A new UCLA study released Friday says drug offenders punished
under Proposition 36 are more likely to be re-arrested for
narcotics-related offenses than criminals rehabilitated through
other programs.
Sixty-one percent of California voters passed Proposition 36 in
November 2000. Also known as the Substance Abuse and Crime
Prevention Act, Proposition 36 sends first- and second-time
nonviolent adult narcotics offenders to probation and drug
treatment programs rather than prison.
The study suggests offenders may not be receiving sufficient
treatment through the proposition’s rehabilitation
programs.
Glenn Backes, director of the Sacramento branch of the Drug
Policy Alliance, said more people are being affected by Proposition
36 than were first estimated, and the two main lapses in the
rehabilitation programs are in methadone and residential
treatment.
Methadone is used to help people addicted to heroin or other
opiates, and residential treatment is for those who have histories
of long-term drug use.
Criminals punished by Proposition 36 were 48 percent more likely
to be re-arrested on drug charges than offenders in other drug
treatment programs.
But the study only examined 13 of California’s 58 counties
and people affected within the first six months of Proposition 36.
The report’s lead author David Farabee said it is important
to look at the results in context and wait for other researchers to
finish their own inquiries.
“There is no perfect study. So if this contributes to a
larger literature over the year that says the same thing, then we
know that we may have a problem,” Farabee said, noting that
other researchers in the Neuropsychiatric Institute’s
Integrated Substance Abuse Programs are working on the official
five year state-wide evaluation of the proposition.
While the study implies there may be problems with the
proposition, Backes said it is necessary to maintain a commitment
to social service programs rather than prison.
“The best solution for Prop. 36 and the best solution for
drug diversion in general is to ensure that individuals get an
adequate dose of treatment,” Backes said.
In 2006, the initial $660 million funding for the proposition
will run dry, and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and California
lawmakers will have to decide how much money should be used to
continue funding the initiative.
Backes said the state is spending far more money keeping
offenders in prison rather than on treatment and that funding
rehabilitation programs is a fiscally responsible decision for a
state plagued by budget crises.
“We have room to invest more in treatment and still save
the California taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars,”
Backes said. “The most important thing is that there is
absolutely no evidence that jailing people is going to make them
better.”
With reports from Bruin wire services.