Warning: mysql_fetch_assoc() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\include\functions\visitors.php on line 5

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\include\functions\visitors.php:5) in D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\index.php on line 546

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\include\functions\visitors.php:5) in D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\index.php on line 547

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\include\functions\visitors.php:5) in D:\Websites\rave.ca\website\index.php on line 548
US CA: Drug Dilemma - Rave.ca
Rave Radio: Offline (0/0)
Email: Password:
Anonymous
New Account
Forgot Password
News (Media Awareness Project) - US CA: Drug Dilemma
Title:US CA: Drug Dilemma
Published On:2000-11-27
Source:Press Democrat, The (CA)
Fetched On:2008-09-03 01:05:36
DRUG DILEMMA

"If you asked how could you throw a wrench into the works of drug
treatment in California, this proposition has done that," commented
Michael Spielman to Staff Writer Cecilia M. Vega about Proposition
36.

Vega detailed reported local officials' concerns with the mandatory
drug treatment measure that was approved by 61 percent of the voters.

It's not that Spielman, who runs the Drug Abuse Alternatives Center in
Santa Rosa, and Sonoma County Drug Court Judge Robert Dale don't agree
with the theory -- they both believe that treatment is more effective
than jail time in changing the behavior of drug offenders.

But theory doesn't raise money for drug testing, nor does it create
the new programs necessary to treat the thousands of offenders who
will fall under the umbrella created by the measure.

As practitioners in the field, Spielman and Dale worry about these
problems. After all, they work with drug offenders every day. They see
the effect of addictions that lead to job loss, family break-ups,
theft and violence. They see the impact that broken promises can have
on people who are already down and out.

Unless state and local officials can respond to a number of questions,
including the following, Proposition 36 may be another broken promise:

Is the measure's $120 million annual allocation enough to pay for
promised programs? If not, how will the programs be funded?

How will counties recruit, train and pay for the new probation
officers that will be necessary?

How will drug treatment centers recruit and train counselors in areas
with near-zero unemployment rates?

What standards will be used to ensure the effectiveness of new drug
treatment programs that spring up as a result of the measure?

How much will it cost for drug testing? And, where will the money come
from?

These are problems that should have been worked out prior to the
measure reaching the ballot. But, as with so many other initiatives,
Proposition 36 was developed and circulated within a relatively small
community of supporters. Now it's up to the local courts and drug
treatment programs to make sure it works.
Member Comments
No member comments available...