PROP. 5 WOULD HELP ADDICTS RECOVER

Old arguments over treatment vs. punishment for drug addicts willing
to try tough, rigorous recovery work have been shot down by reason,
common sense and demonstrated successes, but in some minds, a
judgmental hangover lingers.

Still, a mind-set persists that it's a moral failing and sin - not the
sickness of spirit and body the medical profession long ago recognized
- - and needs to be punished. This hampers humane approaches to
problem-solving.

No recovering addict or alcoholic expects immunity from responsibility
for our actions under the influence. We accept that addiction is no
excuse for wrongdoing, though it may constitute an
explanation.

Proposition 36, which garnered 61 percent of the vote in 2000, is
"termed out" and will be replaced by Proposition 5, the Nonviolent
Offenders Rehabilitation Act, if voters approve. Proposition 5 would
build on past successes, putting new teeth in provisions for failure.

This is a critical need, for in today's economic climate, Los Angeles
County faces a cut of up to 24 percent in its remaining Proposition 36
funding reserve. Other county budget reductions for alcohol and drug
treatment are also pending. In a worst-case scenario, several
nonprofit recovery programs may simply be forced to close.

Moreover, Proposition 5's greatest benefit will be a $610million
allocation enabling California counties to craft a system of juvenile
recovery programs for those at-risk kids age 12 to 18, before they
become enmeshed in crime and the court system.

Response to Proposition. 5, however, has been misinformation and scare
tactics suggesting drug lords, violent criminals, child molesters and
the like can sign on for rehab, then return to beachfront mansions or
middle-class neighborhoods.

A potent coalition of law enforcement professionals and their wealthy
Washington, D.C., lobbyist is aligned against Proposition 5, arm in
arm with a token Hollywood celebrity. He should know better.

Distinguished actor Martin Sheen, co-chair of the No on 5 campaign,
and son Charlie (both in recovery) have distinguished themselves off
screen for illegal chemical excesses in years past. Sheen supports
diversion, but advocates mandatory prison for even one slipup.

Since it began July 1, 2001, some 84,000 men and women availed
themselves of Proposition 36 screening, referral, program placement
and 34percent graduated, clean and sober. Detractors contend this
figure is not a substantial success. Relapsers can get a second or
third chance, but under stricter supervision. Law enforcement wants
one relapse to put them in prison.

Drug and alcohol addiction is a disease. Do we punish victims of
cancer, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cystic
fibrosis and the like? We treat them - insofar as they can afford it.

Based on proven studies, society saves $7 for every $1 invested in
recovery and addiction intervention. Currently, it costs about $27,000
a year to support each of the 177,000 men and women in California's 33
prisons. They essentially have no recovery resources.

They pass the time behind steel bars and concrete walls where - as it
stands now - there are no recovery programs available. Proposition 5
would initiate in-house addiction treatment as well as establish
outside care centers for juveniles to keep them out of prisons.

Besides the juvenile care allocation of $610,000, Proposition 5 could
cost as much as $1 billion for in-prison treatment. But a nonprofit
state legislative analysis agency predicts this sea change in drug
treatment can save $2.5billion down the line. No new prisons would be
needed.

By comparison, at San Pedro's licensed, nonprofit Beacon House
residential recovery program, it costs about $12,000 a year to support
each of its 120 residents.

Here are specifics to ponder:

Proposition 5 is the only ballot item that will save California
money.

For those entering a prison-based recovery unit, Proposition 5 does
not constitute a "get-out-of-jail-free card." Judges and prosecutors
retain jurisdiction on crimes other than the drug-use issues.

Nonviolent offenders given 18 months in an outside residential program
in lieu of prison face even longer sentences for repeated relapses.
Moreover, Proposition 5 tightens and streamlines probationary
oversight of its clients.

In the spirit in which it's conceived, Proposition 5 can do a great
deal of good, costing money that will be spent one way or another
anyway on society's efforts to deal with drug addiction and its
criminal fallout.

Just saying "No" is not the answer, either to youthful drug abuse or
to Proposition 5, this newest approach to making a real difference in
society.

Arthur R. Vinsel is a Beacon House media relations aide and a San
Pedro free-lance writer.