Compiled by Drug Policy Alliance. 2002.
By White House estimates, 57 percent of people who need drug treatment do not receive it (1), in spite of its proven superior cost effectiveness over criminal justice approaches in reducing drug abuse and related social costs.
In 1999, the New Mexico Corrections Department housed 5,127 inmates (not including city and county jails). Eighty-seven percent of state inmates were diagnosed with substance misuse disorders. (2)
- Former Office of National Drug Control Policy Director Barry McCaffrey stated, "(A)pproximately five million drug users needed immediate treatment in 1998 while only 2.1 million received it. Limited funding is a major factor in the availability of treatment." (3)
- The National Treatment Improvement Evaluation Study (NTIES) found that with treatment, drug selling decreased by 78%, shoplifting declined by almost 82%, and assaults declined by 78%. Furthermore, there was a 64% decrease in arrests for any crime, and the percentage of people who largely supported themselves through illegal activity dropped by nearly half, decreasing by 48%. (4)
- A study by the RAND Corporation found that every additional dollar invested in substance abuse treatment saves taxpayers $7.46 in societal costs (crime, violence, loss of productivity, etc.) The study also found that additional domestic law enforcement efforts cost 15 times as much as treatment to achieve the same reduction in societal costs. (5)
- The same study found that treatment is 10 times more cost effective than interdiction in reducing the societal costs of cocaine. Also in regards to cocaine, the study found: (6)
|
For every additional
$1.00 spent on:
Source-country control
Interdiction
Domestic enforcement
Treatment
|
Societal benefits are:
A LOSS of 85 cents
A LOSS of 68 cents
A LOSS of 48 cents
A GAIN of $7.56
|
- In 1996, voters in Arizona passed an initiative providing that non-violent drug offenders be sentenced to probation rather than prison. At the end of the first year of implementation, Arizona's Supreme Court issued a report finding that Arizona taxpayers had saved $2.6 million in one year and that 77.5 percent of drug possession probationers who had received treatment tested negative for drug use after the program. (7)
- In November of 2000, Californians overwhelmingly passed a voter initiative, Proposition 36, which requires that first and second time non-violent drug offenders be sentenced to probation instead of incarceration. Treatment is made available to those on probation. According to the state Legislative Analyst's Office, it is estimated that the new law will save the state $250 million a year in incarceration costs, save local governments $40 million a year in operations costs, and will create a one-time savings of up to $550 million in prison construction costs.
NOTES:
1. National Drug Control Policy Strategy Report 2000, Office of National Drug Control Policy.
2. "Getting Free Behind Walls: Comprehensive Addiction Treatment", New Mexico Corrections Department, September, 2000.
3. Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey, USA Ret., Director, ONDCP, Final Remarks, American Methadone Treatment Association Conference, San Francisco, April 12, 2000.
4. Center for Substance Abuse and Treatment, National Treatment Improvement Evaluation Study 1997 Highlights
5. Rydell, C.P. & Everingham, S.S., Controlling Cocaine, Prepared for the Office of National Drug Control Policy and the United States Army, Santa Monica, Drug Policy Research Center, RAND Corporation, 1994, p. xvi.
6. Rydell, C.P. & Everingham, S.S., Controlling Cocaine, Prepared for the Office of National Drug Control Policy and the United States Army, Santa Monica, Drug Policy Research Center, RAND Corporation, 1994, p. xvii.
7. State of Arizona Supreme Court, Drug Treatment and Education Fund: Implementation Full Year Report: Fiscal Year 1997-1998, 1999.
|
