Pubdate: Sun, 06 Oct 2002
Source: Beacon Journal, The (OH)
Copyright: 2002 The Beacon Journal Publishing Co.
Contact:  http://www.ohio.com/mld/beaconjournal/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/6
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?168 (Lewis, Peter)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?206 (Ohio Campaign for New Drug Policies)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/rehab.htm (Treatment)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/soros.htm (Soros, George)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/sperling.htm (Sperling, John)

DEFEAT ISSUE 1

The campaign for mandated drug treatment misses the mark. Sure, treatment 
works -- with the appropriate incentives

The very wealthy men behind state Issue 1 have had success in California 
and elsewhere with their proposals to mandate treatment, instead of jail 
time, for drug offenders. Their operatives have been frustrated in Ohio. 
Polls have shown a solid majority in opposition to the constitutional 
amendment. Proponents complain about the ballot language (words they once 
praised). They may even forgo a multimillion-dollar ad campaign.

Ohioans should breathe a sigh of relief. Then, they should go to the polls 
on Nov. 5 and ensure defeat of the measure by voting no on Issue 1.

The wealthy supporters are Richard Wolfe, a Columbus native who runs a 
California technology firm; John Sperling, the founder of the University of 
Phoenix; George Soros, an international financier and philanthropist; and 
Peter Lewis, an Ohio insurance executive. Their instincts are sound. Too 
often, the so-called drug war has been waged with the big guns of law 
enforcement and the military. The thinking has been that prison will teach 
lessons, or arms to the Colombias will thwart supply. Treatment hasn't been 
sufficiently emphasized. Issue 1 promises change.

The trouble stems from the type of change. Issue 1 may be 10 paragraphs on 
the ballot. The amendment would amount 6,500 words in the state 
constitution, adding clutter to an already bulging document. The proposal 
mandates that the state spend $247 million over seven years. It would 
require judges to sentence nonviolent first-time and second-time drug 
offenders to treatment. In almost all cases, jail wouldn't be an option.

Proponents admit this kind of policy-making belongs more appropriately with 
the legislature. They point to the unlikelihood that Ohio lawmakers will 
adopt such a proposal. That doesn't mean legislators and other officials 
haven't acted. They have.

The state and its counties have begun to develop further a multidimensional 
approach to drug offenders, combining the option of treatment with threat 
of time behind bars. Ohio has 48 drug courts, including two in Summit 
County. Judges pledge to wipe the record clean if offenders meet the 
demands of a treatment program. The attention is rigorous. The requirements 
are demanding. The incentive is: An offender falls short, and he or she 
heads to jail.

Drug courts have proved successful. So have changes in sentencing 
procedures that place greater emphasis on treatment. A small percentage of 
nonviolent drug offenders initially lands in prison. The state already 
recognizes the savings to be gleaned from treatment instead incarceration. 
The added factor is the hammer provided to the judge, the tool that can 
bring focus to an offender, the element missing in the ballot proposal.

Ohio spends roughly $172 million a year on drug treatment. It should spend 
more. It can do so more effectively than through the passage of state Issue 1.

A broad coalition has formed in opposition, Democrats and Republicans, 
prosecutors and drug counselors. Hope Taft, the first lady and a longtime 
advocate of the value of treatment, has been a particularly strong voice, 
both compassionate and realistic, urging voters to get beyond the slogans 
to grasp the hard work of beating an addiction, for the individual and the 
community as a whole.

Hope Taft has been a key reason for the frustration of advocates. She 
understands the essential role of drug treatment. She also articulates 
clearly and passionately that it cannot succeed on its own.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Terry Liittschwager