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.