Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
Massachusetts Question 8, Drug Treatment Trust Fund and Expanded Court-Monitored Treatment Programs Initiative (2000)
| Massachusetts Question 8 | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
| Election date |
|
| Topic Criminal sentencing and Drug crime policy |
|
| Status |
|
| Type Indirect initiated state statute |
Origin |
Massachusetts Question 8 was on the ballot as an indirect initiated state statute in Massachusetts on November 7, 2000. It was defeated.
A “yes” vote supported creating a state Drug Treatment Trust Fund, funded by fines and forfeitures related to drug crimes, to expand drug treatment and prevention programs; expanding eligibility for court-monitored treatment as an alternative to prosecution; and changing forfeiture laws to raise the burden of proof, and redirect proceeds exclusively to treatment efforts. |
A “no” vote opposed creating a state Drug Treatment Trust Fund, funded by fines and forfeitures related to drug crimes, to expand drug treatment and prevention programs; expanding eligibility for court-monitored treatment as an alternative to prosecution; and changing forfeiture laws to raise the burden of proof, and redirect proceeds exclusively to treatment efforts. |
Election results
|
Massachusetts Question 8 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 1,215,806 | 47.76% | ||
|
|
1,329,899 | 52.24% | ||
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Question 8 was as follows:
| “ | Do you approve of a law summarized below, on which no vote was taken by the Senate or the House of Representatives before May 3, 2000? | ” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary for this measure was:
| “ |
This proposed law would create a state Drug Treatment Trust Fund, to be used, subject to appropriation by the state Legislature, solely for the treatment of drug-dependent persons. The Fund would include fines paid under the state's criminal drug laws: money forfeited because of its use in connection with drug crimes; and the proceeds from selling property forfeited because of its use in connection with drug crimes. The Fund would be administered by the state's Director of Drug Rehabilitation. Money in the Fund would be spent to increase, rather than replace, existing government funding for drug treatment programs. Those programs would be expanded to apply to persons who are at risk of becoming drug-dependent and to include drug abuse prevention through education. The proposed law would expand eligibility for the program under which a person charged with a drug crime may request a court finding that he is drug-dependent and would benefit from court-monitored treatment. If the court so finds, and the person then successfully completes a treatment program, the criminal charges are dismissed. The proposed law would allow requests to enter this program by persons who are at risk of becoming drug dependent and by persons charged with a first or second offense of manufacturing, distributing, or dispensing a controlled substance, or possessing a controlled substance with the intent to do any of those things, or trafficking 14 to 28 grams of cocaine. The proposed law would change the state law governing forfeiture of money and property used in connection with drug crimes. Land and buildings could not be forfeited if used in a manner that was merely incidental to a drug crime. The state would have to prove by clear and convincing evidence that money or property was subject to forfeiture, and the property owner could then try to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the money or property was legally exempt trom forfeiture All forfeited money, instead of being divided between the prosecuting agency and responsible police department and used for law enforcement purposes, would be put in the Fund. All forfeited property, instead of being so divided and used, would be sold and the proceeds put in the Fund. Records of all sales and local forfeiture activities would have to be kept and made public unless harm to law enforcement efforts would result. The state Inspector General could audit and investigate these activities. Any official who concealed or diverted any forfeited money or property could be punished by a fine of up to $1000, imprisonment for up to one year, or both. The proposed law states that if any of its parts were declared invalid, the rest of the law would remain in effect. | ” |
Full Text
The full text of this measure is available here.
Path to the ballot
An indirect initiated state statute is a citizen-initiated ballot measure that amends state statute. There are nine (9) states that allow citizens to initiate indirect state statutes.
While a direct initiative is placed on the ballot once supporters file the required number of valid signatures, an indirect initiative is first presented to the state legislature. Legislators have a certain number of days, depending on the state, to adopt the initiative into law. Should legislators take no action or reject the initiative, the initiative is put on the ballot for voters to decide.
In Massachusetts, the number of signatures required for an indirect initiated state statute is equal to 3% of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial election. Massachusetts also has a distribution requirement that requires no more than 25% of the certified signatures on any petition can come from a single county.
The state Legislature has until the first Wednesday of May in the election year to pass the statute. If the legislature does not pass the proposed statute, proponents must collect a second round of signatures equal to 0.5% of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial election. The Legislature also has the power to place an alternative measure alongside the proposed statute via a simple majority vote of the state legislature.
A simple majority vote is required for voter approval. However, the number of affirmative votes cast for the measure must be greater than 30% of the votes cast in the election.
See also
External links
Footnotes
 |
State of Massachusetts Boston (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
