Tuesday, January 31, 2006

SSDP's lawsuit gets more coverage

The UCLA Daily Bruin covered SSDP's lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Education.
Erik Cooke, an SSDP legislative director, said a state-by-state analysis of the impact of the Drug Provision is vital to inform legislators of the law's effect on constituents and for them to start paying a more particular interest in it.

"When we're in a meeting with legislators, they want to know how this is going to affect their constituents. By withholding this information, it is bad for our advocacy efforts to inform Congress. It limits Congress's ability to quantify how the law affects citizens across the country," Cooke said.

Makes you wonder what the federal government's true motivation for preventing SSDP from getting our hands on this information really is, doesn't it?

1 comment:

800 pound gorilla said...

It's quite likely that the Education department doesn't even bother to keep stats like those. The Health department doesn't keep stats on drug dependencies - because 99% of those have to do with chronic health problems using regulated, legal and "safer" pharmaceuticals [with HUGE profit margins because we are a drug obsessed culture].

The government only keeps stats on things that authority figures consider problems. They get plenty of money from pharmaceuticals so drug dependencies are not a problem. They spend plenty of money on drug prohibition and get plenty of money from the prison industrial complex. They get a lot of mileage from drug scares. Getting complaints from "druggies" who don't get government aid only makes them look good before their real constituents. And a lot of their real constituents have multiple drug dependencies like our current VP Dick Cheney. I have several links to him at my site.

Of course, the more people you actually know who lose out on student aid the more likely you are to not support this arbitrary demonization and stigmatization. Why do we stigmatize usage of some drugs and not others. My teenager has a drug dependency for ADD and asthma; the asthma dependency seems to be more socially acceptable. It was acceptable to mention that dependency but not the one for the learning problem. The bottom line on support for drug prohibition: it's about stigmatizing others for addictions and dependencies. Anyone who says different is lying. Admittedly it is mostly to themselves and all the talk is about phony issues.