se who have previous convictions other than a non-violent drug charge are eliminated, except those that have no other convictions or jail time accrued in the five years after their release. Additionally anyone convicted of a non-drug crime in addition the possession would not be eligible. Would we be giving those who were convicted of a drug offense a free ride through the system? Opponents will suggest that this ties the hands of judges in putting offenders in jail. The facts are otherwise. If an offender is sentenced to complete a court-supervised drug treatment program under this measure, he would be subject to certain sanctions if the court determined that he or she was not responsive to treatment or had violated a condition of probation. The sanctions could include being moved to an alternative or more intensive form of drug treatment, revocation of probation, and incarceration in prison or jail. Additionally, an offender who had two or more times failed the drug treatment programs required under this measure and in some cases involving repeat drug-related violations, return to prison or jail would be mandatory. (Analysis by the Legislative Analyst) If the court’s drug treatment programs do not affect offenders; then they will serve jail time. Convictions and jail time would not only be a possibility for drug users, if a judge deems that drug treatment has failed, jail time is a requirement.Do our jails really have room to house non-violent drug users while being forced to release violent criminals? “As of June ’99, the California state prison system held a record 19,743 offenders, 12.2% of the entire population, for a simple drug possession.” (Offender Information, California Department of Corrections Data Analyst’s Unit, 1997.) Implementation of this measure would mean a direct impact on this statistic, “Between 10, 000 and 20,000 beds, currently used by non-violent drug offenders wi...
