News (Media Awareness Project) - US CA: Prop. 36 Critics Applaud UCLA Report |
Title: | US CA: Prop. 36 Critics Applaud UCLA Report |
Published On: | 2004-11-25 |
Source: | Sacramento Bee (CA) |
Fetched On: | 2008-08-21 13:11:17 |
PROP. 36 CRITICS APPLAUD UCLA REPORT
It Proves More Sanctions For Drug Offenders Are Needed, They Say
Critics of Prop. 36, a 2000 ballot measure that gave drug offenders a
choice of treatment instead of jail, have said it is all carrot and no
stick.
A UCLA report released today may bolster their claim. It shows that
Prop. 36 treatment clients were 48 percent more likely to commit
another drug violation within a year, compared to rehab clients who
signed up for treatment under supervision of probation or parole.
"Any treatment model has to have sanctions," said Mike Kennedy,
president of the California Narcotic Officers' Association. "The
problem with Prop. 36 is there are none. That's the big deal."
Results of each study looking at the law have been scrutinized by
supporters and detractors of the ballot measure that 61 percent of
California voters backed, and the law is watched nationally as a
social experiment in drug policy.
Since the law was passed, more than 30,000 people have been exposed to
drug treatment, about half for the first time, according to a
state-funded UCLA report released this year. About 24 percent of the
people who entered treatment completed it.
Today's report published in the journal of Criminology & Public Policy
proves what law enforcement has said all along: that Prop. 36 is not
tough enough, said John Lovell, lobbyist for the Chief Probation
Officers of California.
He said drug courts across the nation give judges the discretion to
fine or send people to jail for a weekend if they are not succeeding
in treatment.
"We need treatment with oversight ... so we're not enabling people in
the program, instead giving them the tools to succeed," he said.
Other close watchers of the law say this study does not make a
sweeping indictment of the program.
"It's not surprising, but it doesn't damn it, either," said Martin
Iguchi, director of the Drug Policy Research Center at the RAND
Corporation. "No one ever said treatment would always work for those
not interested in it."
Iguchi said the long-term benefits of turning a drug user into a
contributing member of society far outweigh the short-term cost of
sending one straight to jail.
The study also shows that compared to people who went to treatment
voluntarily, Prop. 36 clients are 65 percent more likely to be
arrested on suspicion of another drug charge within a year.
But despite the initial outcry from the law-enforcement community, the
study also shows that Prop. 36 clients are not more likely to commit a
violent or property crime one year after starting treatment than the
comparison groups, said Glenn Backes of the Drug Policy Alliance,
which supported Prop. 36.
"The fact that they are arrested at somewhat higher rates is a cause
for concern, but we believe 36 can be refined and improved," he said.
"It's far better than jail."
The study tracks the early months of Prop. 36, which gave non-violent
drug offenders the choice to enter treatment rather than go to jail.
Del Sayles-Owen, deputy director of the state Office of Criminal
Justice Collaboration, said the study takes too quick of a snapshot of
the program as it was still being fine-tuned in each county. Based on
the law passed by voters, counties were free to tailor their own
treatment systems.
The study does highlight the problem some counties are facing of too
few beds in residential treatment centers for people who need intense
treatment, she said. Most Prop. 36 clients go to support groups and
classes several times each week.
"We continue to deal with that issue, the shortage of residential
treatment statewide," she said.
And Sayles-Owen said the study does nothing to prove that Prop. 36 is
not doling out enough punishment to people who are not succeeding in
recovery. While the report shows Prop. 36 clients re-offending at
higher rates than others, she said it does not explain why.
"We are very pleased with client progress in treatment, given that
overcoming addiction is so difficult," she said. "Even those who are
just exposed learn more about addiction and how to seek help."
It Proves More Sanctions For Drug Offenders Are Needed, They Say
Critics of Prop. 36, a 2000 ballot measure that gave drug offenders a
choice of treatment instead of jail, have said it is all carrot and no
stick.
A UCLA report released today may bolster their claim. It shows that
Prop. 36 treatment clients were 48 percent more likely to commit
another drug violation within a year, compared to rehab clients who
signed up for treatment under supervision of probation or parole.
"Any treatment model has to have sanctions," said Mike Kennedy,
president of the California Narcotic Officers' Association. "The
problem with Prop. 36 is there are none. That's the big deal."
Results of each study looking at the law have been scrutinized by
supporters and detractors of the ballot measure that 61 percent of
California voters backed, and the law is watched nationally as a
social experiment in drug policy.
Since the law was passed, more than 30,000 people have been exposed to
drug treatment, about half for the first time, according to a
state-funded UCLA report released this year. About 24 percent of the
people who entered treatment completed it.
Today's report published in the journal of Criminology & Public Policy
proves what law enforcement has said all along: that Prop. 36 is not
tough enough, said John Lovell, lobbyist for the Chief Probation
Officers of California.
He said drug courts across the nation give judges the discretion to
fine or send people to jail for a weekend if they are not succeeding
in treatment.
"We need treatment with oversight ... so we're not enabling people in
the program, instead giving them the tools to succeed," he said.
Other close watchers of the law say this study does not make a
sweeping indictment of the program.
"It's not surprising, but it doesn't damn it, either," said Martin
Iguchi, director of the Drug Policy Research Center at the RAND
Corporation. "No one ever said treatment would always work for those
not interested in it."
Iguchi said the long-term benefits of turning a drug user into a
contributing member of society far outweigh the short-term cost of
sending one straight to jail.
The study also shows that compared to people who went to treatment
voluntarily, Prop. 36 clients are 65 percent more likely to be
arrested on suspicion of another drug charge within a year.
But despite the initial outcry from the law-enforcement community, the
study also shows that Prop. 36 clients are not more likely to commit a
violent or property crime one year after starting treatment than the
comparison groups, said Glenn Backes of the Drug Policy Alliance,
which supported Prop. 36.
"The fact that they are arrested at somewhat higher rates is a cause
for concern, but we believe 36 can be refined and improved," he said.
"It's far better than jail."
The study tracks the early months of Prop. 36, which gave non-violent
drug offenders the choice to enter treatment rather than go to jail.
Del Sayles-Owen, deputy director of the state Office of Criminal
Justice Collaboration, said the study takes too quick of a snapshot of
the program as it was still being fine-tuned in each county. Based on
the law passed by voters, counties were free to tailor their own
treatment systems.
The study does highlight the problem some counties are facing of too
few beds in residential treatment centers for people who need intense
treatment, she said. Most Prop. 36 clients go to support groups and
classes several times each week.
"We continue to deal with that issue, the shortage of residential
treatment statewide," she said.
And Sayles-Owen said the study does nothing to prove that Prop. 36 is
not doling out enough punishment to people who are not succeeding in
recovery. While the report shows Prop. 36 clients re-offending at
higher rates than others, she said it does not explain why.
"We are very pleased with client progress in treatment, given that
overcoming addiction is so difficult," she said. "Even those who are
just exposed learn more about addiction and how to seek help."
Member Comments |
No member comments available...