The most comprehensive assessment of California's landmark effort to treat drug users rather than jail them has found that nearly half of offenders sentenced under the program fail to complete rehab and more than a quarter never show up for treatment.
The high failure rates have prompted a growing number of critics to call for jail sanctions for defendants they say take advantage of the program's lack of penalties.
Voters overwhelmingly approved Proposition 36 in November 2000. Under the program, most people convicted of drug possession get three chances to complete rehab and kick their addictions before a judge can send them to prison.
To date, the initiative has cost California more than $600 million. By diverting thousands of nonviolent drug offenders from lockups, the measure has reduced the burden on prisons and saved the state $2.50 for every $1 spent, according to UCLA's study of Proposition 36.
So far, researchers have analyzed each of the nearly 100,000 defendants who went through the program in its first two years.
But the large number of dropouts and no-shows has led judges, researchers and treatment providers to complain that voters undoubtedly expected more for their money.
"For the lay voter, I'm sure they thought, 'If you build it they will come,' and that you would have close to probably a 75% or higher success rate," said Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Ana Maria Luna, who leads a county committee on Proposition 36 issues. "We just haven't seen that anywhere in the state."
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger last year demanded that judges be allowed to jail defendants for short stints if they continue to use drugs or fail to enroll in treatment.
In response, Proposition 36 supporters sued Schwarzenegger and temporarily blocked the governor's proposal. Now the governor is proposing to cut the program's funding.
'Critical juncture'
The stakes are high. For critics, Proposition 36 cannot succeed because it lacks meaningful sanctions to motivate defendants. For supporters, jail terms, however short, would signal a shift away from treating drug use as a health problem and funding cuts would reduce success rates. They argue that to improve the program, the state should spend more to ensure treatment beds are immediately available.
"We're at a critical juncture," said Dave Fratello, a Santa Monica-based campaign consultant and one of Proposition 36's authors. "With every year of declining results, you'll see reduced funding and hostile changes to the program. It'll become unrecognizable."
