PROPOSITION 36
Drugs. Probation and Treatment Program.
We endorse Proposition 36, which would mandate treatment, not
incarceration, for possession, use or transportation of controlled
substances. Drug addiction is a health problem, not a criminal act,
and it’s about time we treated it as such.
Rehabilitation programs have proven to be more effective in
treating drug addiction than prisons, where even people not
previously using hard drugs can gain access to them.
If Proposition 36 passes, more than 24,000 nonviolent drug
offenders would be diverted to drug treatment programs in the
community instead of being sent off to prison, according to the
California Legislative Analyst’s Office.
Under current law, a person convicted of minor possession of
drugs such as marijuana or LSD could be imprisoned for as much as
10 years, only to come out of jail addicted to harder drugs.
Contrary to popular belief, this initiative would not legalize
drugs, nor would it allow for drug dealers or manufacturers to go
free. Rather, it would give people convicted of using or carrying
drugs a second chance in life. It is a moderate measure which would
exclude violent drug offenders from foregoing a prison
sentence.
Critics of Proposition 36 have argued the measure may allow
people convicted of possessing date rape drugs to escape proper
punishment. But this is not the case. Proposition 36 only affects
“personal use” ““ people who use or plan to use
date rape drugs on others in order to make it easier to rape them
is not “personal use” and they will get the punishment
they deserve.
Others decry that Proposition 36 would legalize hard drugs such
as heroin, cocaine or methamphetamines, and thus spread the use.
This argument is simply flawed. First of all, people already use
these drugs regardless of their illegality, and second, there
should be no discrimination in which drugs are acceptable for
treatment and which aren’t.
Furthermore, it is important to understand that under this
proposition, if someone is convicted of charges other than use or
possession of drugs, including rape, carrying firearms, assault or
child neglect, they still would not be able to get around serving
prison time.
Any other charges against a person at the time of the drug
possession arrest would still be valid. Also, someone who refuses
drug treatment, or someone who has failed treatment more than two
times, would automatically go to jail.
We cannot emphasize enough that Proposition 36 affects people
convicted of nonviolent drug offenses. This excludes more than just
cases that involve violence, it also excludes instances that
involve possession of drugs for the purpose of production or sale,
as well as the manufacturing of illegal drugs.
After more than 20 years, the government and voters must finally
acknowledge that the “War on Drugs” that began in the
1980s under the Reagan administration has failed. As a result, we
have more than 2 million people in our prisons, a prison population
exceeded only by Russia. In California alone, 24,000 nonviolent
drug offenders enter the prison system every year. This measure is
a cautious step toward rectifying the damage this costly war has
wrought.
As it is, jails and prisons in California are overcrowded,
mostly with non-violent drug offenders. Proposition 36 would help
alleviate overcrowding and treat drug addiction.
Because it costs less to send a drug offender to a
rehabilitation program than to put them in prison, Proposition 36
would save taxpayers money.
The Legislative Analyst estimates that Proposition 36 would
result in savings to the state prison system, because many of the
non-violent offenders currently in prison would otherwise have
served only a few months in jail. The Legislative Analyst estimates
as many as 11,000 fewer prison beds would be needed at any given
time.
Consequently, state prison operating costs would be reduced by
$200 million to $250 million annually within several years after
implementation of this measure. In addition, Proposition 36 would
cost the state only $120 million annually.
In 1996, Arizona voters passed a measure similar to Proposition
36, with a preliminary success rate of 61 percent, though it is too
early to judge the overall success rate. And although the Arizona
initiative was criticized for not giving judges enough discretion
in sentencing, California has headed off such claims by allowing
judges to send offenders they feel are showing no signs of
rehabilitation to prison.
In the interests of justice, choose treatment, not ineffective
punishment. Vote yes on Proposition 36.