DRUG COURTS SAVE LIVES

Thank you for my life." That was the simple summation of gratitude issued
last week by one recovering drug addict graduating from the Denver Drug
Court.

If only one addict were spared a life of addiction and crime, the court
would be well worth the effort. But in fact, 70 percent of more than 4,800
Denver court participants between December 1996 and December 1999 either
graduated from or remained active in the recovery program, which usually
lasts 18 months.

So we are chagrined and disappointed by Denver District Judge Morris
Hoffman's article in the North Carolina Law Review, blasting drug courts as
a "scandal" and an experiment that should be abandoned.

Hoffman raises many valid concerns, such as the risk of federal meddling in
state and local courts, the "unhealthy interdependency" of the judicial
branch with private treatment providers and the advent of judges making drug
policy because elected officials lack the political will to do so.

The policy questions he poses are excellent ones, and they should be
addressed.

But this "experiment" most assuredly should not be abandoned.

The War on Drugs policy of imprisoning ever more offenders hasn't fixed a
thing. Indeed, drug-related arrests rose more than four-fold between 1970
and 1998.

Most substance abusers eventually cure themselves without treatment. Among
those who don't, but who seek private treatment, only about 15 percent
remain drug-free after one year. Contrast that with the 71 percent success
among offenders sent to U.S. drug courts.

These courts speed felony drug offenders through the system, freeing regular
courts to more rapidly address murder, rape and other violent cases. They
fashion sentences ranging from treatment to prison time, depending on the
offender's record and potential. Then they monitor defendants closely,
requiring urinalyses and doling out punishments or rewards depending on
behavior.

Granted, those who qualify for drug court are predisposed to have a greater
chance of success. But that's precisely the beauty of the program. Those who
can be salvaged are salvaged, rather than locked up to count the days until
they can abuse drugs again.

We respect Hoffman's concerns about these programs. But clearly, programs
this effective should be improved and elaborated upon, not abandoned.