Topeka ? Kansas prisons are becoming warehouses for those addicted to drugs and alcohol and society might be better off if they weren’t locked up.

That’s not some left-wing, soft-on-crime rhetoric. It’s the assessment of front-line workers in the drug war.

But how to fix this problem is at the heart of a fierce debate going on in the criminal justice community and Legislature.

Some prosecutors and judges are telling lawmakers to approve a bill that would give certain drug offenders treatment for substance abuse rather than jail time.

But other prosecutors, such as Douglas County Dist. Atty. Christine Kenney, oppose the legislation, saying there are details within the bill that would allow repeat drug offenders to avoid prison.

“Everyone is entitled to a second chance, but I don’t think you’re entitled to a fifth, eighth or 10th chance,” Kenney said.

Aside from the budget, legislative leaders agree that Senate Bill 123 is probably the most important measure under consideration by the 2003 Legislature.

‘Broken’ criminal system

In a rare joint caucus of the Senate last week, Shawnee County District Judge Eric Rosen, a supporter of the bill, told lawmakers that nearly 90 percent of the criminal cases before him are in some form drug-related, a percentage similar to Douglas County’s, officials said.

“What we are dealing with are addicts, and we are not beginning to touch the problem at all,” Rosen said. “What we are doing now is simply broken.”

Rosen and Johnson County Dist. Atty. Paul Morrison, who both serve on a commission that studies sentencing guidelines, described a state criminal justice system where a person arrested for possession of drugs is sent to prison or placed on probation without treatment.

¢ Download Senate Bill 123 (pdf)¢ Download the Supplemental Note for SB 123 (pdf)

That starts an escalating process that often ends tragically — a person is in and out of jail, violating probation and committing new offenses to support his or her drug habit, they said.

“There isn’t anyone who hates dope more than me,” said Morrison, who added that the current form of punishment was not helping society.

Some drug treatment is available, but it is too short, not diverse enough to handle the different problems of addiction, and not available for most offenders because of budget constraints, Morrison and Rosen said.

“It’s like telling a person with cancer, you need chemotherapy, but we’re only going to give you a week’s worth,” Rosen said.

Under Senate Bill 123, people convicted of drug possession could be given mandatory drug treatment for as long as 18 months.

Cost-effective?

During 2002, 1,571 offenders were sentenced in Kansas for drug possession, according to a bill analysis. Of that number, 731 received prison sentences, while the others were placed under various forms of supervision. Under the new bill, 1,255 of those offenders would have been placed in mandatory treatment.

Aside from the policy aspect of trying to transform drug offenders into productive citizens, supporters of the bill also are pointing to the bottom line — treatment costs less than building and operating a new prison, they say.

The state prison system is at capacity and the bill would free up 240 prison beds.

“There are tremendous savings with Senate Bill 123,” said Sen. John Vratil, R-Leawood, the bill’s sponsor.

But some lawmakers are skeptical.

They’ve been burned before on recommendations to go easy on lesser offenders and they questioned whether the current effort was being driven by what’s good policy or what’s inexpensive.

State Sen. Robert Tyson, R-Parker, asked if a person arrested repeatedly for drug possession could continue to avoid prison time. The answer was yes.

Some reservations

That is what troubles Kenney, the Douglas County district attorney. With most crimes, repeat offenses fetch enhanced sentences. But that wouldn’t be true in most cases for drug possession under the proposed law.

“The bottom line is now drug sentences are mostly geared toward probation for first offenses and getting treatment, so if they do re-offend, you have something held over their heads,” she said.

Sen. Karin Brownlee, R-Olathe, questioned the cost savings being pitched. One written explanation of the bill provided by the bill’s supporters said the costs of the drug treatment program would be paid by the offender. When Brownlee asked about that, Vratil said that would almost never happen.

One provision that would have made the changes in the law apply to inmates already in prison will be taken out of the bill, according to Vratil. With that change, Gov. Kathleen Sebelius has said she would support the bill. Kansas Atty. Gen. Phill Kline opposes the legislation.

“This bill eliminates sanctions, and treatment without sanctions does not work,” Kline said.

State Sen. Mark Buhler, R-Lawrence, said he supported the bill with the change.

“The system we have now probably isn’t working. This is an attempt to see if we can limit jail space,” Buhler said.

Buhler said he was influenced greatly by Morrison’s comments.

“He’s about as avid a prosecutor as there is,” Buhler said.