'SMART ON CRIME' IS BETTER

Gov. Davis, Cultivating A Tough-On-Crime Image, Would Do Well To Look At The
Unintended Consequences.

After more than a year in office, Gov. Gray Davis is still trying to cement
his reputation as the toughest-on-crime governor in recent memory. As he
does so, he leads the state into dangerous waters.

California has experienced a remarkable drop in crime over the past decade.
Politicians here, as in other states where crime rates have plummeted, are
quick to claim credit, citing laws they backed or tougher enforcement
policies as having made a difference. That Davis emulated his Republican
predecessor, Pete Wilson, in pushing for ever-stiffer penalties for even
minor offenses and rejecting moves to temper unduly harsh laws is not
surprising. Governors who have done otherwise, particularly Democratic
governors, have seen their political careers come to an abrupt end.

Yet with state prisons bursting and rehabilitation and drug treatment
programs grossly underfunded, Davis, whose crime-fighter bona fides are now
assured, needs to show he is responsive as well to the unintended
consequences of his tough stance. Here's where to start:

California's three-strikes law is among the nation's harshest. A prison term
of 25 years to life can fall even on felons whose third strike is a
nonviolent petty theft or bad check, not the best use for scarce prison
cells. It is also too often a waste of recoverable lives. Yet Davis has
rejected even a proposal to study the costs and consequences of this law. A
new proposal, AB 2447, is now before the Legislature. It would further
encourage skittish judges to use the discretion the state Supreme Court has
granted them to remove a prior felony from sentencing consideration when the
newest felony is neither violent nor serious. Davis should support it.

The governor should also give up efforts to renew an expired state law that
requires a six-month driving suspension for anyone convicted of even a minor
drug charge, regardless of whether the offender was behind the wheel or even
in a car at the time of the arrest. Federal and state laws already impose
stiff penalties for drug crimes; the "smoke a joint, lose your license" law
was gratuitous.

If Davis is serious about effectively fighting drug abuse, there are better
ways. The state prison system is the logical place to start. The California
Department of Corrections estimates that 80% of all its inmates may be
substance abusers and that 37% were imprisoned specifically for dealing in
or possessing illegal drugs.

Davis has already taken a small but significant step in the right direction
by asking legislators to fund 1,500 new drug treatment slots, with the
modest goal of providing intensive drug treatment programs for 9,000 of the
state's 162,000 prisoners by the end of the governor's first term. Davis can
make more progress in cutting drug abuse among criminals--and recidivism by
parolees--by approving the $50 million the state Senate has set aside for
establishing drug treatment programs in county jails.

This is crime-fighting that makes sense and can make a difference.