Fifteen years ago, there were few drug courts in the country. The prevailing sentiment was to punish illegal drug offenders and thereby send a message that such a crime wouldn’t be tolerated.

That didn’t go so well. In 1992, one in five cases before Spokane Superior Court judges was drug-related, and often the perpetrators were familiar faces who couldn’t kick the habit even after being incarcerated.

A couple of years later, Spokane County began exploring an alternative way to combat drug use and to clear the courts for more serious crimes. Now the county’s drug court is among 1,621 nationwide. Kootenai County formed one in 1998.

Drug-court advocates had to overcome skeptics who said that treatment and rehabilitation had already proved to be a failed strategy in the 1970s. One example of a convert is Pierce County Superior Court Judge Bruce Cohoe, who was approached in 1994 about running a drug court.

“They came to me, and I said. ‘I don’t want to do drug court. I don’t want to be a social worker. I want to be the best judge I can be,’ ” Cohoe said in a recent article in the News Tribune of Tacoma. But Cohoe relented and now he counts his time on the drug court as the most worthwhile experience of his 18 years. He is retiring in January.

Spokane Superior Court Judge Tari Eitzen is also an enthusiastic promoter of drug courts. She’s run Spokane County’s for the past five years and will turn the reins over to Judge Linda Tompkins in January. On the 10th anniversary of the court, Eitzen told The Spokesman-Review, “In comparison with any other method of addressing felony offenders with addiction, it’s just tremendously more successful.”

It’s easy to see why drug courts have become so popular. There’s the emotional satisfaction of turning criminals into responsible citizens.

But the benefit is more far-reaching than that. The state Legislature commissioned a cost-benefit study of the state’s drug courts and the results were highly encouraging. They save $7.25 to $9.94 for every dollar spent. The savings come from reduced incarceration costs and from the avoided costs to victims because of the lower recidivism rate.

The carrot and stick approach works. Those selected to participate must confess to the charges. After that, they are immediately enrolled in an intensive drug treatment program. Enrollees are closely monitored and must take regular urinalysis tests. Backsliders land back in court in front of the same judge. If judges don’t see a good-faith effort, enrollees can be quickly sentenced and incarcerated.

Drug courts save tax dollars and turn ne’er-do-wells into better people. We applaud this successful criminal justice experiment.