Editorial: Recriminalization bill offers a necessary start on addressing Oregon’s addiction crisis

Measure 110 hearing

The Joint Committee on Addiction and Community Safety Response holds a public hearing on Measure 110 in Salem on Feb. 8. A proposal that would recriminalize drug possession and call for counties to set up “deflection” programs to steer drug users to treatment would mark an important step in addressing the addiction crisis, the editorial board writes.Mark Graves/The Oregonian

Perhaps it’s the adrenaline-fueled focus that a short legislative session provides. Or maybe the motivation prompted by a possible ballot measure backed by public sentiment that Measure 110, the 2020 initiative that decriminalized drug possession, was a mistake.

Or maybe it’s just the grim reality that more and more Oregonians – 1,268 adults and children for the year ending September 2023 – are dying from fentanyl overdoses and that our drug crisis is only deepening.

Whatever the impetus, credit Senate Majority Leader Kate Lieber, D-Beaverton; Rep. Jason Kropf, D-Bend; and House Speaker Dan Rayfield, D-Corvallis for keeping their nerve amid intense pushback and successfully negotiating a framework for Oregon to responsibly and compassionately address the drug addiction crisis. The proposed changes to House Bill 4002 lay out a health-focused strategy for combining multiple opportunities for treatment with the structure of the criminal justice system – a departure from the all-carrot, no stick approach Oregon currently has. And while lawmakers should be prepared to make additional fixes in the 2025 session and beyond, they should turn the page on our drug decriminalization experiment now and support the new proposal.

As The Oregonian/OregonLive’s Noelle Crombie reported, the proposal recriminalizes possession of small amounts of street drugs as a new “unclassified” misdemeanor that carries a potential six months in jail. But it also calls on counties to set up “deflection” systems in which users are offered multiple opportunities for treatment – including prior to arrest – as an alternative to prosecution and the traditional criminal justice system. The idea is to emphasize a health response aimed at helping a user connect with services rather than a criminal response. The bill also calls for expungement of charges following completion of treatment.

If passed, the bill would, as previously planned, tighten state law to make it easier to prosecute drug dealers. And importantly, the proposal includes direction to the state’s Alcohol and Drug Policy Commission for developing a youth-specific strategy – a need that has gone ignored for too long.

Certainly, the bill has its weaknesses. Most notably, it would not mandate that counties adopt deflection programs, nor does it lay out how such programs should be structured. While counties have reportedly expressed their support for setting up deflection systems, the actual implementation will depend on the commitment – and competence – of elected officials, law enforcement, county leaders and others to follow through. But such a critical component of this plan should not vary by county lines or be vulnerable to change with each election. The long-term success of this approach will depend on the state and legislators exerting strong oversight over counties’ implementation, recommending models that show success and laying the foundation for making deflection programs mandatory across the state.

Critics warn that recriminalizing possession could further burden the justice system, which has for years been unable to ensure defense attorneys for those charged with criminal counts, despite $100 million in new money. But the state’s repeated failures to fix the lack of representation do not justify asking Oregonians to stick with continued failure on this public health and public safety issue. At the same time, counties should keep such practical concerns in mind and focus on providing meaningful outreach and pre-arrest deflection opportunities that limit people’s entry into the criminal justice system to begin with.

If the bill is passed, it won’t be an easy transition. Oregon is once again pioneering a different way of doing things. But the bill is a compromise that seeks to honor voters’ best intentions when they passed Measure 110 while recognizing the urgency needed to more effectively pressure drug users to seek help.

Lieber, Kropf and Rayfield have handed their fellow legislators an opportunity to help build a better way forward. Lawmakers should give them their support.

-The Oregonian/OregonLive Editorial Board


      
Oregonian editorials
Editorials reflect the collective opinion of The Oregonian/OregonLive editorial board, which operates independently of the newsroom. Members of the editorial board are Therese Bottomly, Laura Gunderson, Helen Jung and John Maher.
Members of the board meet regularly to determine our institutional stance on issues of the day. We publish editorials when we believe our unique perspective can lend clarity and influence an upcoming decision of great public interest. Editorials are opinion pieces and therefore different from news articles.
To respond to this editorial, submit an OpEd or a letter to the editor.
If you have questions about the opinion section, email Helen Jung, opinion editor, or call 503-294-7621.

If you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation. By using this site, you consent to our User Agreement and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.