A sampling of recent editorials from Colorado newspapers:
NATIONAL:
Aurora Sentinel, Dec. 27, on America’s ineffective tactics in the war on drugs:
Americans have bought themselves a trillion dollars worth of nothing over the past few decades.
An Associated Press story this week pointed out that the disastrously expensive and ineffective war on drugs has been one of the biggest losing battles in American history.
The story estimates that the country has thrown away an impossible amount of money in trying to keep drugs from being imported into the country, and to prevent Americans from using them, only to bolster a pricey criminal justice system that promises to cost U.S. taxpayers even more.
The story focused on Portugal, where the country was dealing with an overabundance of drug addicts. Portuguese lawmakers essentially decriminalized drug use and possession 10 years ago. Despite dire warnings by critics, there was no surge in drug use. In fact, there was a decrease in the number of teenagers and many others using drugs.
One of the most promising results of the experiment was that the number of drug-related HIV cases dropped 75 percent. But the most important change was that the bulk of drug-related cases moved from courts and jails, which are exorbitantly expensive to process, to treatment and rehab centers, where thousands more got off drugs for good, rather than moving their habits to prison cells at taxpayer expense.
Congress and state lawmakers should consider similar changes. Incarcerating drug users is a colossal waste of taxpayer money, clearly doing little to persuade a user to stop. Since the drug trade is like any other, governed by supply and demand, the threat of legal action has done little to curb Americans’ appetite for illegal, recreational drugs.
It doesn’t mean that the United States should just give up in an effort to persuade Americans to turn away from drugs to lead more healthy and productive lives, but what this country has done locally and nationally has been painfully expensive and blatantly ineffective. It’s past time to try something new.
Besides the misery we create for our own citizens, criminalizing drug supply and production has nearly destroyed some communities south of the border, where murderous gangs kill thousands each year as part of the illegal drug trade.
By treating drug use and trafficking like we do with alcohol, Americans could spend far more resources on drug education and treatment programs, which have provenly gone much further in reducing drug use and addiction.
It means a huge change in the perception of drug use and a great deal of courage in letting go of notions and stigmas that have done nothing to improve the safety of drug users or the rest of the community.
The time for those changes are now as new lawmakers meet to address the endless challenge of drug abuse.
Editorial:
———
The Denver Post, Dec. 23, on why U.S. attacks in Pakistan could have disastrous consequences:
News earlier this month that senior U.S. military commanders are pushing to send Special Operations ground forces into troubled tribal areas of Pakistan sent shock waves around the world.
And it prompted denials from NATO and Pentagon officials, who said there were no such plans.
We hope this was just a case of fed-up military leaders floating a trial balloon, because the U.S. is hardly in a position of opening what amounts to a new front in an already difficult and unpopular war.
Pakistan’s refusal to root out al-Qaeda militants in these sanctuaries is frustrating, no doubt, and threatens to undermine coalition gains in Afghanistan.
Attacks launched from that area across the border into Afghanistan are frequently blamed for the painstakingly slow progress in stabilizing Afghanistan. The Pakistanis, fickle allies at best, have resisted committing to a timetable for clearing the area of militant forces.
After The New York Times, citing unnamed sources, broke the story about the plan for ground raids, Pakistani officials expressed outrage.
“Pakistani forces are capable of handling the militant threat within our borders and no foreign forces are allowed or required to operate inside our sovereign territory,” Husain Haqqani, Pakistan’s ambassador to the U.S., told the Pakistani newspaper Dawn.
The Pakistani position is not a mystery. They are hedging their bets in harboring insurgents, trying to maintain ties with militant groups that might be in a position to give Pakistan some influence in Kabul once U.S. forces leave the region.
Their ultimate aim is to ensure that arch enemy India does not gain too much sway in Afghanistan.
The U.S. has a delicate balance to maintain between pressuring Pakistan to help and taking matters into its own hands.
American patience for gaining Pakistani cooperation is wearing thin. But launching ground attacks into Pakistan without its permission is a recipe for further destabilizing an already dangerously unsteady region.
Editorial:
STATE:
Canon City Daily Record, Dec. 27, on state governing officials trying to deliver smaller, more efficient government:
Let’s hope Colorado’s new governor can deliver a budget as well as he can deliver a line. At a meeting last week, he told Colorado press representatives that he wanted to deliver a “smaller, more effective, more efficient” government and a government that is “elegant.”
Gov.-elect John Hickenlooper will have a challenge to deliver a balanced budget, before even getting to the “elegant” part. While estimates change, in recent years they rarely have gone down, and the forecast so far predicts a $1.1 billion gap between revenues and costs. And this after billions in cuts in the past few years.
One man’s “elegant” may turn out to be an ox goring for the next man or woman.
Colorado’s budget situation hasn’t really changed. Economic circumstances have reduced income at a time when expenses brought on by the economic downturn have increased needs. Meanwhile, population has grown, roads have deteriorated, higher education has had to find ways to fund more of its own operations, prison populations have not decreased.
To balance the budget, the governor and the split Legislature will be forced to cut the size of government, make what remains more efficient, and probably do without services and programs that people have taken for granted.
Do we need as many institutions of higher learning as we currently have, while the schools that are producing economic return for the entire state go lacking? Should regions of the state be expected to pick up more cost through special districts for the institutions that largely provide a regional benefit?
Should the state not be looking for ways to reduce prison populations through alternative sentencing, instead of mandated sentencing?
Whether the results of Hickenlooper’s work and those of the Legislature turn out to elegant or not, we hope that, once state government is smaller and more efficient, elected officials come to see that strategies used to create efficiency also make sense for use during times of abundance.
In other words, once made smaller, keep it smaller. Many would consider that in and of itself to be quite elegant.
Editorial:
———
Loveland Daily Reporter-Herald, Dec. 28, on why redistricting of the state should be done by lawmakers:
The Colorado Constitution grants the state Legislature the power to divide the state into its congressional districts.
Paralyzed with partisan bickering, lawmakers failed at that job 10 years ago, leaving it to a Denver District judge to draw congressional lines. The Colorado Supreme Court upheld his decision.
With 2010 census numbers on the way, state lawmakers should see to it this time that they fulfill their constitutional duty.
And they will, if the plans of Senate President Brandon Shaffer and other leaders in the Statehouse are successful. The Longmont Democrat and others are creating a special committee—divided evenly between Democrats and Republicans and representing both houses—to help the Legislature redraw boundary lines.
The committee is expected to analyze the data, evaluate proposed maps, solicit public comments during visits to all seven congressional districts and make recommendations to the full Legislature by mid-April.
While the Legislature is not expected to be a rubber stamp, it should seriously consider the panel’s recommendations and not forget the intent behind its creation.
Redistricting should not be left to a judge. It should be the duty of the representatives who are sent to Denver to do such work.
Editorial:
