PROPOSITION 5 FUELS DEBATE BETWEEN GROUPS

Ballot Measure Will Be on the November Ballot Six Months After Drug Busts

Last May, San Diego State made headlines when it was the center of a
drug bust coordinated by the Drug Enforcement Agency. Police arrested
dozens of students for possessing various drugs, such as marijuana,
cocaine, ecstasy pills and more.

This November, SDSU students will have an opportunity to shape the
system that detains suspected offenders, such as some of those
arrested four months ago.

Proposition 5, called the Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act,
will be on the statewide ballot Nov. 4 and, if passed, will allow
$460 million to be spent annually to improve and expand treatment
programs for some who are convicted of drug and criminal offenses.

The proposition will limit court authority to imprison offenders who
commit drug-related crimes, violate parole or break specific rules of
their drug treatment program. Parole for those who have served time
will also be shortened for certain drug offenses.

If it isn't passed, current laws and programs will stay in place -
which is where the debate comes into play. Will Proposition 5 make
California's approach to the treatment and incarceration of
nonviolent drug offenders more effective, or will it allow criminals
to get away with breaking the law?

Several groups have spoken out on both sides of the issue.

The Drug Policy Alliance Network is one group in favor of the
proposition. In fact, network spokesperson Margaret Dooley-Sammuli
said the group authored the proposed legislation.

Dooley-Sammuli said the group developed the proposition in coalition
with many other organizations and experts. She said Proposition 5 is
based on decades-old recommendations made in a series of reports by
treatment and prison reform policy experts.

"It's really addressing the part of the criminal justice system and
the health system where addiction and nonviolent crimes meet," she said.

She added that untreated drug addiction and mental illness are
driving many of the incarcerations of nonviolent offenders in California.

California has an overcrowded prison system that it can no longer
afford, she said, along with a "disastrously underfunded" addiction
treatment system.

Statistics from the California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation show that there are 170,973 inmates in California
prisons and that 19.1 percent of them are in for drug-related offenses.

Some opposed to the proposition don't think those numbers are accurate.

Kevin Spillane, spokesman for the People Against the Proposition 5,
said the amount of people said to be in prison for drug offenses is not true.

"Only 8 percent of people in prison are there for drugs," he said,
adding that the problem is that the proposition will shorten some
inmates' probation from three years to six months.

The proposal, he said, will even affect those charged with crimes
involving hard drugs, such as methamphetamine and cocaine dealers.

Spillane said that people who use meth are responsible for violent
crimes and that by decreasing the probation period, their chances of
selling meth again will increase. He added that the wording of the
Proposition 5 will allow people to commit crimes such as identity
theft, arson, domestic violence and hate crimes without having to
serve jail time.

"It's a get-out-of-jail-free card for them," said the spokesman,
"where in treatment they can continue to use the drugs with no consequences."

He said that the proposition ignores the science of drug addiction.

"The Betty Ford Center would not qualify because they require to not
keep using drugs."

He added that it's a waste of money that would steal funding from
education, health care, local programs, transportation and human services.

Dooley-Sammuli said the proposition aims at the heart of the problem.

"Prop. 5 will create a system of care for young people - that is
people under the age of 18 - who have drug problems. Currently in the
state, there are no resources for them."

She added that passage of the proposition will not benefit drug dealers.

"What happened on SDSU's campus had a lot to do with distribution and
sales," she said, "so those people would not really be helped here.
We're talking about people with drug problems."

However, she said, it would help students who use drugs -
particularly younger ones.

"I think that will affect some people on the SDSU campus because if
there are any people under the age of 18 who have drug problems, this
will be an option for them in San Diego County."

Videos posted on www.noonproposition5.com/, the Web site for
Spillane's group, show press conferences of several people advocating
against the proposition.

One of those people was Fresno Police Chief Jerry Dyer, who is also
the president of the California Police Chiefs Association.

In the video, Dyer said one reason the CPCA opposes the legislation
is because it "will no doubt take the State of California backward
and wreak havoc" on communities.

"One of Proposition 5's biggest deceptions," he said, "is that it's
all about treatment, and that is simply not true."

Dyer added that Proposition 5 is an attempt to dramatically shorten
parole time for convicted drug dealers, adding to comments made by Spillane.

"Prop 5 could provide, in effect, a get-out-of-jail free card to
defendants ... simply by claiming that 'the drugs made me do it,'" Dyer said.

Dooley-Sammuli said that's not the case.

"All of this goes to getting at the root of the problem - breaking
the cycle of crime driven by addiction, reducing prison overcrowding
and improving public safety," she said.

Currently, she added, the state treats nonviolent and violent
offenders exactly the same.

"Once people have served their sentence," she said, "nonviolent
offenders would (if the proposition passes) serve one year on parole.
Currently, it's three years, the same as people who have committed
serious and violent crimes. That's crazy."