Advertise Here
Deliver your message to thousands of readers every day.
Our readers are influential opinion makers - politicians, journalists and activists.
Our latest headlines
- Weekly Radio Address: Assembly Lead Water Negotiators Huffman, Caballero Discuss this Week’s Historic Agreement to Solve California’s Water Crisis
- Feinstein Once Again Flirts With Entering the Governor’s Race
- A Good Health Care Bill Emerging from the House
- Schwarzenegger Applauds Passage of Peripheral Canal/Dams Water Package
- "Historic" Water Deal Draws Both Praise and Criticism
- Republican State Senators Vote for Administrative Chaos, Backdoor Cuts in IHSS
- Assembly Budget Committee Follow-up Informational Hearing on Implementation on IHSS Program Changes
About Us
David Greenwald, Editor. (Contact David.)
CFC Education Foundation, Publisher. (Contact us.)
Got a news tip? Want to write a guest column?
Contact David here.
About California Progress Report.
Founded by Frank D. Russo (Publisher and Editor, 2006-08).
Sponsors
Books
In Time of California's Prison Crisis, Prop 36 Is Solution

By Margaret Dooley
Drug Policy Alliance
Just days after signing off on a plan to spend billions on prison expansion, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will release his revised budget proposal for Proposition 36, California’s voter-enacted, treatment-instead-of-incarceration program. Prop. 36 has proved over and over again to improve Californians’ lives, save taxpayers money and reduce the burden on our prison system.
The governor should heed the advice of a recent state-funded report by increasing funding for Prop. 36 drug treatment to $228.6 million.
The analysis released last month by researchers at the University of California at Los Angeles, found that the program requires at least that amount to provide adequate treatment and to help generate even greater cost savings. At the same time, a Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) report showed that a reduction in Prop. 36 funding would increase prison costs.
Prop. 36 has already graduated 70,000 Californians, saved taxpayers $1.7 billion, and reduced the number of people incarcerated for simple drug possession by one-third (5,000 people). With adequate services, it could do even better.
Even before UCLA recommended $228.6 million as the minimum annual funding level, there was consensus among doctors, treatment providers and advocates, and county governments that Prop. 36 needs more funding, not less. Only a substantial funding increase can provide adequate treatment and continue to expand this program’s documented cost savings. We hope the governor’s May revise will reflect this broad consensus.
The governor’s January budget proposed slashing Prop. 36 funding from $145 million to $120 million, while diverting half of those funds into an “Offender Treatment Program” (OTP) requiring a 1-9 county match. At legislative budget hearings, treatment providers and local governments have vocally expressed their displeasure. And in addition to showing that funding cuts to Prop. 36 would increase prison costs, the LAO also pointed to some prospective legal concerns regarding the shifting of funds from the Prop. 36 trust fund into OTP.
Several major California newspapers have also criticized the Governor’s plan. The Los Angeles Times editorial page said: “The UCLA study flagged [shortcomings] in Proposition 36, most of which point to a need for longer, more intensive treatment. That means more funding, not less.” The Orange County Register and San Diego’s North County Times also weighed in against the governor’s plan and in support of cost-effective, community-based treatment.
The state budget may be tight, but California can’t afford to reduce its commitment to Prop. 36. UCLA has shown again and again that Prop. 36 generates huge cost savings, improves thousands of lives each year and has significantly increased the number of people being rehabilitated rather than incarcerated. We can show now with data that drug addiction is most expensive when it is not treated.
UCLA Finds Big Savings, Recommends Big Funding Increase
Analyses conducted by UCLA show that for every $1 invested in Prop. 36, the state saves $2.50. For program completers, every $1 invested leads to $4 in savings. UCLA put first year (2001-02) savings at $173 million. The Legislative Analyst’s Office has estimated that the state’s $120 million annual investment in Prop. 36 resulted in net savings of $205 million in 2002-03 and $297 million in 2004-05. Conservatively estimating $200 million in annual savings, total program savings in six years surpasses $1.2 billion.
