WEST WING STAR TRIES TO SWAY VOTERS ON DRUG PROPOSITION

Actor Martin Sheen, whose son Charlie has been addicted to drugs, fights a
California proposal that would make treatment, not jail, the primary
response to illegal drug use.

LOS ANGELES -- This November, television's favourite president, The West
Wing's Martin Sheen, will test his star status when voters in California
decide whether to end imprisonment for most users of illegal drugs.

Proposition 36, the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act, asks
Californians to make treatment, and not prison, the state's primary
response to illegal drug use.

This week in Long Beach, opponents of the proposition gathered at a Summit
for a Drug Free California organized by proposition opponents, including
the California Narcotics Officers Association.

And this being Hollywood they billed as a ''sneak preview'' a commercial to
air in this state, ''No on Prop 36, No on Drug Abuse'' with Sheen as
spokesman. In the commercial he appears in an open-collared, pale blue
shirt and speaks directly to the camera in his famous voice:

''Proposition 36 essentially decriminalizes hard drugs like heroin, crack
cocaine -- even date-rape drugs. This dangerous initiative hurts
California's drug courts -- opening the door to fly-by-night treatment with
no accountability.... We all want to stop drug abuse, but Proposition 36
isn't the answer.''

Proposition 36 asks California voters to endorse probation and treatment,
not jail time, for the possession, use and transportation of controlled
substances.

The legislation that approval of the proposition would bring in would
impose prison terms for the manufacture and sale of controlled substances.
The legislation would not spare from jail the users of illegal drugs who
have been convicted, in the previous five years, of a violent or serious
crime. It also would not spare the treatment-centre participant who fails
treatment; it imposes jail time of one to three years.

The proposition's proponent, the California Campaign for New Drug Policies,
is comprised of the same reform strategists who persuaded Californians to
pass Proposition 215, a measure that decriminalized the use of marijuana if
it is used for medical purposes.

The proposition's opposition consider it a ''Trojan horse'' that would
legalize the use of street drugs, in at least one state of the union.

Dave Fratello, manager of the California Campaign for New Drug Policies,
disagrees. ''That comment just shows what a terrible debate we have in
this country about drugs. It presents false choice between legalizing drugs
versus an all-out drug war.''

An important arrow in the quiver of proposition proponents is fiscal. The
proposition would direct $120 million US annually into drug-treatment
programs, spending which would produce a net saving of between $100 million
and $150 million annually in prison expenses.

Proponents of the proposition estimate that a full drug-rehabilitation
treatment would cost about $4,300 an individual; it now costs $23,406 a
year to imprison a criminal in California. Says Fratello: ''When you're
talking about spending $120 million in the system and that this initiative
saves money that's positive.''

Another potentially wounding arrow in their quiver is laced with class
antagonism and reflects the unequal distribution of the benefits from the
economic boom California is experiencing. Proposition champions have taken
out a full page advertisement in The Hollywood Reporter under the heading
''Why is Martin Sheen trying to limit drug treatment so that only the rich
can get it?'' The text criticizes the actor for coming between minorities
and the middle class and the drug- rehabilitation treatment received by his
son Charlie.

Martin Sheen's opposition to the proposition no doubt arose from this
family ordeal. As he told reporters: ''I've seen how devastating drug
addiction can be. If I can help other families avoid the pain and heartache
it causes, then I will have made a real contribution.''

Marcella Wess, a 37-year-old former drug addict, is with Sheen because she
thinks Proposition 36 is a public-safety menace. ''The only people this is
going to help is people who want to continue doing drugs. With Proposition
36, no sanctions means it's a user's dream and a dealer's pie in the sky.''

A Los Angeles drug court judge shares that opinion. ''Unless the defendant
is a threat to society or unamenable to treatment, my hands are tied,''
Judge Michael Tynan said at the Long Beach gathering. ''Even on 'three
strikes you're out,' the most a user can get is 30 days.''