IMPLEMENT DRUG TREATMENT

Prosecutors, probation officers, judges and others in California's criminal
justice system are in the tough position of having to implement a reform
they ardently opposed--Proposition 36, a measure requiring judges to send
nonviolent drug offenders into treatment programs instead of jail cells.

Proposition 36, which The Times also opposed, clearly goes too far toward
leniency. But the state's existing war on drugs wastes hundreds of millions
of taxpayer dollars each year imprisoning drug offenders, only to see them
resume their drug habits after release. Given Proposition 36's passage by a
resounding 61% to 39% earlier this month, state leaders would be wise to
work out details of implementation now so the measure can take effect by
July as the voters willed.

This week, there were hopeful signs that state leaders are ready to do
that. County drug treatment program directors began drafting implementation
guidelines that would prevent turf wars among county programs competing for
a share of the $120 million in treatment money that Proposition 36
provides. And Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco) called
for a state task force to oversee implementation and promised that the
Legislature would allocate more than the required $120 million.

The hardest work still lies ahead. Judges should not send drug offenders
into just any treatment program, as the initiative allows, but rather
should be required to use programs whose efficacy has been proved.

On an average day, 1,500 community-based facilities in California provide
126,000 clients with drug treatment. Some are highly effective: programs
like the Walden House Center for Women and Children in El Monte, a
residential treatment center where drug offenders attend five group
counseling sessions a day on everything from parenting to relapse prevention.

However, Proposition 36 will fund mostly less expensive day treatment
programs, clinics and group homes that, unlike the residential programs,
are not regulated by the state. Gov. Gray Davis and legislators should make
it a priority to pass legislation in January giving the state Department of
Alcohol and Drug Programs the legal and financial resources it so plainly
needs to oversee Proposition 36 programs.

Davis should allocate $60 million from the state's general fund now, as
Proposition 36 requires, so the Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs can
start identifying and expanding successful treatment programs. With prompt
funding, the department might actually be able to create the 3,000
treatment slots a month that will be needed beginning in July. Additional
funds will be required to expand drug testing and probation, which are not
funded through the initiative.

Finally, district attorneys, who led the fight against Proposition 36,
should avoid the temptation to undermine the measure, something they could
easily do by charging abusers with additional petty crimes to ensure they
go to jail or prison.

The focus should be on making Proposition 36 as effective as possible,
recognizing that whatever its flaws, the system it will replace is far from
perfect.