DRUG USER BILLS DUEL IN SENATE

A state Senate committee today is hearing two bills that claim to
strengthen California's treatment-instead-of-jail law for drug users. But
only one of these bills is backed by the original law's authors while the
other is supported by law enforcement, amounting to a battle for the future
of Proposition 36.

"California voters made it clear that they want addiction to be treated as
a health issue instead of a criminal justice one, and Sen. Ducheny is
trying to overrule the public will," Glenn Backes, the Drug Policy Alliance
Network's health policy director, said in a release. Proposition 36,
approved by 61 percent of voters in 2000, essentially required drug
treatment instead of jail for first- and second-time nonviolent drug offenders.

S.B. 830, authored by state Sen. Denise Moreno Ducheny, D-San Diego, among
other things would allow jail time for such offenders by redefining
"treatment programs" to include those offered inside jails, and by
specifically authorizing judges to assign defendants to these in-custody
programs. This way, money earmarked for treatment could be spent behind bars.

Ducheny's bill also would appropriate $150 million per year for drug
testing to ensure offenders in treatment are staying clean; the original
law didn't allow any of the money it appropriated to be used for testing.
Ducheny's bill is supported by law enforcement groups including the
California Peace Officers Association, California Police Chiefs Association
and California District Attorneys Association. When introducing the bill in
February, Ducheny said it will "add the sanctions and structure to Prop. 36
required to make it work and give drug users the necessary support to avoid
re-offending and become productive citizens."

But Backes noted existing law "does not give drug offenders a free pass -
it allows judges to sanction clients for missed appointments or early signs
of relapse to drug use, but it does not allow them to be jailed." That's
what voters wanted, he said, and that's how it should stay.

The Drug Policy Alliance Network, which helped put forth Proposition 36, is
backing another current bill to modify - S.B. 556, introduced earlier this
month by state Sen. Carole Migden, D-San Francisco. Migden's bill among
other things would expand the duration of treatment that can be provided
under Proposition 36 from one year to two. Also, existing law requires that
a defendant complete treatment and offer no reasonable cause to believe he
or she would abuse drugs in the future; Migden's bill would require
completion of treatment but delete the other condition. And it would force
counties to spend no more than 12 percent of the state money they receive
under Proposition 36 for costs other than treatment, training, counseling
or housing for defendants.

Although both bills were authored by Democrats, Backes predicted Monday
that only the Senate Public Safety Committee's Republicans are likely to
back Ducheny's bill. The committee's Democrats - including Migden, Senate
President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, and committee chairwoman Elaine
Alquist, D-San Jose - "will be hard-pressed to swallow such a bitter pill,
a pill opposed by the majority of California voters," he said.