'THERAPEUTIC JUSTICE'

Frustrated with drug laws that fill prisons without fixing addicts,
California voters approved Proposition 36, a hopeful, if dubious,
answer to one of society's most corrosive problems.

Instead of jail for nonviolent drug abusers, the initiative requires
probation and treatment for first and second convictions. We opposed
Prop. 36 as a simplistic answer to a drug epidemic that has defied
police, the courts and medical intervention.

We remain skeptical that the law can be implemented with consistency
in the state's 58 counties with such vastly different populations and
needs. Prop. 36 also undermines the authority of drug courts and
removes the sterner legal consequences of drug abuse. For better or
worse, Prop. 36 is a giant step toward decriminalizing of drugs.

However, the $19.2 billion-a-year federal war on drugs is a dismal
failure and California, with its prisons packed with drug offenders,
isn't doing any better.

For all of its uncertainties, the new law offers a kinder, gentler way
of dealing with chronic drug offenders.

The state Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs, with primary
responsibility for administering the law, will hold a three-day
conference in San Diego this week to figure out how to make it work.
Kathryn Jett, director of the department, says the meeting will
include representatives from all 58 counties and will be aimed at the
practical, legal and technical issues of making the program work.
"We're changing the justice system's philosophy from punitive to
rehabilitation," she says. "It's therapeutic justice."

With only about a month-and-a-half before Prop. 36 becomes law, there
remain many unanswered questions. How much of the money will be spent
on rehabilitation services and how much on probation and
administration? The counties will decide.

Drug offenders face 30 days in jail if they are convicted more than
twice of using drugs. Public defenders say that is the maximum
allowable sentence; prosecutors argue it is the minimum. Courts will
decide. A major weakness is that the law does not provide funding for
drug testing, a key to successful treatment. Will counties finance
testing, the best way to tell if an addict is still using?

Are there enough rehab facilities, and are they ready for a big
increase in the number of clients seeking treatment?

Prop. 36 is a bold experiment that will likely need a good deal of
fine-tuning over the next few years. It will take hard work and the
goodwill efforts of everyone involved -- including notoriously
undependable drug offenders -- to make it work.

"We all want these individuals off the streets and into treatment and
back into productive lives," says Jett. "We are offering them a second
chance in life. We offer hope."

Taxpayers have already invested $60 million in start-up costs, and
will provide $120 million a year for the next five years to establish
and run an array of community-based rehab, educational and vocational
services.

Money will be distributed to counties according to a formula based on
population, drug arrests and case-load estimates.

California voters were asked last year whether nonviolent users of
illegal drugs should be treated as criminals and punished, or as
victims of an illness who need treatment, counseling and care.

The answer came with the passage of Prop. 36. We accept the voters'
verdict and support the humane intent of the law, but drug addiction
is a pernicious sociomedical affliction without a simple cure.

In recent weeks, America has witnessed the sad spectacle of actor
Robert Downey Jr. and baseball great Darryl Strawberry in their
downward spirals of addiction, arrests and failed attempts at rehab.

Sometimes it takes a hard-nosed approach to kick drugs. Sometimes
kindness and good intentions aren't enough.