TREATMENT INSTEAD OF PRISON

A Win-Win Public Policy

Barry Hubbard gets a daily reminder that he's still a drug addict. He has a
part-time job doing data entry at an area church because it's the only one
he can get.

Hubbard's a convicted felon, and having a felony rap overhead makes it
quite difficult to get a job these days.

Selling $20 of crack to an undercover cop got him that tag. "I was under
the influence. I sold some to the police, and they sold me some prison. I
thought I was doing another junkie a favor," he says of how he was arrested
the day before his 39th birthday in 2001.

"I know I hurt the community for what I did," he says now. But he still
doesn't think he deserved to spend 10 months at the House of Correction. A
previous arrest was nine years before that, for possession. He did a little
time then, too, then violated his probation and did a little more time.

Most folks uninitiated to the penal system could think that people
convicted for drugs are sentenced to time behind bars because they'll get
rehabilitated from their previous ways, come out clean, repentant and ready
to do good. But that's not reality. Reality is that there is next to
nothing going on behind jailhouse walls that would help an inmate who's
hooked. Those who work in the environment know that. Those who live in it
know even better.

"They had an AA meeting about once a month, and that's about it. It's
really just a warehouse for people," he says of the House. "You sit around
and play cards or dominoes all day or you learn how to be a crook. So I did
a lot of sitting."

Putting "convicted felon" on a resume certainly limits his job options,
even though there are laws preventing discrimination. Having two college
degrees-one in liberal arts and another in biology-doesn't seem to help.
He's been turned down for seven jobs since he got out of the House in
April. "I really can't say [the felony] is why. A lot of times they say the
position's been filled or 'We can't use you.' I never really had a problem
finding a job before."

Hubbard is straightforward about the hand he's dealt for himself. Being an
armed forces veteran, he attends sessions at the Veterans Administration to
deal with his addiction, but he fears he could slip at any time.

Living with his parents helps, he says. Not having any kids keeps the
financial pressure off a bit as well.

"I'm trying to get back on the right path. Trying to stay out of jail.
Trying not to use. It's a discipline, really. You have to take care of
yourself.

"I'm a drug addict, but who knows when I'll relapse. And that could cost
taxpayers a lot of money. I'm trying to prevent it from happening, but it
could. And that could put me away for a long time."

Hubbard didn't make it into the state prison system on his last bust. But
if the state's legal climate stays the same, and if he tests positive for
drug use over the course of his five years of probation, he most certainly
will. Then his sentence will be nine years.

He definitely won't be alone. In the last three and a half years, the
state's inmate population has risen 14.5% from 21,530 to 25,177, including
3,964 inmates currently housed out of state. It's not that the state wasn't
prepared for the surge, with in-state capacity going from 14,025 to 17,075
during that same time.

"We've built an awful lot of prisons because of our drug policy," offers
Kit McNally, executive director of the Benedict Center, which runs programs
for ex-offenders.

A Solution

But perhaps in the future that can all change. Addicts like Hubbard could
get treatment for their addictions instead of spending idle time doing
nothing behind bars and relying on relatives to give them support when they
get out-if they have relatives.

An effort by local religious groups under the umbrella of MICAH-Milwaukee
Inner City Churches Allied for Hope-is underway to pass a state law that
essentially says treatment is more important for addicts than time behind bars.

The legislative proposal would have made treatment mandatory for first-time
non-violent drug possession offenses and offer judges treatment as an
option for second-time offenders. Successfully completing the drug and
alcohol treatment program would eliminate any record of the offense.

MICAH's plan isn't new to the country. Arizona and California-through
referenda-have enacted similar laws to treat non-violent offenders instead
of locking them up. Both states are quite thrilled with the results, having
saved millions in incarceration costs. Ohio and Michigan are gearing up for
implementing their own programs, and Florida was ready with a drug
treatment initiative but is now holding off until 2004.

Given this plan, instead of Barry Hubbard being a 40-year-old addict facing
nine years in prison if he violates his probation, he may have gotten the
help he needed in 1992. Today, he could be working in a job using one of
his college degrees and paying taxes. One thing advocates for this bill are
saying is that it gives a leg up to those who may not have been able to
afford one before.

"We think it's the more just solution than the current solution, a more
effective solution. Incarceration does little or nothing to rehabilitate,"
says MICAH's Conner Williams.

Another thing is that it will save taxpayers in Wisconsin a ton of money.
Simple math shows that if Hubbard messes up this time while on probation,
his nine years in prison will cost about $240,300, not accounting for
inflation. The average length for treatment under the MICAH proposal would
be a year, with another six months optional. The cost of that? Even at the
California rates of $4,000 a year for treatment, it would cost $6,000.

