TOUGH DRUG LAWS NEED TO ADD TREATMENT

Over a decade ago, we got tough on drugs in this state. Faced with
drug felony cases in King County that jumped from 200 in 1985 to
2,700 just two years later, the Legislature passed the 1989 Omnibus
Drug Act that doubled sentences for drug crimes and boosted them even
higher if they were committed near schools, parks or other places
where children were likely to be.

The results have been dramatic. The epidemic of gang killings that
plagued the Puget Sound area in the mid-1980s with the arrival of
crack cocaine has waned. While problems still exist, the no-nonsense
policy has meant that we have never lost an entire neighborhood to
drugs.

While law enforcement has been a success, it's time for the
Legislature to complete the promise it made in 1989 and provide
treatment to those caught in drug's grip. Identical bills in both the
House and Senate would do this -- without sacrificing our safety.

Treatment for addicts was part of the 1989 act, but one year after
passage, the Legislature repealed the funding mechanism to make it
work. It never has been restored and that has hampered our war on
drugs ever since. For addicts to kick their habit, there must be some
hope of redemption.

These days, most drug cases involve small-time drug users. Most are
caught when they sell less than $50 worth of drugs to an undercover
police officer as a way to support their own habit. Nevertheless, our
drug laws are harsh and there is no clear distinction between the
addicted small-time offender and the person who deals drugs for a
profit. What's needed is a tool to continue to hammer big-time drug
dealers while offering eventual treatment to addicted offenders.

The House and Senate bills do this by distinguishing between these
two types of drug offenders. It would slightly lower the jail time
for low-level drug use and use the savings in prison costs to pay for
new treatment options. At the same time, the bill also dramatically
increases prison time for those who sell drugs for a profit, are
armed or sell drugs to a minor.

The money saved from reducing the sentences on low-level drug users
would allow counties to expand their drug courts, a highly successful
program that diverts non-violent addicts into treatment programs
rather than prison. The intensive, heavily supervised rehabilitation
program offers addicts the chance to avoid prison and a criminal
record. If they fail the program, they go to jail.

Today, law enforcement has gone about as far as possible to stem drug
use. The next step requires rehabilitation to make the offender a
productive member of society.

The Legislature should make good on the promise of 1989 and finally
make treatment part of the solution to our drug problem.