CALIFORNIA'S PROPOSED DRUG-REFORM LAW PROVING CONTROVERSIAL

SAN FRANCISCO, California (CNN) -- Many people convicted of drug possession
in California will no longer go to jail if voters approve a proposed
drug-reform law on November's ballot.

And that's proving controversial.

Proponents of the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act say the proposed
law would make needed changes in drug laws -- keeping most offenders on
probation and sending them to drug treatment programs rather than jail.

By treating drug use as a disease and not a crime, proponents say
Proposition 36, as the measure is called, would save the state millions of
dollars. It also would reduce drug-related crime and reserve jail space for
violent offenders, they say.

Critics Say Law Not Tough Enough

Opponents say the proposed law for first- and second-time drug offenders has
too many holes in it and fails to treat drug offenders in a tough enough
manner.

Actor Martin Sheen, an impassioned opponent of Proposition 36, says jail is
what offenders need to force them to kick their drug use.

"You have to get their attention," he said.

Stephanie Contreras disagrees.

She says the state's current approach left her without the treatment she
needed when she was convicted of using drugs the first time. She was
sentenced to four months in jail.

"Basically, you're just in there and you learn how to be a worse kind of
criminal," she told CNN.

Proposition 36's critics also complain that the measure will not allow for
sufficient drug testing to ensure offenders are complying with treatment
programs. Proponents respond that judges still will be able to order
testing.

Proponents Cite Cost Savings

Proposition 36's proponents say on their Web site that the measure would
apply to those convicted of possession, use, and transportation for personal
use of controlled substances and similar parole violations. The measure
would exclude offenders involved in the sale or manufacture of drugs.

If enacted, say proponents, the bill's financial benefits would include a
net annual savings for the state of between $100 million and $150 million.
They say local governments would save about $40 million.