VIEWS ON PROPOSITIONS 34 & 36 NO

A Front For Legal Drug Use

The proponents of Proposition 36 are attempting to mislead the voters into
thinking that they have a quick fix for the tragedy of drug addiction.
Simply pump $120 million a year into unregulated drug-treatment programs,
let drug addicts police themselves and prevent judges from punishing
addicts for failing to stop their drug use.

Like a Trojan horse -- voters will discover upon closer scrutiny that Prop.
36 is a fraud. No incentives for drug addicts to stick with treatment. No
standards for drug treatment. No funding for drug testing. No
accountability for continued drug abuse. No hope for drug abusers and their
families, who want real solutions, not tolerance of more illegal drug use.

Why does Prop. 36 fail to take into account the advice of the leading
drug-treatment experts, who say that accountability for illegal drug use is
vital to recovery? Because Prop. 36 is not a serious drug-treatment
measure. It is an attempt to manipulate voters into approving the
decriminalization of dangerous drugs, such as heroin, crack cocaine, PCP
and methamphetamine.

How did this irresponsible and misleading initiative get on the ballot? The
answer is simple: a well-financed and deceptive campaign bankrolled by the
pro-legalization movement.

New York billionaire George Soros and two other out-of-state backers are
falsely portraying this initiative as a humane answer to drug addiction --
a feel-good measure that will appear to help addicts kick their habits
while saving taxpayers millions of dollars.

Because advocates of drug legalization cannot win on its merits, they have
learned to cloak their efforts under the guise of socially attractive
programs. In this case, they have chosen drug treatment for addicts to hide
their goal of tolerating illegal drug use.

What they don't say is that the drug-treatment programs on which this
initiative proposes to spend $120 million a year will not stop illegal drug
use. Under Prop. 36, anything goes. Everything from videotaped
``treatment'' programs to Internet chat rooms for addicts can qualify for a
share of your tax dollars. The predictable result would be a proliferation
of pseudo treatments for the drug addicts who desperately need real help.

Prop. 36 specifically prohibits any of the proposed funding for drug
testing, choosing instead to trust drug addicts to hold themselves accountable.

Prop. 36 prohibits payment for any treatment over 12 months, even though
extended treatment often is the most effective approach for many long-term
addicts.

Prop. 36 also doesn't provide funding for treatment programs to help
addicts in California prisons.

Finally, Prop. 36 would undermine California's highly effective,
individualized addiction treatment. Drug courts, unlike Prop. 36, hold
illegal drug users accountable for their behavior.

The drug courts also save taxpayer dollars. Every $1 invested in the drug
court system saves an estimated $10 by reducing jail time, decreasing crime
and lowering criminal justice costs.

Californians can take a stand against deceptive efforts to legalize
dangerous drugs and support the state's real drug-treatment programs --
including drug courts -- by voting ``no'' on Prop. 36.