HUTCHINSON IS WRONG ABOUT DRUG-TREATMENT ISSUE

The Philosophies Are Almost Identical, But The Initiative Promises A Much
Bigger System.

The Ohio Drug Treatment Initiative headed for this November's ballot would
overhaul the state's drug war, offering treatment instead of jail time for
nonviolent offenders. A Buckeye State Poll shows 74 percent of voters want
to see it happen. Meanwhile, a tone-deaf Gov. Bob Taft is leading the
charge to "just say no," often distorting the measure in the process.

Now comes the nation's drug cop telling Ohioans to oppose the initiative.
Drug Enforcement Administration chief Asa Hutchinson tells us Ohio is doing
just fine with drug offenders and that we don't need to expand treatment
options ("Drug treatment needs accountability," Forum column, May 14).

In his column, Hutchinson said, "Treatment alone too often becomes a
revolving door." He said "accountability" is needed in treatment. He argued
that the criminal-justice system must monitor addicts closely and punish
their transgressions. Great. Supporters of the ballot measure, including
me, agree with all these statements. That's why we want to see this
initiative approved by voters. It has all the elements the Hutchinson would
want. But for purely political reasons, he turned a blind eye to each of them.

For instance, drug offenders placed in treatment under the ballot measure
will be subject to urine testing and other daily monitoring. Treatment
providers, probation officers, independent experts and judges all will be
watching each offender's progress. A major section of the initiative spells
out how the court should react to program violations with sanctions and
intensification of treatment. The ultimate "accountability" is a jail or
prison sentence. This consequence hangs over the head of every person in
treatment under the terms of the ballot measure. The court can remove a
noncompliant offender and ship him or her up the river.

But Hutchinson said the initiative "robs judges of their power" and "would
remove the critical court oversight and accountability." Both claims are
simply false, as anyone reading the initiative can see.

Hutchinson touted the state's current drug-court system as the alternative.
What's the difference between that and the initiative? Not much, except the
initiative would instantly make every court in Ohio a drug court.

Hutchinson called drug courts a "realistic" program that "accepts relapse
as part of recovery." The initiative says, similarly, that relapse should
be understood as "often a part of the process of recovery signaling the
need for a consequence or increase in the level of care." In both systems,
judges try to keep a person in treatment while there is hope for recovery.
Everyone seems to understand that jails don't cure addiction.

Drug courts offer treatment for up to one year, and "not," Hutchinson said,
"for 90 days." If Hutchinson is claiming that the initiative limits
treatment to 90 days, he is simply wrong. The initiative provides up to one
year of treatment upon entry, and in some cases, treatment could be
extended to 18 months.

The philosophies are almost identical, but the initiative promises a much
bigger system than today's drug courts. Most counties don't have a drug
court. Half of the four dozen drug courts do not serve adult offenders, who
go to jail if treatment is not available. Only one in four drug-possession
offenders has a chance to enter such a program. We can do better.

What's worse is the sacrifice we are making by offering treatment on a
limited, case-by-case basis. We are losing a generation of young people,
especially blacks, as a drug arrest and the resulting felony record explode
into a life of addiction, criminality and unemployment. Just 11 percent of
Ohio's population is black and only 13 percent of drug users are black, but
77 percent of the people sent to prison for drug possession last year were
black. This brings shame to us all.

The Ohio Drug Treatment Initiative will change the system. No wonder those
who like the status quo, from the governor to the DEA chief in Washington,
oppose this intelligent reform.

State Sen. Robert F. Hagan Youngstown