TREATMENT INSTEAD OF JAIL FOR DRUG OFFENDERS? D.C. VOTERS SAID "YES," BUT CONGRESS WILL DECIDE

By Karen Harris

On December 17th, the D.C. City Council transmitted the "treatment instead of jail" initiative (Measure 62) to Congress. Although it was passed by 78% of Washington D.C. voters during the November election, the Council voted 12 to 1 not to use local 2003 budget dollars to fund it. According to the Washington Post, city officials believe it unlikely that Congress will agree to fund the new local drug treatment rules.

Measure 62 offers treatment, counseling, and job training instead of incarceration to non-violent, low-level drug offenders in the District. If implemented, the program would be run by the D.C. Department of Health.

According to the Washington Post, city officials have estimated the program could cost as much as $23 million per year. Supporters of the initiative say Mayor Williams, in his lawsuit to stop the Measure, sent an affidavit sent to court citing costs of $1.6 million per year. They argue that, since the federal government pays to house the city's felons, it could cover Measure 62's costs with savings from fewer jail stays.

Congress has sixty working days to review the initiative, and can veto it by passing a joint resolution of opposition. If both houses reject the initiative during this period, it will be dead. (A resolution opposing the bill would either be referred to the House DC Subcommittee or the Senate DC Subcommittee.) If Congress fails to pass a joint opposing resolution, the initiative will become law.

The initiative differs from D.C.'s existing "drug court" program, which has been operating for nine years. Drug court offers treatment to first time drug offenders, and drops charges against those who successfully complete it. However, people who suffer a relapse, or who get into other trouble, are sanctioned. Penalties include two days in the drug court jury box for a first violation, and three days in jail for each subsequent violation.

The Drug Policy Alliance, the organization originally sponsored Measure 62, argues that addiction is a disease, and relapse a normal episode in the process of recovery. They say punishing addicts with jail time often results in children being placed in the city's foster care system.

The initiative's supporters also say there are 60,000 drug-addicted individuals living in D.C; only 10,000 of them are receiving treatment.

A Washington Post editorial (November 2, 2002) reported that 40 percent of people who received jail time in the District between 1993 and 1998 were sentenced for drug-related offenses; of these, more that 7 in 10 had never before served prison time.

Voters enacted similar "treatment instead of incarceration" initiatives in Arizona (Proposition 200, in 1996) and California (Proposition 36, in 2000).

Analysis by the Arizona Supreme Court found Proposition 200 diverted 2,600 non-violent offenders into drug treatment in its first year, saving Arizona taxpayers $2.56 million; a follow-up study indicated the program saved $6 million in prison costs in its second year.

The nonpartisan California Legislative Analyst's Office estimated that Proposition 36 would divert 30,000 drug offenders per year into treatment, saving approximately $ 1. 5 billion over five years.

Under Measure 62, eligible, non-violent defendants would receive substance abuse treatment instead of conviction or imprisonment. Services would be designed to meet the special needs of women and parents, young people, the mentally ill, people with HIV/AIDS or other health problems, and culturally and linguistically diverse populations.

Programs could include vocational counseling, literacy training, family counseling, mental health services, or other needed support services.

The Drug Policy Alliance will be sponsoring a meeting for supporters of Measure 62 at 10:00 A.M. on January 81' (92 5 1 15th Street, NW, on the 2" floor). For more information, contact Opio Sokoni at osokoni@drugpolicy.org.