ATTORNEY GENERAL OPPOSES DRUG PLAN

Proposition 36: Proposal Calls For Therapy Instead Of Jail For Most Drug
Offenders

The state's top law enforcement officer and the largest provider in the
country of drug treatment announced their opposition Thursday to a ballot
initiative that would mandate therapy in the community instead of jail or
prison for most non-violent drug and alcohol offenders.

Attorney General Bill Lockyer announced his opposition at a news conference
in Sacramento. Lockyer said he agrees that California should devote more
money to treatment rather than automatically imprisoning addicts, but he
said Proposition 36 actually would harm efforts to rehabilitate drug users.

"Drug treatment programs don't work unless there's both a carrot and a
stick," he said at a Capitol news conference with other law enforcement
leaders including Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca. The stick, he
indicated, is the threat of jail or prison if the defendant fails treatment.

Joining Lockyer in his opposition was Phoenix House, which operates 70
substance-abuse treatment programs across the country, including facilities
in Los Angeles, Orange and San Diego counties.

"Proposition 36 is a dangerously deceptive measure," said the firm's
president, Mitchell S. Rosenthal, in a release from the firm's Los Angeles
quarters. "It would undermine the drug courts and all the state has done to
reduce drug use by California's most drug-troubled citizens."

Rosenthal characterized the measure as ``a giant step toward
decriminalization of drug use,'' and maintained that research of the past
two decades has shown that seriously disordered drug users need to be
compelled to change their lives.

Supporters countered with an endorsement from the proposition's own
big-name treatment program and suggestions that Lockyer's opposition is
tempered by his need to be politically correct on the issue.

"The reality for him now is that he has a constituency he has to respond
to," said Dave Fratello, director of the Yes on 36 campaign. "That's
organized law enforcement, which always speaks with one voice on these issues."

Fratello said his forces are "disappointed" in Lockyer's stand since "he
often tried to do the right thing in the area of drug policy as a state
senator. And he still says he's interested in expanding the availability of
treatment."

Fratello also pointed to support from the Delancey Street Foundation, which
operates treatment and self-help facilities in San Francisco and outside
the state.

With a few exceptions such as Phoenix House, support for the measure has
largely come from drug-treatment and public-health organizations, while law
enforcement and the state's judges generally have come out in opposition.

Judges and prosecutors are opposed, they said, because drug courts in
California are working and this law would put too-strict limits on judges
to return offenders to prison if they fail treatment.

According to an estimate by the state's independent Legislative Analyst,
the proposition would divert some 36,000 people a year from prison or jail
and require them to receive treatment at recovery houses in local
communities. It also would, in a few years, begin saving the state some
$150 million a year in the cost of incarcerating drug offenders.

Opponents, however, said the measure basically permits a drug offender to
fail treatment three times before a judge can even administer a 30-day jail
term, a point that Fratello said vastly over-simplifies the reality of the
situation.

Contact Ed Pope at epope@sjmercury.com or (408) 920-5641. The Associated
Press contributed to this report.