PROP. 36 PUTS PRESSURE ON DAVIS, LAWMAKERS

I read your Oct. 23 editorial advising a ``no'' vote on Proposition 36. Then
I read a defense of the bill by the author, Dave Fratello, published on the
same day. Confused, I reread the argument for a ``no'' vote and therein
found the reason to vote yes.

The editorial makes the argument that there is a superior way to accomplish
the drug treatment vs. prison goal -- namely, to use the under-funded drug
courts. It encourages voters to vote no and then pressure the governor and
Legislature to increase the spending on drug courts by over tenfold. Yet,
earlier the editorial stated that you can't imagine our ``tough on crime''
governor and Legislature coming up with that kind of money. This strengthens
the argument for a ``yes'' vote.

We should approve Proposition 36 to show that voters want mandated treatment
over costly, ineffective incarceration. A ``no'' vote is likely to be
interpreted as a preference to fill our jails to the tune of $24,000 per
addict per year.

Proposition 36 may not be perfect, but it is a step in the right direction.
Passage may be the pressure the governor and Legislature need to really
address the problem.

Kenneth Hamann, Dublin