U.S. - Deputy attorney general Rosenstein: op-ed against supervised injection sites

[S.J.B.]

Fight Drug Abuse, Don't Subsidize It
Rod J. Rosenstein
The New York Times
August 27th, 2018

Almost 64,000 Americans died of drug overdoses in 2016, a shocking 54 percent increase since 2012. Dangerous opioids such as heroin and fentanyl contributed to two-thirds of the deaths. This killer knows no geographic, socioeconomic or age limits. It strikes city dwellers and Midwestern farmers, Hollywood celebrities and homeless veterans, grandparents and teenagers.

Remarkably, law enforcement efforts actually declined while deaths were on the rise. Federal drug prosecutions fell by 23 percent from 2011 to 2016, and the median drug sentence doled out to drug traffickers decreased by 20 percent from 2009 to 2016.

The Trump administration is working to reverse those trends. Prosecutions of drug traffickers are on the rise, and the surge in overdose deaths is slowing.

Unfortunately, some cities and counties are considering sponsoring centers where drug users can abuse dangerous illegal drugs with government help. Advocates euphemistically call them "safe injection sites," but they are very dangerous and would only make the opioid crisis worse.

These centers would be modeled on those operating in Canada and some European countries. They invite visitors to use heroin, fentanyl and other deadly drugs without fear of arrest. The policy is "B.Y.O.D." -- bring your own drugs -- but staff members help people abuse drugs by providing needles and stand ready to resuscitate addicts who overdose.

Read the full story here.

 

[S.J.B.]

DOJ Promises 'Aggressive' Response to Lifesaving Supervised Injection Facilities
Jacob Sullum
Reason
August 28th, 2018

For anyone who was wondering how the Trump administration might respond to plans for supervised injection facilities (SIFs), which aim to reduce drug-related disease and death by offering a safe, sanitary, and medically monitored environment where people can inject illegal substances, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein makes it clear in a recent New York Times op-ed piece that the Justice Department is firmly opposed to the idea. What's not clear is why.

Rosenstein complains that local governments plan to "subsidize" SIFs, which he describes as "taxpayer-sponsored haven" for drug users. Given the billions of dollars that the government routinely squanders on anti-drug efforts that are not just ineffective but counterproductive, a strong argument can be made that harm reduction programs like SIFs are a far more efficient use of taxpayer money. But they need not involve any public expenditure. The SIFs under consideration in New York City, for instance, would be funded and run by nonprofit organizations. With that sort of arrangement, government's role is limited to getting out of the way.

Rosenstein says SIFs "are very dangerous and would only make the opioid crisis worse." Yet research has found that SIFs, which operate legally in 66 cities and 11 countries but are prohibited in the United States, help prevent fatal overdoses, control the spread of HIV and hepatitis C, reduce skin and soft tissue infections, and encourage enrollment in drug treatment.

A 2010 study estimated that Insite, a Vancouver SIF that opened in 2003, saves five times as much money as it costs. According to a 2016 cost-benefit analysis, a SIF in San Francisco would save $2.33 for every dollar spent on it. A 2017 summary by the Penn Wharton Public Policy Initiative concluded that "the effectiveness of SIFs is clear," which helps explain why the American Medical Association supports their legalization.

Read the full story here.

 

[Jabberwocky]

Glad to see you posted this SJP. I was shocked to read this the other day, but I guess it doesn’t really surprise me coming from this administration.

 

[LucidSDreamr]

No amount of statistics or facts will be read, let alone considered by the current administration. They are going to fight this tooth and nail.

 

[Captain.Heroin]

I hope Trump fires him and Sessions.