Pubdate: Sat, 08 Feb 2014
Source: Buffalo News (NY)
Copyright: 2014 The Buffalo News
Contact: http://drugsense.org/url/GXIzebQL
Website: http://www.buffalonews.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/61
Author: Froma Harrop, Creators Syndicate
Note: This column also appeared in the Detroit News, 
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v14/n128/a10.html and the Seattle 
Times, http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v14/n127/a03.html

CLASS WAR ON DRUG USERS

Philip Seymour Hoffman's death at the end of a heroin needle again
spotlights the dangers of a poisonous drug. And so did the Vermont
governor's plea last month to confront the "fullblown heroin crisis"
plaguing his rural state.

His population is far poorer and more isolated than an Oscar-winning
actor in New York's Greenwich Village. But though drug overdoses are
democratic in choosing victims, the War on Drugs is anything but.

Every year, billions of dollars pour down the War on Drugs drain, and
the drugs are cheaper and easier to find than ever. The war enriches
dealers by constricting the supply while turning addicts into
criminals afraid to publicly confront their drug use.

Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin wants to use the moment of arrest as an
opportunity to steer drug users into treatment instead of prison. He
wants to treat addiction as the medical problem it is.

That approach costs far less. Jailing someone in Vermont for a week
costs $1,120. A week at a state drug treatment center costs $123.

Our less than compassionate conservatives can't get this in their
head. With some noble exceptions, Republicans remain intent on
treating drug users as reprobates, especially if they are poor.

Note the reasoning of Trey Radel, the Florida tea party Republican
recently convicted for cocaine possession. Resign in disgrace? Not
him; he had a "disease." Join the half-million Americans in prison for
drug violations? Never considered. (Radel eventually gave in to
pressure and quit the House seat.)

Not long before, Radel had joined fellow Republicans in a vote
requiring food stamp applicants to pass drug tests before receiving
benefits. Some Democrats asked why they didn't demand drug tests for
recipients of federal oil subsidies or farm insurance. Sadly, we know
the answer.

So continues a non-compassionate tradition of making life harder for
those already having it hard. Two years ago, for example, Rep. Jack
Kingston, R-Ga., proposed forcing states to drugscreen applicants for
unemployment insurance.

In 1998, then-Rep. Mark Souder, R-Ind., pushed through an amendment to
the Higher Education Act that denied federal aid to any student having
committed a drug offense. A Souder spokesman explained, "American
taxpayers should not be subsidizing the educations of convicted drug
dealers or drug users."

Oddly, rapists, armed robbers and even murderers who had done their
time qualified for college aid. The law was later modified to punish
only those who committed drug offenses while in college.

Of course, the drug-offending children of rich parents were not
affected, because they didn't need student aid. They were also less
likely to get caught and, if they did, could afford better lawyers.

The War on Drugs is above all a Class War on Drug Users. Conceding
this ugly reality is the first step in recovery toward a fair drug
policy - and one that might do some good.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jo-D