Nearly six years into Prop. 36, the number of people incarcerated for drug possession has fallen by 32% (5,000 people). More than 1,000 Californians on parole complete treatment under Prop. 36 each year instead of going back to prison. By diverting so many into treatment, Prop. 36 rendered unnecessary the construction of a new men’s prison (saving $500 million) and also resulted in the shuttering of a women’s prison. This brings total savings to $1.7 billion.
UCLA’s most recent analysis arrived at their recommended Prop. 36 funding level of $228.6 million by analyzing the costs of a series of program improvements, including:
• More appropriate treatment placement (e.g., residential placement for those severely addicted, $18.9 million);
• Providing a “minimum dose,” or 90 days, of treatment ($31.3 million);
• Expanding access to narcotic replacement therapies, such as methadone and buprenorphine ($3.7 million); and
• Enhancing probation supervision ($25 million).
Margaret Dooley is Prop. 36 Coordinator for the Drug Policy Alliance. Based in Southern California, she works with some of the state's 70,000 Prop. 36 graduates to build links between graduates and their legislators, to educate the community on the success of drug treatment and to protect the voter-approved law so that Californians can continue to turn their lives around.
Comments
I wholeheartedly agree that drug treatment programs need more funding. These programs have been proven to work, whereas incarceration does nothing to heal addictions, or mental illness for that matter. Historically, programs that provide treatment and healing are given minimal support by government, while punishment -- in spite of contradictory evidence -- is still supported by our Legislature and Governor, as they believe -- or would have us believe -- that somehow we can punish addictions and mental illnesses out of people. Modern neuroscience and psychology experts tell us in ever more undeniable terms that except in extreme cases, treatment should take precedence over punishment. I would gladly pay more taxes if I knew that my tax dollars would go to community drug treatment and mental health programs.
Posted by: Barbara Christie at May 11, 2007 01:07 PM
Thank You Margaret Dooley,I agree with your findings...
"The governor should heed the advice of a recent state-funded report by increasing funding for Prop. 36 drug treatment to $228.6 million."
Keep up the good work on making the public aware this important issue.
Posted by: Donna Stotts at May 13, 2007 09:21 AM
Hello Margaret and thank you. I do not see what wrong with the Governor. Can't he see the savings that program has for taxpayers? The Prop 36 programs take off a huge load from the offenders, society and the state.
Posted by: Josue Medrano at June 6, 2007 01:20 AM
Well the state and the court system would be
saving the tax payers a whole lot more money. If they would quit arresting people that are trying to get their lifes in order. and have good job for stupid things and harrassing them all of the time. every time that someone gets arrested and they have a life with a job. that just makes them want to turn back into doing crimes. why? because they have lost it all being in jail for cops that just like messing with people. if they have a past record and they aren't really breaking the law. they are working trying to be a part of society. leave them alone. they are doing their best to get on the right track the cops and the da's should leave them alone unless they continue to break the law then arrest them. and prosecute
Posted by: CMAG at June 11, 2007 01:15 AM
I recently had my first exposure to the county jail system in Orange County when one of my sons was arrested on a traffic violation which had gone to warrant. I was stunned to hear about the conditions at the jail. What's wrong with California? My son requires medication, which he was never given. Intake processing took hours. He witnessed an inmate, who apparently the guards had a problem with, have his cuffed arms pulled up by the guards until his hands touched his head. My son said you could actually hear something tearing or breaking. The inmate was asked "What happened? If you say you fell you can go to the infirmary. If we did it you go to a cell." It's my understanding that sheriffs are required to work in the jails for their first five years of service. Judging by what I heard, I shudder to think what we turn out on the streets after those five years. Everyone who is arrested is not a hardened criminal. And are these people not presumed innocent until proven guilty? My son's head was bashed against a wall by guards and there's no one to help. Is there a reform movement in place that I might become involved with?
Posted by: JH at June 11, 2007 05:25 PM
My daughter was taken to Orange County Women's Jail 06/16/2007 she was taken away hysterical, crying and pleading to me, her mother to help her. She is 19. I called the Jail that evening but "she hasn't been processed".
