Friday, September 23, 2005

We spent HOW much? After five years of unprecedented runaway spending (that has almost made LBJ look fiscally conservative), a group of Republican House members apparently finally looked at our credit card statements. It all came to a boil when they were trying to decide which card still had enough credit limit left to buy the brand new Sim City: New Orleans. "Hey, who charged this $223 million bridge to nowhere?" asked one of them. "Kiss my ear," replied Don Young (disappointed that nobody actually nibbled his lobes, which are incredibly sensitive). So they decided to look at how they could cut back on the family expenses (You've all been there before -- no movie rentals this month, eliminate Sally's lunch money and let her trade sexual favors for food, etc.) So the Republican Study Committee has released a list of cuts (pdf) to help cover the cost. (Of course, these cuts wouldn't actually touch the current credit card balances or anything -- that would require some really tough choices.) I'm not going to comment on all the cuts they suggested -- most will not survive their own colleagues' self-interest. But let's check out the drug war entries: Level funding for Andean Counter-Drug Initiative [...] Savings: $125 million over 10 years Eliminate State Grants for Safe and Drug-Free Schools [...] States receive SDFSCA funding on the basis of their school-age population and number of poor children but statistics suggest programs are ineffective. In addition, studies show that schools are among the safest places in the country and relatively drug free. Savings: $4.8 billion over ten years Eliminate the Federal Anti-Drug Advertising [...] There is no solid evidence that media campaigns are effective in either preventing or reducing the use of illegal drugs. Savings: $1.3 billion over ten years Eliminate High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Program [...]Because many of its functions are duplicative, the Administration requested that its functions be transferred to the Department of Justice, and the program terminated. Savings: $3.2 billion over ten years OK, there are a couple of good cuts there, but that's just scratching the surface. Only level the funding for Andean Counter-Drug Initiative? Scrap it. And where's the cuts to the DEA's budget? Come on, guys -- you can't tell me that you're going to eliminate the Moon/Mars mission and Sesame Street, but keep arresting grandma for using marijuana to help deal with her chemo treatments in California? Does that make any sense at all? On the plus side, it's nice to see members of Congress in print point out that some of these programs that they suggested for the chopping block are "ineffective." We may want to remind them of that fact on occassion. 9:32:13 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []

Fact-checking the media Via News of the Weed: The Times Online (UK) published a reefer-madness article by Will Iredale and Holly Watt on Sunday: Mental problems soar among children using cannabis. The number of children treated for mental disorders caused by smoking cannabis has quadrupled since the government downgraded the legal status of the drug, according to a leading drug charity. Startling. But clearly nonsense to anyone who follows the facts. Yet at a time when there are prohibitionists in England trying hard to reverse the liberalization trend, such an article will fan flames in a major way. So what's this leading drug charity where the Times got their info? Addaction. The very next day, Addaction released this statement The Sunday Times published a story on September 18th under the heading "Mental Health Problems Soar Among Children Using Cannabis" by Will Iredale and Holly Watt that bore little relation to any information supplied by Addaction, and was, in our view, entirely misleading. The story has been so structured as to make a case about cannabis-related psychosis based on information the paper claims came from Addaction, but which did not come from the charity. In 2004-5 Addaction which collects data on numbers of young people seen in its youngaddaction services, saw 1,575 young people who came to Addaction for treatment for drug misuse. Addaction collected data on cannabis use. But Addaction is not a mental health charity and is not qualified to treat psychosis. Rosie Brocklehurst, Director of Communications at Addaction said: "The subject of cannabis-related psychosis is a very serious subject and the report in the Sunday Times made serious claims, based on no evidence supplied by us. We suspect the story was influenced by the Sunday Times wish to write a piece before the imminent deliberations by the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs. The ACMD will be reviewing the scientific evidence on cannabis use and misuse and will be making recommendations to the Government in the light of those deliberations." I haven't seen a correction yet at the Times. 12:17:50 AM |  drug policy | Links | permalink | comment []