EXCERPTS ON PROPOSITION 36

Host: Daryl Kagan

Guests: Congressman Doug Ose, Betty Ford Center President John Schwarzlose,
Yes on Prop. 36 campaign rep. Dave Fratello

[begin excerpt]

KAGAN: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE, continuing our discussion as we turn
our attention now to California's proposition 36. It concerns the treatment
of people who commit drug-related crimes.

Joining us are two representatives from California. Democrat Maxine Waters
will be with us in just a moment, and right now, we have Republican Doug
Ose.

Congressman, good to see.

REP. DOUG OSE (R), CALIFORNIA: Good afternoon. Thank you, Daryn. How are
you today?

KAGAN: Doing just fine. Good to have you here with us. I believe you're
from the Sacramento area, Northern California.

OSE: That's correct.

KAGAN: Well, it's good to have you along.

This thing, Proposition 36, a good thing or a bad thing in your eyes?

OSE: This is a flawed proposition that needs to be voted down, pure and
simple. It's got so many flaws that I don't know where to start, but I'd be
happy to do that.

KAGAN: Pick -- come on, just pick one.

OSE: Well, it's not written by anybody associated with the medical
industry. There's no doctor input into this entire initiative. There's not
a single word in here talking about how treatment is to be provided.

In fact, if you look at the entire initiative, about 4,500 words, 3,500 of
the words deal with changes to criminal statute, and the rest deal with how
the money is going to be distributed, but not a single word about treatment
itself. If our objective is to provide treatment who are trying to rid --
to people who are trying to rid themselves of this drug scourge, that's
what we ought to be doing. But this initiative does not do that. KAGAN:
What about the big problem of all these people who are talking up space in
prison and jail that cost the government, I think, about $24,000 a year for
each person to have them behind bars? There's too many people like that, a
lot of people believe, and that this would help empty some of the prisons
and give space to really violent, really hard-core criminals.

OSE: Before -- before -- Daryn, before I got involved in this, I checked
that exact argument out, and if you look at who's there, the people who are
actually incarcerated for drug possession or trafficking or what have you,
you'll see that by and large the vast majority of them have plea-bargained
down their original charges to a drug possession or something similar
charge. And as a result, what you see is, when you actually look at the
record, they're incarcerated for drug possession. But in fact, it is a plea
bargain that they have come to because the original charges were far more
serious charges, charges such as drug trafficking.

KAGAN: But do you agree that the war on drugs is not working, that there's
a big problem here with the billions of dollars that the government is
spending and you still have all these people using drugs and going to jail
just for that? Something has to be done.

OSE: I do agree with you, Daryn, that our effort to eliminate drugs from
our society could stand improvement. And what we need to do, as this
initiative says but does not do, is focus on treatment in particular. In
fact, this year the federal government spent $6 billion nationwide on
treatment programs. Last week, we passed a bill off the floor of the House
setting aside $485 million over the next five years for additional
treatment program.

This week in the Commerce, Justice, State appropriations bill, we put $63
million in for treatment. The flaw here, what we are talking about here is
Proposition 36. And Proposition 36 says it's treatment. But there's not a
single piece of evidence in the initiative -- no words, nothing -- about
how treatment is to be delivered. In fact, what is in there denies
treatment to people who are incarcerated for drug offenses. It specifically
prevents the use of these funds to treat people in jail right now for drug
addiction.

KAGAN: Here's a good comment and question from somebody in your home state
of California. It's from Paul, who writes and asks via e-mail, "It's a
shame that the potential leaders of our country," Mr. Gore and Mr. Bush,
"do not talk about the No. 1 problem in the United States." And he believes
that's drugs. Do you think there's been a lack of discussion on the
campaign trail, Congressman, about the drug problem this year?

OSE: Daryn, I do believe there has. This is not an easy problem.

I sit on the Drug Policy Subcommittee of the United States Congress. I'm on
the speaker's task force. This is something people would rather turn away
from and not face, but in fact it is possibly the greatest threat we face.
When we have young people -- this past year we had over 16,000 people whose
deaths in the United States were attributable to drug use. That is a
tremendous loss of life, and we need to do something about it.

KAGAN: Congressman, we'll ask you to stand by and stay with us...

OSE: OK.

KAGAN: ... We're going to take a quick break. We're going to find
Congresswoman Waters, we'll and continue our discussion after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAGAN: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE.

That opening shot can kind of make you hungry there. Snacks after the show
for everybody. Meanwhile, we're continuing to talk about a California
drug-treatment initiative, and on the phone with us right now is John
Schwarzlose, president and CEO of the Betty Ford Center in California.

John, good talk with you.

JOHN SCHWARZLOSE, PRESIDENT & CEO, BETTY FORD CENTER: Thank you.

KAGAN: what's your take on this Proposition 36? It sounds like it's
something that might be right up your alley since you are in the treatment
business.

SCHWARZLOSE: We are in the treatment business, and over the last two years
have treated over 20,000 citizens of California. But we are strongly
against this proposition. And the reason is it is not about treatment. It
is a very poorly written proposition.

And we're -- we're against what the drug war has done. We have been loud
critics of our nation's drug war and what it has accomplished. It has
accomplished very little.

