DRUG TREATMENT LAW WOULD EFFECTIVELY LEGALIZE DRUG USE

Regarding the editorial by The Tampa Tribune, "A drug treatment law worth
watching" (July 9): It is worth watching, all right, for it offers anything
but effective treatment.

The proposed constitutional amendment would be more accurate titled "Right
to use Drugs." It legalizes, de facto, the possession, purchase and use of
all drugs - crack cocaine, heroin, methamphetamines, marijuana, cocaine,
Ecstasy, and otherwise controlled pharmaceuticals such as the powerful and
deadly oxycodone and fentanyl.

This provision stands the law on its head by creating a free pass for the
repeated commission of felonies occurring with the purchase, possession and
use of Schedule I controlled substances listed in Florida Statute section
893, (i.e., dangerous and illegal drugs). It removes any sense of personal
responsibility for the individual being treated.

Treatment is defined as a "right": indeed, use of the word "right" is
stressed and repeated throughout the length of the amendment.

While the taxpayer is given an obligation to pay for treatment, the drug
abuser is held to no requirement to refrain from using drugs or to see
treatment through to successful completion. Successful outcomes are not
demanded and therefore cannot be expected.

The offender needs only to put in his or her time without concern for outcomes.

As the amendment reads, success or 18 months - "whichever comes first" - is
the only requirement necessary to permit the individual to be excused from
prosecution, sentencing, or continuing court supervision.

In this manner, the amendment would render moot the entire Florida drug
court system by removing the strong incentives of the criminal justice
system to stay the course, as there would be no penalties for failure. An
offender may demand treatment, as a right, at any time, from the moment of
being charged with the offense through conviction and sentencing. In so
doing, at one fell swoop the ability for the drug court to monitor or
supervise the progress of the "client" is removed. What is left is an
unfunded mandate that will lead to increased crime in Florida while
ensuring that fewer of our addicted population receive effective treatment.

Personal responsibility is completely removed from the equation.

In short, what remains is a cynical, imported ballot initiative that would
normalize the use of drugs, confound the law in any attempt to curtail drug
abuse and its felonious consequences, and remove the one element from
treatment that all professionals agree is tantamount to success - strong
incentive to get and stay clean of drugs.

The authors of the amendment ignore the fact that Florida has developed
effective treatment systems and over the past two years has increased
treatment funding by almost $100 million.

Instead they seek to achieve through the referendum process that which they
could not hope to achieve through the normal legal process by which the
state Legislature passes laws. The amendment, by its use of sophistry,
internally contradictory passages, disregard of the benefits of the already
established drug court system and Florida's strides in providing
significant addiction treatment, and emotional manipulation seeks to
confound and confuse the good common sense of Florida citizens.

This outright chicanery offers the voters an illusion of treatment while
concealing its true purpose - the normalization of drug abuse in the state
of Florida. It is, beyond any reasonable doubt, a hoax on the citizens of
Florida by non-Floridians who have targeted us to advance their own, not
our, interests.