SUPPORT FOR CRIME PREVENTION RISES AS TOUGH APPROACH LOSES FAVOR

A new survey suggests public opinion is swinging toward crime prevention
and rehabilitation and away from harsh punishments, including
mandatory-sentencing provisions such as "three strikes, you're out," that
many states adopted in the last decade.

The poll results, to be released Wednesday, may give pause to political
candidates seeking to position themselves as tough on crime in this year's
elections. And the numbers indicate there may be broad support for voter
initiatives under way in several states for measures that mandate treatment
and counseling rather than jail time for some nonviolent drug offenders.

"Six or seven years ago, letting somebody outflank you on the right was a
dangerous place to be politically," said Guy Molyneux, senior vice
president of Peter D. Hart Research Associates in Washington, D.C., which
conducted the survey. "Now, that's not going to be a concern and there may
even be situations where someone can go on the offensive talking about new
approaches."

The survey, conducted both before and after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks,
was backed by the Open Society Institute, which is funded by financier
George Soros. Mr. Soros is a major backer of the treatment-not-jail ballot
measures, which have passed in California and Arizona. Signature-gathering
drives are under way in Florida, Michigan and Ohio.

One reason for the shift in opinion appears to be the falling crime rate of
recent years, which may have made the public more receptive to alternative
approaches. For example, the poll found adults, by a 56% to 38% margin,
supported eliminating "three strikes" policies and other mandatory
sentencing laws, favoring letting judges choose sentences. In 1995, another
poll found 55% of respondents thought mandatory sentences were "a good idea."

The shift comes as "three-strikes" provisions are under legal attack as
well. Last week, a federal appeals court overturned two sentences imposed
under California's law, ruling that a 25-years-to-life term for petty theft
violated constitutional protection against cruel and unusual punishment.

More than three-quarters of respondents favored proposals requiring
mandatory drug treatment rather than prison time for people convicted of
drug possession. More than 70% favored extending the approach even to
small-scale drug sellers. An initiative in Massachusetts that proposed such
treatment for dealers was defeated in 2000.

In general, the survey found support had grown to 65% for dealing with
crime by providing job training, family counseling and youth activities,
with 29% favoring stricter sentencing, capital punishment for more crimes
and fewer paroles for convicted felons. When the same question was asked in
a 1994 survey, 48% favored addressing the causes of crime and 42% preferred
the get-tough approach.