treatment) PROPOSITION WOULD TOUGHEN METH LAWS In the crowded list of measures on the Nov. 7 ballot, Proposition 301 is barely drawing notice. But it could land those convicted of first-time possession of methamphetamine in jail or prison. Arizona voters in 1996 passed an initiative that made it all but impossible for first- and second-time drug possession defendants to be sentenced to jail, steering them instead to probation and drug treatment. Now, citing the rise of methamphetamine use, backers of Proposition 301 want voters to make an exception among drug defendants. If passed, the initiative again would allow judges to incarcerate those convicted of first-time possession of methamphetamine. It also would make successful completion of treatment a condition of probation. Opponents say passing the resolution would waste money and backfire by filling prisons with drug offenders who need medical treatment, not expensive punitive incarceration. They say the present law requires treatment and allows judges to impose jail terms for defendants who fail to comply. "We need to take this scourge seriously," said Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas, who backs Proposition 301. He noted that 40 percent of inmates in county jails test positive for highly addictive methamphetamine. "The idea is to give prosecutors and judges the tool so they can encourage offenders addicted to meth to get off the drug," Thomas said. "Meth has reached such proportions in our community that it deserves to be singled out." The county attorney said judges should have the right to imprison those convicted of first-time possession of methamphetamine if the person convicted has a long history with the criminal justice system and crimes including identity theft that often are committed by methamphetamine addicts. Caroline Isaacs, a spokeswoman for Meth Free Arizona: No on Proposition 301, said that passage of Proposition 301 likely would make the methamphetamine problem worse. "The bottom line is, given (that) we have a huge meth problem in Arizona, why would we make treatment less likely than more likely?" Isaacs said. The purpose of prison is punishment, not treatment, making methamphetamine possession convicts more likely to re-offend after they are released, said Isaacs, Arizona program director for the American Friends Service Committee in Tucson. "Under the current program, if someone blows off treatment, they can be sentenced to prison at any time," she said. "In Arizona, our knee-jerk reaction is to be more punitive, rather than smart." - --- MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman