PROP. 36 CAUSING EMOTIONAL DEBATE OVER HOW TO DEAL WITH DRUG USERS

California, which since 1980 has shown a 25-fold increase in its
number of imprisoned drug offenders, leads the nation in locking up
addicts, according to a study released Thursday.

The Justice Policy Institute study claims California's number of
persons imprisoned for drug offenses rose from 1,778 in 1980 to 44,455
in 1999, and that the state now has twice as many people doing time
for drug offenses as its entire 1980 prison population.

The study claims that while the number of people entering the nation's
state prisons for violent offenses nearly doubled from 1980 to 1997,
the number of nonviolent offenders tripled and the number of persons
imprisoned for drug offenses increased 11-fold. Almost one in four
people now in prison nationwide is behind bars for a drug offense, the
study says.

But those statistics are extremely misleading, warn opponents of
California's Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000, a drug
court initiative appearing on this November's ballot as Proposition
36.

The Justice Policy Institute study was underwritten by a foundation
created by millionaire financier and philanthropist George Soros, one
of the three main proponents of Prop. 36.

California already has some drug courts offering those charged with
drug possession or use an option of treatment and monitoring rather
than imprisonment.

Prop. 36's backers claim the measure will expand that program;
opponents, including many drug court officials, fear it will cripple
the system.

Prop. 36 spokesman Dave Fratello said the study shows the state has
spent hundreds of millions of dollars to lock up drug offenders, a
tactic that "has failed California spectacularly.

"Proposition 36 would flip California's drug policy 180 degrees by
providing treatment, not prison, for nonviolent drug users," he said.
"Our state is now No. 1 in the nation in its rate of imprisonment for
drug offenses. With Proposition 36, California could become No. 1 in
its rate of treatment for drug offenders instead."

Not so, insisted Alameda County Deputy District Attorney Jeff Rubin,
who said he studied and now opposes Prop. 36 as "the most devastating
assault on our ability to prosecute crimes that has ever been foisted
on the citizens of California.

"No one in Alameda County is going to state prison for first-or
second-time drug possession -- it just doesn't occur," he said.

"I would buy lunch for the first person to show me a dozen people who
are in state prison for a first-or second-time possession case that
wasn't pleaded down from a sales case or that didn't have a strike
prior."

Rubin said public perceptions of drug treatment and imprisonment
issues are "fed by the folks who are trying to legalize drugs. ...
It's just a horrible falsehood."

About half those who go to state prison for drug possession crimes
have serious or violent prior convictions, he said -- "They would
still be in prison anyway, even if this initiative passed" -- and most
others are imprisoned because they've have had more serious charges
reduced to drug possession in a plea bargain.

U.S. Reps. Tom Campbell, R-Campbell, and Maxine Waters, D-Los Angeles,
and U.S. Rep. John Conyers Jr., D-Mich., were at a Washington, D.C.,
news conference unveiling the study.

Conyers said he brought amendments this week that "offer us a good
starting point for reforming our federal drug laws;" one of those
amendments would create the first federal drug courts.

Conyers said he and other lawmakers are preparing bills that respond
"to our failure to address the serious problem of drug treatment
alternatives."