Implement Drug Treatment

Prosecutors, probation officers, judges and others in California’s criminal justice system are in the tough position of having to implement a reform they ardently opposed--Proposition 36, a measure requiring judges to send nonviolent drug offenders into treatment programs instead of jail cells.

Proposition 36, which The Times also opposed, clearly goes too far toward leniency. But the state’s existing war on drugs wastes hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars each year imprisoning drug offenders, only to see them resume their drug habits after release. Given Proposition 36’s passage by a resounding 61% to 39% earlier this month, state leaders would be wise to work out details of implementation now so the measure can take effect by July as the voters willed.

This week, there were hopeful signs that state leaders are ready to do that. County drug treatment program directors began drafting implementation guidelines that would prevent turf wars among county programs competing for a share of the $120 million in treatment money that Proposition 36 provides. And Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco) called for a state task force to oversee implementation and promised that the Legislature would allocate more than the required $120 million.

The hardest work still lies ahead. Judges should not send drug offenders into just any treatment program, as the initiative allows, but rather should be required to use programs whose efficacy has been proved.

On an average day, 1,500 community-based facilities in California provide 126,000 clients with drug treatment. Some are highly effective: programs like the Walden House Center for Women and Children in El Monte, a residential treatment center where drug offenders attend five group counseling sessions a day on everything from parenting to relapse prevention.

However, Proposition 36 will fund mostly less expensive day treatment programs, clinics and group homes that, unlike the residential programs, are not regulated by the state. Gov. Gray Davis and legislators should make it a priority to pass legislation in January giving the state Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs the legal and financial resources it so plainly needs to oversee Proposition 36 programs.

Davis should allocate $60 million from the state’s general fund now, as Proposition 36 requires, so the Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs can start identifying and expanding successful treatment programs. With prompt funding, the department might actually be able to create the 3,000 treatment slots a month that will be needed beginning in July. Additional funds will be required to expand drug testing and probation, which are not funded through the initiative.

Finally, district attorneys, who led the fight against Proposition 36, should avoid the temptation to undermine the measure, something they could easily do by charging abusers with additional petty crimes to ensure they go to jail or prison.

The focus should be on making Proposition 36 as effective as possible, recognizing that whatever its flaws, the system it will replace is far from perfect.