Want to escape prison? Say you're an addict

Saddled with a variety of seemingly intractable problems, California's criminal justice system is a deeply frustrating mess. Among the groups upset with this mess are those who think the state's initiative-driven tough-on-crime approach is overly punitive of drug offenders and should instead focus on their rehabilitation.

In 2000, these groups persuaded California voters to adopt Proposition 36, which gave most people convicted of drug possession three chances at rehabilitation before imprisonment.

The measure sounded humane and thoughtful, but it proved highly ineffective. A UCLA study found that more than a quarter of offenders never bothered to show up for rehab. Of those who did, nearly half didn't complete their programs.

Given this history, groups advocating changes in drug policies should have been very careful in crafting a follow-up measure. Instead, they've come up with Proposition 5 - the "Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act" - which also is sure to be gamed and abused by those it is meant to help.

The measure mandates increased state funding for treatment and rehabilitation programs for nonviolent drug offenders and parolees. Oversight, however, is inadequate at best.

And Proposition 5 also makes it more difficult to lock up offenders who violate probation or parole - requiring such vast changes that its net effect is to create a separate, much kinder criminal justice system for drug users.

Or for people who claim to be users. Consider the fact that under Proposition 5, a serial burglar or a con artist or anyone whose crimes are nonviolent could escape prison by claiming the crimes were committed to pay for drugs he is addicted to. This is absurd.

There is no question that California's criminal justice and prison policies are ripe for smart reform. Proposition 5 doesn't remotely qualify. We urge a No vote.