Needle Exchange No, No

On May 5th, the Texas Attorney General issued an opinon on the new needle exchange program for Bexar County (i.e., San Antonio). Needless to say, it was not in favour.

In sum:  If, however, Bexar County elects to include such a needle- and syringe-exchange program as part of this overall disease-prevention program, the participants in that program appear to be subject to prosecution under the Texas Controlled Substances Act because the Legislature did not except them from such prosecution.

Burka, Texas Monthly Editor and blogger, says this became an issue when the Bexar Co. DA said she would prosecute anyone who participates in such a program. This program was an amendment to SB 10, but this issue began way back in 2007, during the Legislative session, when a couple of reactionaries in the House tried to kill the idea.

The Senate legislation was SB 308 by Doctor Bob Deuell (Republican). It passed the Senate, and then died in the House committee. Two House bills were filed. One by McClendon (who is from San Antonio) and the other by Solomon Ortiz, Jr. McClendon’s bill became the amendment to SB 10. There was quite a fight over this amendment with Betty Brown (or one of those other reactionary old biddies) leading the way.

The people standing in the way of good public policy are using this as a club to bash their political opponents or buttress their own flagging credentials of being “tough” on crime. Forget whether or not this program would actually work (it’s a freaking pilot program for goodness sakes; notice how these reactionaries have no problem with pilot programs for vouchers, etc., because they are politically popular and the education establishment is a viable whipping boy). A program that could save lives and save revenue isn’t expedient, because the direct beneficiary is a pariah – the druggie. (Just remember what recently happened to Rep. Jerry Madden in this year’s primary election).

Good policy should not take a back seat to political skulduggery and posturing for the voters.

The New Gateway Drug

I’ve always wondered when tobacco would take the place of marijuana as the “gateway drug,” and apparently it’s finally happened, but in Pakistan, not in the U.S. (yet):

Smoking leads to drug addiction: LGES chairman

Smoking is considered the root cause of drug usage, as cigarettes tend to tempt youngsters towards trying out drugs, said Lahore Garrison Educational System (LGES) chairman Major General (r) Nazakat Ali Khan on Tuesday.

This is indeed intriguing. Tobacco and alcohol are obviously the more logical gateway drugs, even though marijuana has been the labeled culprit for years. However, with the increasingly social intolerance of smoking - such as in places like Belmont, CA – tobacco has/will become the next victim of the war on drug mentality.

Belmont, CA has a new ordinance which would outlaw smoking not only in ostensably “public” places, such as restaurants and bars, but in private residences as well. Smoke travel in multi-unit apartments is something that could be handled through two avenues: 1) the market – complaints will lead property owners to install ventilation systems which remove the smoke or they will rent to people who do not smoke; 2) the city could require the installation of such ventilation systems in new apartment buildings or when renovations are done on existing apartment buildings. Both of these options address the issue without invading the privacy of the renter.

Regulating the life of the individual can only go so far, and should only go so far as he interacts with the public and other individuals. It should not extend to his private behaviour within his personal space.

Bad Bills Parading as Good Policy

The Houston Chronicle is reporting that the Texas Senate has passed legislation which would make the legal age for purchasing cigarettes 19, rather than 18.

There were a few ignorant comments made by a couple of Senators with regards to the benefits of this legislation.

We’ll start with Senator Carlos Uresti, D-San Antonio:

“The further you can put this (legal age) off, there’s a much better chance that people will not start to smoke.”

Right Carlos, making the age 19 rather than 18 is going to ensure that fewer people smoke. What’s that? Is that a monkey flying out of my ass?

And then there’s Senator Jane Nelson, R- Lewisville:

She called the measure the “best bill of the session.”

This is the best bill of the session? The Lege is restoring cuts to CHIP, passing tougher sentencing on sex offenders, addressing border security, and addressing the crisis in the Texas Youth Commission, but this is the best bill of session? Give me a break. Hey Jane, if you believe that, you need to pull your head out, because you’re starting to swallow your own bullshit. We wouldn’t want you to choke.

Senator Uresti offered this comparison:

Uresti compared his proposal to the minimum drinking age of 21, a threshold he’d like to achieve for tobacco.

Had they done their homework, they would see that underage drinking has not fallen in response to increasing the legal age for alcohol consumption. From most reports I’ve seen, it’s actually increased. Rather than prohibitive policies, perhaps state and local governments should look into the reasons for teen drinking and address those issues.

And speaking of prohibition, the Lege is apparently attempting to stop people from “abusing” Salvia divinorum. I’ve tried this stuff. If there is anyone who is hard up enough for a high to use this shit, then we should probably just shoot them and put them out of their misery.

These legislators really need to get a life and focus on the real problems of this state.