Voters in a few States have passed referenda aimed at diverting drug-possession offenders into community-based treatment in lieu of judicial supervision.

California's Proposition 36 and Arizona's Proposition 200 were each passed by approximately two-thirds of voters. These statutes require, among other things, that nonviolent offenders convicted of drug possession, drug use, or transportation for use be sentenced to probation with drug abuse treatment as a mandatory condition. Upon successful completion of treatment and substantial compliance with probation, the offender is entitled to have his or her arrest record and conviction record expunged. This would entitle the individual to truthfully respond on an employment application or similar document that he or she has not been arrested for a drug-related offense.

Many jurisdictions offer this form of diversion--sometimes called "Deferred Judgment" or "Probation Without Verdict"--to first- or second-time offenders charged with relatively minor crimes such as disturbing the peace, public intoxication, petty theft, or driving while intoxicated. However, Proposition 36 and Proposition 200 extend the opportunity, as a matter of right, to all nonviolent drug-possession offenders who are not currently charged with another felony or serious misdemeanor offense and who have not been convicted of or incarcerated for such an offense within the preceding 5 years. Moreover, Proposition 36 and Proposition 200 generally provide offenders with three chances to succeed in the program. If an offender violates a drug-related condition of probation or is charged with a new drug-possession offense, the statutes simply provide for a second and then a third opportunity at diversion unless, according to the statute, the State can make the difficult showing that the offender is a "danger to others" or is "unamenable to drug treatment."

A ballot initiative comparable to Propositions 36 and 200 was recently passed in the District of Columbia, and the Hawaii State Legislature recently enacted a similar law. Equivalent referenda were withdrawn from the 2002 elections in Florida and Michigan on technical, procedural grounds and are likely to be placed on the ballot again for the next elections. Kansas and several other State legislatures also are considering bills containing similar statutory provisions. Yet, despite their widespread and rapidly growing appeal, no reliable data are available on the efficacy of these types of diversionary programs in general or on specific initiatives such as Proposition 36 and Proposition 200.

Studies of Proposition 36 are currently under way in California. Various counties have been implementing Proposition 36 differently at the programmatic level. For instance, some counties are administering Proposition 36 through the existing drug court system using ongoing court hearings. Comparisons of client outcomes across different service models may reveal the best way to implement these types of initiatives.