But that's not what this proposition is about. We've been trying to get
people across our state to read the actual proposition, and of course
that's been a hard thing to do, because most people go into the ballot box
without being able to do a lot of research.

But it is a poorly written proposition. It is not about treatment, and so
we're taking a strong stand against it.

KAGAN: If it's not about treatment, then what's it about in your eyes?

SCHWARZLOSE: It is about the decriminalization of drugs. And George Soros,
the primary financial backer, has make it very clearly, very open about
that that's what it's about. What I'd like to see is take that money and
expand drug courts. In California, we have 110 drug courts that are showing
wonderful results across our state. We need money to examine those drug
courts. Let's put our money where it's working, not coming up with a new
kind of system that is unproven and that really is not about treatment.
KAGAN: John and Congressman Ose, I want you to stand by and continue our
conversation.

I'm going to bring in some members of our audience here. Here's Aikens from
Massachusetts.

AIKENS: My problem isn't with the legalization of drugs or not --
legalizing or not. The problem is the people that are in jail, they're in
jail for drug use. What rehabilitation are they getting? Are they being
treated? And what is the use of putting people in jail for using drugs when
they're not being treated for the drug use and they come back out and
they're going to keep using the drugs.

So why don't we treat the people for the drug problem and not just
incarcerate them?

KAGAN: John, why don't you take that one first? If you could rule the world
and set up a system like you think it would work best, what would you do
for somebody who is using drugs and is breaking laws?

SCHWARZLOSE: This gentlemen's question is perfect, because what we should
do with people that are arrested for simple possession is send them to a
drug court, where this person's offered treatment rather than jail. And if
they comply, if they do what the judge orders, they will not spend time in
jail. They will get treatment. And in drug courts across California, these
people are returning to their jobs, to their families. We just have to use
systems like the drug courts that are working.

KAGAN: Congressman, would you support that as well?

OSE: I would. I think Mr. Aikens has a great point.

In fact, Proposition 36, the money that's appropriated within it, none of
it by its own writing can be used to provide treatment to people who are
currently incarcerated. Now that is a fundamental flaw. Compare that with
what we did on the floor of the House yesterday, where we provided $63
million for treatment to people who are in prison for exactly the point
that Mr. Aikens makes. And that is that we need to find a way to get people
who are currently incarcerated who are suffering from this disease. -- and
it is a disease -- the treatment, the medical treatment they need.

KAGAN: Our audience member, Norvell, is a very talented young man here.
He's monitoring our chat room, and listening in, and has a comment all at
the same time.

Norvell, go ahead.

NORVELL: Right, I disagree with the notion that drug users, such as like
marijuana users, anyway, need treatment. I think that -- well, listening to
the World Health Organization, they recently put out like a long-term study
conclusively stating that marijuana is far less dangerous than both alcohol
and cigarettes. So I think that the whole notion of them needing treatment
is completely wrong. And I think it's unworkable for us to pay it for it
anyway.

KAGAN: John, I bet you at the Betty Ford Center might have something to say
about that.

SCHWARZLOSE: Well, I don't really disagree with him. Simple marijuana use
and possession, in most states, including California, is treated today with
a fine. People are fined. They don't spend time in prison. What happens is
the chronic marijuana users do need treatment. The casual marijuana users,
I would agree with him. We are not -- we don't put those kind of people in
treatment.

KAGAN: And here's J.R.

J.R.: Yes. I don't know that I agree with the need for a drug court. I
think that gives the judges a bit more subjective reasoning power. They've
already -- they're already way too subjective in doing what they do. As a
result, we have a disproportionate numbers of individuals of certain
classes going to prison being incarcerated.

I believe what should happen is that all of those drugs that are dangerous
- -- for example, known human carcinogens and drugs of that nature -- should
of course remain illegal. However, drugs that have not been backed by
medical science showing any sort of harm or danger, or are more no more
addictive than, say, caffeine -- which is available to children of all ages
- -- should be left alone.

KAGAN: And if you gentlemen can stay with us -- we are going to take a
break -- we'll let you comment on what J.R. had to say more -- right after
this.

According to the Department of Justice, drug and alcohol counseling was
available in nearly 90 percent of state and federal facilities, but only 10
to 20 percent of prison inmates participated in treatment during their
incarceration.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MATT: Hi, my name is Matt and I'm from American University. I think that
non-violent, first-time drug offenders should definitely have the option of
drug rehabilitation. Mandatory minimums are racist and ineffective. Studies
have shown that rehabilitation can work. Furthermore, the purpose of our
prison system is to rehabilitate the people. And here's our chance to do
so. KAGAN: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE.

This being CNN, we are lucky enough to have many international visitors
with us today. And we were asking some of them during the commercial break
what they think of how we as Americans are handling this problem. And we
were talking to Elena from Russia.

You had a comment and then also told us how it is handled in Russia if you
are found with illegal drugs.

ELENA: Salers are punished hardly, yes. But you -- I can't say that I'm --
I know everything about this point. But the users is usually called
patients. And if they want, they having a treatment. But that is only --
they are free choice to have a treatment. And if they want to have a good
treatment, they should pay for that and pay a lot. Not everybody can afford
this payment.

