Republicans in Congress are taking aim at last summer's crime bill, trying to strip away the prevention measures, which they label "social pork." But some of the programs they want to kill are the first ever to actually deal with the root cause of most crime--addiction.

Two programs, in particular, authorize $1.4 billion for mandatory drug and alcohol treatment of first-time offenders and prison inmates.

Opponents argue that we shouldn't spend tax money on treatment for criminals, or they insist the best way to prevent crime is to build more prisons and lock people up longer. But the best way to prevent crime is to treat the disease of addiction.

Rudy Velasquez of Houston, Texas, understands why. For 30 years, Velasquez was addicted to heroin, paying for his habit by dealing drugs and stealing cars. Four times he went to prison, twice for drug possession and twice for auto theft, serving a total of 12 years.

But each time he was released, he was shooting heroin within a day and stealing within a week. Drugs and crime were his daily life.

"Every time I broke the law it had something to do with drugs and alcohol," Velasquez said. "I didn't know anything else."

Then one day in 1986, Velasquez decided he'd had enough. He got help for his addiction and has stayed away from drugs and alcohol ever since. And when his drug and alcohol use stopped, so did his life of crime. Since that day, he has not broken the law once.

Velasquez's story is not unique. Numerous scientific studies conclude that drug and alcohol problems are involved in most crime. A federal study has shown that 80 percent of all prisoners under age 35 are drug abusers. Addiction is one of the main reasons many first-time criminals go on to become repeat offenders.

But addiction is treatable. And research has shown that treatment of addicted criminals reduces crime. The most extensive study, done by the Research Triangle Institute in North Carolina, showed a 40 percent decrease in crime over a one-year period.

In other words, last summer's crime bill has prevention programs that could cut repeat offenses almost in half.

Besides, addiction treatment saves money. Studies show that every $1 spent on treatment saves nearly $10 in costs related to crime, health care, accidents and worker productivity.

Velasquez's story also shows why punishment alone fails with the overwhelming number of drug addicts and alcoholics behind bars. He didn't like being locked up. But the disease of addiction was more powerful than his fear of prison.

Longer prison terms and three-strikes-and-you're-out, by themselves, are not the answer. Although such penalties can convince addicted criminals to get clean, mandatory drug treatment is both cheaper and more effective at reducing crime.

If Velasquez had been locked up for life after his third conviction, several years of crime would have been prevented. But we'd be paying to keep him in prison for decades. And we wouldn't have been preventing crime until after his third conviction.

On the other hand, suppose mandatory treatment existed in 1959, when Velasquez was first arrested. He could have been forced to take part in a treatment program, and a life of crime might have been avoided.

Could this have worked? Research says yes. People forced into treatment do as well as those who go voluntarily.

And look at what treatment has done for Velasquez. He used to be a predator and an economic burden on society. Thousands of tax dollars were spent to arrest, investigate and imprison him. Much more was lost in the hundreds of unsolved crimes he committed. But today, he benefits society. He runs his own business and pays taxes.

Most important, treatment means fewer Americans are victims of crime. In Velasquez's words: "...Imagine all those people I didn't steal from when I sobered up."

Multiply these benefits by the hundreds of thousands of drug- and alcohol-addicted criminals clogging our judicial system, and the need for mandatory treatment becomes clear.

Our jails and prisons are full of untreated addicts who, on release, will go right back to stealing, shooting, stabbing and selling drugs. But with last summer's crime bill, we can break the cycle of addiction and crime the first time these people are arrested.

Mandatory drug and alcohol treatment for addicted criminals is the best way to prevent crime. If Republicans really want to reduce crime in America, they should leave these prevention programs alone.



Jim Gogek is an editorial writer and columnist for the San Diego Union-Tribune. Ed Gogek, M.D., is a Phoenix psychiatrist who works in community mental health.