If a law comes out of this, it would be a fundamental shift in the thinking
and practice for the state's criminal justice system, which has preferred
the lock 'em up strategy. It's a philosophy that continues to grab a
greater portion of the state budget every year. The budget for running the
state's correctional services for the past two years was $1.6 billion.

Granted, violent criminals need to be locked up for the safety of the
community. But with this plan, not only is there a tremendous humanitarian
appeal (after all, these people are convicted of non-violent
crimes-victimless offenses for the most part) but there is a tremendous
cost savings in keeping people out of prison and giving them the help they
need, its backers say.

"There is a correlation between drug abuse and incarceration," says MICAH's
Conner Williams. About 70% of inmates have drug or alcohol problems before
they get behind bars. And without treatment, who's to say they won't have
one when they get out?

"Sometimes you just sit there thinking about how high you're going to get
the first thing when you get out," says Hubbard. "They're really not
supportive of people with addictions. You sit all day long with nothing to
do but read or write, if you got someone to write to. And you keep hoping
you got someone on the outside keeping your spirits up, giving you support.
Otherwise you'll come out a bitter man."

Williams could see Hubbard's situation as backing up his point. "The crux
of the issue is who's in jail and why they are there."

"It became very clear to us that the war on drugs was putting away so many
people," interjects pastor Mary Rowland of Reformation Church, who has
spent the last 12 years helping former addicts like Hubbard who are trying
to get their lives back together.

"What compounded it was truth in sentencing," adds Rowland.

Mistruths of Sentencing

A Department of Corrections report estimates truth in sentencing has cost
the state some $24 million a year more for incarceration. It also shows that:

State agencies prepare "fiscal estimates" for all legislature introduced.
The estimates are based on a series of assumptions, and some state agencies
are notorious for proposing outrageously high estimates in the hopes of
defeating a bill.

In their fiscal assessment-which DOC number crunchers refused to answer
questions about-they grouped all 25,932 eligible people for probation and
put the final cost figure based on that amount, even though that the group
included inmates coming out of the prison system and the MICAH bill was
designed to avoid prison.

Deeper in the estimate, however, it shows that 2,749 people going to prison
could have been helped by the proposed program. Again, using the generally
higher California costs of $4,000 per person, the price tag then comes in
at some $11 million. The main expense is that the bill calls for the state
to pay for the treatment. It does, however, require those able to pay for
treatment to pay. And the bill for one year in prison for the 2,749? About
$73.4 million.

While concerned about certain nuances of any proposed legislation calling
for treatment instead of prison, Milwaukee County District Attorney E.
Michael McCann advocates more treatment on the front end. For example, all
misdemeanor cases should be looked at as drug treatment possibilities.
Focus on first-time offenders that would get probation anyway, he says,
"The time to emphasize that is not at the time they're waiting for prison."

McCann has some national groups on his side as well. The New York-based
group Reconsider, which has a number of law enforcement representatives as
members and believes the war on drugs is a failure, elaborates on McCann's
points.

It notes:

People forced into treatment may not need it. They may just be people who
use drugs recreationally who happened to get arrested-the point being that
arrest may not be the best way to determine who should get treatment services.

Forcing treatment would create a separate system of justice for drug
offenders, that doesn't work in the traditional adversary system of justice
and due process. Instead it would be a system where the defense,
prosecution and judge work as a team to force the offender into a treatment
program.

While State Sen. Gary George introduced the bill at the end of the
legislative session in March, Milwaukee Democratic Sen. Gwen Moore's office
will be working on a better version in order to get bi-partisan support.

A big issue will be getting the $33 million price tag down to a more
reasonable number. Moore aide Jessica Clark calls the fiscal estimate
"ridiculous." The bill should be ready in January.

The bottom line in a program like this is to keep non-violent offenders in
the mainstream and out of the lifestyle that got the law in their face in
the first place.

"This is one of these things that seems so practical," says John Goldstein,
president of the Milwaukee County Labor Council. "It just makes total sense
that you can treat someone so they do not become recidivists and instead
become productive members of society. It's a no-brainer, really."

Union support was key in California's passing Proposition 36, and Goldstein
says he personally supports MICAH's initiative and would expect a number of
unions to go along with their effort once the process gets moving.

As Arizona's director of probation, Barbara A. Broderick, puts it, "If
probationers can become clean and sober, most will maintain jobs, pay in
full their restitution, and live law-abiding lives, resulting in safer
communities, improved family and social relationships, increased
productivity and wages and decreased health costs."
em