RESTORE DRUG COURTS

Lawmakers Can Easily Find The Money -- And Here's How

One of the most short-sighted provisions in a $17 billion budget the N.C.
Senate approved Thursday is a plan to eliminate state support of the highly
successful drug courts.

These courts, at work in nine judicial districts including Mecklenburg,
should be expanded, not curtailed. Yet the Senate budget eliminates $1
million for the 30 drug court programs -- most of their annual state
funding -- and gratuitously provides a small sum for administration if the
judicial branch can find money for the program elsewhere. It's part of the
legislature's continuing disdain for the judicial branch, which consumes
less than 3 percent of the annual state budget.

This is ludicrous. The drug courts are highly successful at screening
defendants who'd be good candidates for alternatives to costly
incarceration, including an array of substance abuse programs.

A 2001 study found that 18 percent of drug treatment court graduates were
rearrested, compared to 44 percent of those who did not participate. Court
officials cite research that every $1 spent on drug treatment saves that
jurisdiction at least $3 in other court costs. When prison costs upwards of
$27,000 a year for one inmate, and drug treatment programs cost about
$4,000, the implication is clear. It's in the public's interest to retain
drug treatment courts, so eligible offenders can kick their substance abuse
and become productive citizens. When these offenders can stay out of
prison, earn a living and pay taxes, everyone benefits.

The meaning of all this is clear: Drug courts SAVE the state money. The
consequence of eliminating funding is also clear: It would COST the state
more than the $1 million it saves.

This debate isn't about whether the program is worthwhile. It's about
money. Legislators are having a tough time finding enough revenue to
balance the budget, so they're cutting some spending. But on this issue,
they made a mistake. They proposed cutting the program's $1 million funding
while approving considerable new funding for a number of programs.

We suggest lawmakers reconsider the wisdom of spending, for example, $2
million to promote economic development through the Partnership for the
Sounds. Reducing that sum to $1 million alone would provide enough funding
for the drug program. If lawmakers don't think that's the right place to
juggle the numbers and provide drug courts funds, there are other
opportunities all over the budget. All they have to do is look.