Pubdate: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 Source: Oakland Tribune (CA) Copyright: 2000 MediaNews Group, Inc. and ANG Newspapers Contact: 66 Jack London Sq., Oakland, CA 94607 Feedback: http://www.newschoice.com/asp-bin/feedback.asp?PUID486 Website: http://www.newschoice.com/newspapers/alameda/tribune/ Author: Steve Geissinger, Sacramento Bureau Note: other articles archived by MAP DRIVE BEGINS TO EASE DRUG PENALTY LAWS SACRAMENTO -- Launching what is sure to be one of the hottest debates of the November election, a liberal coalition Wednesday kicked off a campaign to pass a statewide initiative requiring treatment rather than prison for nonviolent drug offenders. Immediately attacking the wide-ranging proposal as a threat to public safety was a newly formed group primarily representing law enforcement and crime victim organizations. The wealthy philanthropists, drug reformers and medicinal marijuana advocates behind the proposal obtained enough voter signatures to qualify the initiative Wednesday for the ballot. If approved, it would require that people convicted of nonviolent offenses of drug possession -- including nonviolent prison parolees -- be sent to drug treatment centers instead of county jail or state prison no matter how many times they are arrested. Their offense would be wiped from their record if they successfully complete drug treatment. If they fail, a judge could incarcerate them for up to 16 months. Excluded from the initiative would be dealers or people caught with large amounts of drugs, as well as offenders who commit another crime along with drug possession and those with serious or violent prior convictions. Currently, tens of thousands of the state's prison and jail inmates are there for simple drug possession. The Legislature's nonpartisan analyst reported the initiative would divert about 37,000 people each year from expensive incarceration to much less costly drug treatment programs. The proposal, the analyst said, would yield taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars in net savings -- up to $150 million in annual prison operation bills alone and perhaps $500 million in one-time state prison construction costs. Counties would save another $50 million yearly in reduced jail expenses. The proposal would provide $120 million in taxpayer funds to expand community drug treatment programs, ranging from residential therapeutic settings to methadone maintenance. "The initiative represents a commitment to treating drug abuse as a health problem, not a criminal justice problem," said Dave Fratello of the Campaign for New Drug Policies, a group formed by supporters. "Drug treatment is effective not only at reducing drug abuse and addiction but in cutting criminal activity by users. ... It (this initiative) is tough on crime because, unlike our failed war on drugs, it deals with the core problems of drug abuse and addiction with effective, health-based solutions." In particular, the measure would assist minorities, who are more likely to be convicted on drug-related charges even though drug use levels are relatively consistent across racial lines, according to supporters. The $1 million signature-gathering campaign to qualify the initiative was conducted by the group that launched California's medicinal marijuana initiative, Proposition 215, approved by voters in 1996. That proposition is still being argued over at the state and federal levels. The effort has been largely financed by wealthy drug reformers -- George Soros, a New York financier; Peter Lewis, a Cleveland insurance executive; and John Sperling of Phoenix, founder of the University of Phoenix business college. Supporters count among their backers state Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco, and Sen. Don Perata, D-Oakland. Supporters say the measure also has been endorsed by the Oakland and Berkeley city councils; the supervisors, mayor and sheriff of San Francisco; and San Mateo County Supervisor Michael Nevin. But the initiative faces vigorous opposition from the law enforcement sector and virtually certain opposition from Gov. Gray Davis, who is conservative on crime issues. "This dangerous and misleading initiative undermines California's legitimate drug treatment programs and seriously weakens anti-drug laws by giving drug felons a 'get out of jail free' card," according to a statement by Californians United Against Drug Abuse, formed by initiative foes. "The initiative threatens public safety, sends the wrong message to our children and will cost taxpayers millions in added public safety, court and drug abuse costs." Fueling opposition is the initiative's effect on California's tough 1994 anti-crime measure, the "three strikes" sentencing law. It requires a person with one felony conviction to have his sentence doubled if convicted of another felony. Anyone with two felony convictions is sent to prison for 25 years to life on a third conviction, no matter what the crime. Under the proposal, convicted felons who remained free of trouble for at least five years would not be sentenced under the "three strikes" law for committing a nonviolent drug offense. Rather, they would be sent to drug treatment. Central among foes' arguments is their criticism of a provision that bars spending any treatment money on drug testing. The aspect of the measure would prevent parole agents from sending potentially violent offenders back to prison after they are found in possession of drugs or if they test positive. Further, opponents say, the measure could endanger businesses that hire people for sensitive jobs because drug offenses would be erased from the books. Foes also say that since the initiative requires drug treatment, not jail time, for first and second drug offenses, it could prompt defense attorneys to demand jury trials that would clog the courts. Proceedings could result in an innocent verdict, according to foes, while a conviction would hold no jail time. - --- MAP posted-by: Derek Rea