I called again at 7am the next morning concerned about her welfare and health. I was transferred to the medical area and was told she is "under observation".
Later that day at 1.20pm I again called the Jail. I gave her booking number and name to the female guard answering the phone and again asked after my daughters health condition. The guard told me "she is fine". I questioned how she could know that since she didn't enquire, she then told me she was on $20,000 bail, while munching on some food item through the phone. I told her Yes I am aware of that but could you please see if she was alright (I had called at 7am that morning etc).
The guard proceeded to tell me she is there and she was ok, again I asked to speak to someone in the medical area to confirm, she again repeated her earlier statement (refusing to enquire basically).
I told her we were Australian Citizens and would she like me to call the Australian Consulate, she told me to hold. After about 2 minutes she came back on the phone and stated, "she is under observation, you will have to call in a few hours when the nurse is back".
Astounded, I sked why I could not speak to the nurse myself, she told me she "has stepped out and will be back in 2, 3 or 4 hours I can call back then" Then she hung the phone up in my ear.
This person should not be working in the Jail system!! My YOUNG 19 year old (yeah some adult huh?) is most probably lying on a bed (strapped, tied, knocked out??) who would ever know!
California Jails lock these young people up, family members are not informed nor do they take next of kin information off the inmates. I am so disgusted. And I would think that if anybody cares to find out who was on duty at 1.20pm on Sunday 06/17/2007 that person should be disciplined or fired.
The country states they want to "rehabilitate" drug users and not incarcerate, how can politicians care when the very people put into direct care employment don't give a damn.
I called the Australian consulate in Australia. Let's hope I get some help and information any concerned parents deserves!
Posted by: Leslie Elliott at June 17, 2007 02:55 PM
Update: the consulate called me and then the Jail. No luck on the first attempt but managed to be told Privacy Laws prevented Jailers from telling the Consulate specific information regarding my daughter except, any inmate held under "observation" is on SUICIDE WATCH, how comforting.
Inmates in medical unit are not permitted visitor/s at all.
Can someone tell me if arrestees are required to fill out a personal information form where they can list any person/family member as "guardian"/"next of Kin"? Where is the outside support while going through the stages of "due process"??
Teens/young adults caught up in drug addiction, (not sellers, manufacturers,) Users are still treated as filthy criminal garbage. These kids need psychiatric help and care, not rough treatment to be shut away from a loved one in their time of "rock bottom".
This is my childs first offense, full-time rehab in my opinion is the ONLY answer. I will endeavour to take her back home overseas for proper care breaking this vicious drug cycle.
Sorry, my heart breaks, she's been my flesh for 19 years and now she is just a booking number.
Posted by: Leslie at June 17, 2007 09:42 PM
I would like to more about the situation of the releasing of the inmates that are incarcerrated on all of the California Prisons especailly the Wasco, California prison and when do you think this will take place. This year 2007 or for the next year 2008
Posted by: Gina Hunter at July 2, 2007 02:01 PM
I would like to more about the situation of the releasing of the inmates that are incarcerrated on all of the California Prisons especailly the Wasco, California prison and when do you think this will take place. This year 2007 or for the next year 2008
Posted by: Gina Hunter at July 2, 2007 02:01 PM
I would like to know when all non-violent offenders are going to be released and sent to rehabilitation. Secondly, when is California going to keep a closer look on drug rehab companies whom don't monitor their clients.
Posted by: Paul at November 5, 2007 03:58 AM
What happens when prop 36 is not even offered on the table to someone who needs it? Is our system only offering this program to specific people? I was told it was only applicable to the federal court systems. Is this true?
Posted by: yolanda at February 12, 2008 02:44 PM
Sorry, comments are temporarily disabled. We're doing a bit of server maintenance on the commenting area. We'll be back up and running shortly. Thank you for your patience.
Get Email Updates
Want the California Progress Report by email? Once a week, we'll send you the latest and greatest headlines.
© 2008 California Progress Report Our copyright and fair use policy.
Powered by Mandate Media. Logo design by Jane Norling.
RSS 