Prop5-Julie Zanardi

Endorsed Vote: No Endorsement

This measure (1) expands drug treatment diversion programs for criminal offenders, (2) modifies parole supervision procedures and expands prison and parole rehabilitation programs, (3) allows inmates to earn additional time off their prison sentences for participation and performance in rehabilitation programs, (4) reduces certain penalties for marijuana possession, and (5) makes miscellaneous changes to state law related mainly to state administration of rehabilitation and parole programs for offenders. Each of these proposals is discussed separately below as well as their combined fiscal effects on the state and local governments.
* Allocates $460,000,000 annually to improve and expand treatment programs for persons convicted of drug and other offenses.
* Limits court authority to incarcerate offenders who commit certain drug crimes, break drug treatment rules or violate parole.
* Substantially shortens parole for certain drug offenses; increases parole for serious and violent felonies.
* Divides Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation authority between two Secretaries, one with six year fixed term and one serving at pleasure of Governor. Provides five year fixed terms for deputy secretaries.
* Creates 19 member board to direct parole and rehabilitation policy.

PRO's:
FIRST, Prop. 5 gives nonviolent youth with drug problems access to drug treatment.

SECOND, it reduces the number of nonviolent drug offenders going into prison by providing drug treatment programs with real accountability.

THIRD, it requires the prison system to provide rehabilitation to prisoners and parolees.

For at-risk youth, California now offers no drug treatment. Families have nowhere to turn.

Prop. 5 creates treatment options for young people with drug problems. They can be referred to treatment by family, school counselors, or physicians. Those caught with a small amount of marijuana will get early intervention programs. In this way, we can steer youth away from addiction and crime.

For nonviolent drug offenders, treatment works. Voter-approved Proposition 36 (2000) provided treatment, not jail, for nonviolent drug users. One-third completed treatment and became productive, tax-paying citizens. Since 2000, Prop. 36 has graduated 84,000 people and saved almost $2 billion.

Prop. 5 builds upon Prop. 36 and improves it. Prop. 5 offers greater accountability and better treatment for nonviolent offenders. People must pay a share of treatment costs. Judges can jail offenders who don’t comply with treatment, and give longer sentences to those who repeatedly break the rules.

For state prisons, Prop. 5 requires all offenders to serve their time and make restitution. After release, they’ll get help to re-integrate into society. Some will need education or job training, others drug treatment. Prop. 5 gives former inmates the chance to turn their lives around.

Prop. 5 holds nonviolent parolees accountable for minor parole violations with community sanctions, drug treatment, or jail time. For serious offenses they’ll be returned to state prison. Parolees with a history of violence, gang crimes, or sex offenses can be returned to prison for any parole violation.

Treating violent and nonviolent offenders differently is the smart fix for overcrowded prisons. Prop. 5 saves $2.5 billion within a few years, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst.

Prop. 5 makes sure that there will always be room for violent criminals in prison. It also toughens parole requirements for violent criminals

CON's:
Dumping 45,000 criminals out of our prisons and into our communities through early release and shortened parole will not “save” money in the prison system—but it will increase crime.

Why? Because according to official studies, those who “graduate” from Prop. 5-style programs in California actually commit new crimes at a higher rate than other released felons.

These aren’t harmless “non-violent” criminals; they are felons who will be back in our neighborhoods—early and unsupervised—and victimizing our families again.

Proposition 5 doesn’t help our youth.

In fact, it puts them at much greater risk by increasing the number of drug dealers returning to our communities every year.

Proposition 5 will massively increase costs to taxpayers.

This program will cost $1 billion yearly with built-in increases. In a budget crisis, we cannot afford to risk funding schools and other vital services to pay for two huge new bureaucracies and programs that are proven failures.

Proposition 5 will also increase costs to local taxpayers, triggering severe financial consequences and tax increases for many cash-strapped counties. More than 20 counties would have to build new jails, since they are already at capacity, yet proponents completely ignore the billions in new spending and taxes which Proposition 5 could impose on local taxpayers.

Proposition 5 isn’t real reform, it’s an expensive sham designed to let criminals go free sooner, with less supervision.

WHOS SUPPORTING THIS?
The 2007–08 Budget Act appropriated $100 million from the General Fund to the Substance Abuse Treatment Trust Fund (SATTF), which was initially created under Proposition 36 to support treatment programs and other allowable activities. This measure appropriates $150 million from the General Fund to the SATTF for the second half of 2008–09 and $460 million in 2009–10, increasing annually thereafter, adjusted for the cost of living and population. After monies are set aside for certain administrative and program costs, the measure designates 15 percent of the remainder for Track I programs, 60 percent for Track II programs, and 10 percent for Track III programs.

MY OPINION:
I believe there is nothing we can do that will reverse the drug problem in our country immeaditely but by taking steps closer to solving or helping the problem and not jus throwing these people that have real problems in jail will make a difference in the end. We are already spending a large amount of money on state prisons and pennitentries and they are completely overcrowded right now. We need to address the specific problem at hand and that is helping the prisoner with what is actually causing their problems, and in most cases it is drugs., A lot of people just hgave a drug problem, plain and simple. The crimes they usually comitt are just hgurting themselves, and i think if their not violent crimes towards other people then it simply means the person has a drug problem and needs help. Throwing a person in jail will make them sober for that period of time but right when they get out they will start up again because they havent learned ways to stop their addiction., classes, programs and help is what they need. Through experiences with friends and family that are drug addicts, i have seen what has and has not worked, and i support prop 5!

debra bowen

Endorsed Vote: No Endorsement

sec of state of CA, persuant to electiuons