OHIO PRISONS CHIEF OPPOSES DRUG TREATMENT ISSUE FOR OBVIOUS REASONS

Let me get this right. Reginald A. Wilkinson, director of the largest
state employer, the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections,
which employs one in four state employees, opposes an initiative that
would provide drug treatment instead of prison time for first- and
second-time non-violent drug offenders?

Do we really expect a person whose job directly depends on prisoners
to be in favor of something that might jeopardize his job as well as
that of his co-workers?

Mr. Wilkinson estimates that 75 to 85 percent of prisoners have drug
problems. So, what if most of those prisoners were provided drug
treatment the first or second time they were caught? Would the ODRC
still account for 25 percent of the state work force?

I think not, and I'm fairly certain Mr. Wilkinson and his co-workers
are well aware of this fact. So the real question here is whether the
director of the ODRC is making a decision based on the benefit to
society the drug treatment initiative will generate or is he more
concerned with keeping his job and those of his co-workers?

Thirty years of lock 'em up policy has produced what can best be
referred to as the "prison industrial complex," where prisons have
become a full-fledged industry that many people have come to rely on
for employment. It's like asking auto workers if everyone really needs
a car.

We're sacrificing entire human lives for jobs, and that must come to
an end. The drug treatment initiative is a step in that direction.

Jim White

Oregon, Ohio