DRUG PROGRAM: PRISON ALTERNATIVE BEATS REVOLVING DOOR

I read that Sen. Gwen Moore (D-Milwaukee) advocated for expansion of the
state's alternative to prison program in 2003 but that some Republican
legislators are calling it a waste of state resources because only 19 of
400 men have successfully completed the program ("Drug program bears sparse
fruit, critics say," Aug. 16). Rep. Mark Gundrum (R-New Berlin) said the
program's success rate does not justify what state taxpayers are paying for it.

And what are we paying? The article said: "It costs $18,772 over two years
to keep an offender in the alternative to prison program, compared with the
$51,000 . . . it costs to keep someone in a state prison for two years."
That means those 19 men saved the state $612,332 and in the process became
productive citizens.

Let me get this straight. We should end a program because it has only saved
us $612,332?

Moore is right: It's too soon to give up. The alternative to prison program
is far less expensive than the revolving door, which prison becomes for
many victims of addiction. I fail to see what we have to lose by working to
improve the program rather than, as Sen. Alan Lasee (R-De Pere) suggested,
pulling the plug.

Kay Augustine, Milwaukee