TAFT, OTHERS OBJECT TO DRUG-LAW CHANGE

COLUMBUS - Ohio voters may get to make a decision in November that could
reshape how the state deals with drug offenders.

The Ohio Campaign for New Drug Policies wants voters to change the state
constitution to force judges to let eligible nonviolent drug offenders
choose treatment over prison.

The proposed referendum reflects the belief that the nation's "war on
drugs" is a failure.

Backed by three wealthy businessmen, proponents have already won similar
campaigns in Arizona and California, and helped pass drug-reform
initiatives in 15 other states.

While these successes and public opinion polls suggest a groundswell of
support for treatment over incarceration, Gov. Bob Taft hopes to convince
voters it's wrong for Ohio.

"This amendment is flawed, it's full of loopholes and it's unsafe for
Ohio," Mr. Taft said Monday, standing in front of a bipartisan group of
government, police and drug-treatment officials. "We must oppose this."

The governor, along with First Lady Hope Taft and Toledo Mayor Jack Ford,
launched a statewide effort to combat the drug treatment initiative.

The proposed Ohio Drug Treatment Initiative would let first- and
second-time drug offenders get treatment instead of facing criminal trials.

Treatment would not be an option for violent felons, convicted drunken
drivers or drug dealers.

The amendment would force the state to spend $19 million this fiscal year
and another $38 million over the next six years to pay for the required
expanded treatment programs.

The proposal is the collective brainchild of New York financier George
Soros, University of Phoenix founder John Sperling and Peter B. Lewis, who
leads Cleveland-based Progressive Corp., one of the nation's largest auto
insurers.

These billionaires spend their own money on their campaigns. The 2000
California campaign, for example, spent $4.2 million.

Voters approved it with 61 percent of the votes cast.

The cost of the Ohio campaign could reach $3 million.

"This may be sponsored by wealthy individuals but it is readily adopted by
local people," said Dave Fratello, political director of the national
Campaign for New Drug Policies.

Mr. Fratello predicted his organization will collect more than 600,000
petition signatures by August, nearly double the 335,422 needed to get the
amendment on the November ballot.

"Certainly jail doesn't cure addiction," Mr. Fratello said. "We have enough
experience by now to see a new direction is needed."

One year after California's Proposition 36 took effect, statistics show
roughly a third of the offenders skipped out on their treatment programs.

But Superior Court Judge Peggy Fulton Hora of Hayward, Calif., said 50
percent of offenders never complete their treatment programs.

"The billionaires who are behind this have a misunderstanding of the
criminal population," Ms. Fulton Hora said.

In Ohio, Mr. Taft and state officials say the proposed amendment would ruin
the state's drug court system and actually help repeat drug offenders hide
their addictions and escape justice.

They point to provisions that would let offenders clear their records after
they complete treatment plans.

They also object to a 90-day maximum the amendment would impose on drug
possession convictions. Ohio laws allow for sentences of up to 18 months.

Lew Hollinger, chairperson of the southwest Ohio chapter of Mothers Against
Drunk Driving, said roads and highways could become more dangerous if
offenders are not in jail.

"MADD believes they should get treatment with incarceration," he said.

Warren County Sheriff Tom Ariss said Ohio employers would never know about
prospective employees' drug history if they are able to expunge their records.

Mr. Taft and Mr. Ford said Ohio's 48 drug courts, which already offer
treatment programs to offenders, would lose their power to enforce that
treatment.

Mr. Ford said the amendment would take away a drug court judge's power to
jail offenders who don't go to treatment.

"Ohio's drug court judges will lose their best tool," Mr. Ford said. "We
need to let the drug courts work."

Hamilton County's drug court boasts a 91 percent success rate, one of the
highest in the country.

It has graduated more than 800 people with only 74 re-offenders.

Despite that, Edward Orlett, a former state lawmaker and lobbyist leading
the Ohio Campaign for New Drug Initiatives, said drug courts can't handle
the case load.

"They were able to process between 1,500 and 1,700 clients. Last year in
Ohio there were 6,300 who were charged with felony drug abuse," he said.
"We're not even serving 25 percent of those eligible for treatment.

We can do better than that in Ohio."

SIDEBAR

THE SCOOP

About the initiative

The Ohio Drug Treatment Initiative is a proposed constitutional amendment
expected to be on the statewide ballot Nov. 5.

* The measure would provide treatment instead of prosecution or jail time
for people charged with illegal possession or use of a controlled substance.

* Treatment would be an option for any non-violent, first-or second-time
offender.

* An offender would not be eligible for treatment if convicted of or
imprisoned for a violent felony within five years of committing the current
offense; or if, in addition to the drug offense, the person had been
convicted of or had pending charges for trafficking, manufacturing or
selling drugs; a violent felony, or a misdemeanor involving violence; or
illegally operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

* The type of addiction treatment and other rehabilitative services
required for each individual would be established by an addiction
professional. Treatment could last up to 12 to 18 months, depending upon
the recommendation of the addiction expert.

* The judge and an independent drug treatment expert would monitor each
offender's progress.

If program violations or relapses occur, the judge could intensify the
treatment program or impose various sanctions on the person, including
removal from the program and jail time.

* Treatment programs would be paid for with $19 million in startup costs
and, beginning July 1, 2003, annual appropriations from the state General
Revenue Fund of $38 million per year, adjusted for inflation, for six years.

* A state agency that already licenses and pays for drug treatment programs
would implement this initiative. The agency would distribute funds to
counties and regional governments to pay for local treatment costs and
related expenses.

The money behind the movement

Three of America's wealthiest businessmen have spent millions of dollars to
bankroll referendums to change drug laws, permit the use of marijuana for
medical purposes, and tighten rules on property forfeitures in drug cases.

The three:

* George Soros is president and chairman of Soros Fund Management LLC, a
private investment management firm that serves as principal adviser to the
Quantum Group of Funds.

Mr. Soros chairs the Open Society Institute and is the founder of a network
of philanthropic organizations that are active in more than 50 countries.

* John Sperling is chairman of the Apollo Group Inc., the holding company
of the University of Phoenix, the for-profit school for working adults he
started in the 1970s.

He sponsored the research that produced the first-ever cloned cat in February.

* Peter Lewis is chairman of the board of the Progressive Corp. of Mayfield
Village, Ohio, the nation's fourth-largest auto insurer.

He helped establish the Cleveland Center for Contemporary Art and chairs
the board of trustees of the Guggenheim Foundation in New York. Last year
he gave his alma mater, Princeton University, $60 million for a science
library.