I think that the main idea of treatment is the accountability, to be
responsible of what you did. And you should choose that: I want to be
treated. Only this way treatment can be successful. Otherwise, it's
nothing, just wasting money and wasting of time.

KAGAN: Congressman, was that you trying to get in there? Or what was John?

John, you still with us? John Schwarzlose, Betty Ford Center, are you still
with us?

SCHWARZLOSE: I'm here.

KAGAN: OK, good. I would imagine that, in your position, being with this
world-famous Betty Ford Center, that you must treat people from all around
the world and also have contact with a lot of international people. Have
you been able to gain anything by that interaction and get an insight of
how different cultures treat their drug problems?

SCHWARZLOSE: Oh, very much so. In fact, we have actually visited Russia,
where that young woman is from, as a guest of their government. And we've
learned a lot. And I think that they have learned a lot from what we are
doing in this country. And the bottom line is, there is not a country in
the world that has a total answer to the drug problem.

KAGAN: Anywhere that you are particularly intrigued by how they handle it,
though?

SCHWARZLOSE: Well, I kind of like the way that they do it in Scandinavia,
because they have a relaxed -- like in Sweden and Finland, fox example.
They have the relaxed attitudes, but when people need treatment, the
government makes sure that they get treatment. And here in this country, we
have huge waiting lists at treatment centers. People don't have access to
treatment. And so that's the kind of thing that I would like to see us fix.

KAGAN: Congressman, in your research, have you seen those same problems:
not enough access to the kind of help that people really need?

OSE: Daryn, I think what John has said is accurate. But Proposition 36 does
nothing to address that issue. I want to go back for a minute to
Nathaniel's comment from American University about treatment for first-time
users. Proposition 36 doesn't allow for proper treatment of first-time
users. And the reason is that the single-most effect effective means of
monitoring behavior from someone who is abusing drugs is drug-testing. And
Proposition 36 specifically excludes that from being eligible for funding
under the initiative.

And it's a terrible problem for doctors and professionals who are trying to
rid people of this scourge if they can't have some means of holding the
drug abusers who are trying to cure themselves accountable for their
actions.

KAGAN: And we'll continue their conservation -- more on that, more on
drug-testing. I would like you to ask a couple questions about that,
Congressman.

But we need a break. And we'll talk about more after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAGAN: Drug offenders accounted for 23 percent of the state prison
population in 1995, up from 6 percent in 1980. They accounted for 60
percent of the federal population ion 1997, up from 25 percent in 1980.

Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE.

Continuing our conversation, first a little housekeeping item. We told you
that Congresswoman Maxine Waters was going to be with us. She did intend to
and had a scheduling conflict, was not able to be with us today. So in the
interest of fairness, getting more out on the other side of the argument --
we've heard plenty against Proposition 36 in California -- I want to the
bring in Dave Fratello. He is for Proposition 36 and in fact working with
the people to put that on the ballot in California.

Dave, are you with us?

DAVE FRATELLO, CAMPAIGN FOR YES ON PROP 36: Yes, I am.

KAGAN: Tell us why it would be a good idea to pass Proposition 36 in
California?

FRATELLO: Well, because the alternative hasn't worked. We've got basically
36,000 people going to jail or prison every year, who instead would go into
drug treatment under this initiative.

We do have an experimental system that's been mentioned, the drug courts.
But they are reaching about 5 percent of all the people who would be
eligible under Proposition 36. So we need to do a lot more.

And Prop 36, it looks like it's pretty likely to pass. We're going to have
a lot of challenges ahead to make quality treatment programs available and
to make this whole thing work throughout the system, but it's a fundamental
change in our drug policy and, we hope it will be a national model.

KAGAN: We have with us also Representative Doug Ose, Dave, just so you
know. He represents the Sacramento area in Congress for California, and he
- -- well, Congressman, I won't speak for you. You go ahead and jump in. You
said that 36 is not a good idea. There's not enough or nothing in there
about rehab.

OSE: Thirty-six is fundamentally flawed. If you go back and you actually
read the initiative, 4,500 words long, 3500 words deal with changes to
penal-code statutes. There's not a single word in there about treatment.
This is about treatment. Drug abuse is a medical disease that requires
medical professionals. Proposition...

KAGAN: Congressman, I just want to make sure that Dave gets plenty of time
to respond.

FRATELLO: Yes, that's really a bizarre statement. I mean, of course it's a
change in the criminal law, so there are a lot of words in there about it.
But the fundamental issue here is that the initiative provides mandatory
treatment for first and second offenders and it provides money to pay for
that treatment. That's going to go through our state department of alcohol
and drug programs to the counties. The counties will set up what kind of
programs they think they need.

That's a step-by-step process, very much a localized process. And, you
know, the reason that I believe this initiative has drawn support from the
medical community -- from the California Society of Addiction Medicine,
from the nurses' association, from the drug and alcohol counselors. This
has really ended up a debate between drug treatment and medical
professionals versus law enforcement.

KAGAN: Dave, we have to take a quick break. Stay with us.

[end]