REAL TROUBLE GETS LITTLE ATTENTION

Florida's presidential vote-counting debacle no doubt was cause for
scornful talk and laughter in anti-American parts of the world. The supreme
insult, perhaps, was Fidel Castro offering to send observers to watch the
recounting and help keep it "honest."

All this, of course, could be attributed to envy and or jealousy. Those who
delighted in this nation's difficulty in choosing a president know that the
United States still offers a way of life and a governmental system they'd
trade theirs for in an instant.

This does not mean that the "Land of the Free" is without problems. In this
respect, we would say that last year's presidential election was not nearly
as embarrassing as the little things those living in Third World countries
never even hear about.

One of those things has been happening in Tulia, Texas, a rural community
of about 5,000 in the Lone Star State's northernmost "Panhandle" area. It
all started in 1997 when a Tulia High School straight-A student filed a
lawsuit claiming the district was violating his constitutional rights.

It was because the school district enacted a policy requiring all junior
and senior high students to submit to drug testing IF they chose to
participate in extracurricular activities. In this case, the activity was
the National Honor Society.

While the absurdity of turning "innocent until proven guilty" into vice
versa should be obvious, the idea that a person who otherwise qualifies for
an "honor society" should have to urinate in a cup as a membership
requirement has a distinct irony. Of course, the rule did not apply just to
academic activities, but also to sports; it's just that the testing of
athletes has become common in professional quarters, so maybe this was
simply a "start 'em off early and get 'em used to it" offensive.

Regardless, the concept of randomly testing all except the students who
choose to do nothing extracurricular (which could also be called "special")
was recently found to be offensive by a U.S. district judge. She ruled that
"mandatory random suspicionless drug testing" violates the Fourth
Amendment, the one that supposedly provides protection from unreasonable
search and seizure.

We find no problem with the judge's ruling, however, there may be some
further reason to overturn the Tulia school policy - and other such
senseless governmental activity - under Amendment Five, which says you
cannot be forced to be a "witness against" yourself. This constitutional
right specifically applies in criminal cases, but what could be more
criminal than to be treated as one before any crime has been provably
committed?

In any respect, the Tulia school board unanimously voted to appeal the
judge's ruling. Apparently its members see nothing wrong in forcing about
80 percent of the district's students in grades 7-12 to stand trial by
urinalysis. (We wonder if the board members have been tested?)

In terms of sheer logic, though, it would be fairer to test every student,
especially when making any sort of distinction that would create inequality
now is a major sin. But, even that would not make it right.

Setting up a system where everyone is made to be equally unequal comes
nowhere close to what the Founding Fathers envisioned. Instead, the
American Way was and is supposed to be one where worth is accorded to the
individual and respect is given to his or her right to be left alone if no
provable harm is being generated.

A student who scores at the highest level and wants to participate with
other honor students is causing no harm to anyone. To be forced to commit
bodily testimony to prove that he or she is violating no governmental
policy sounds more like something that would be happening in Cuba than in
the U.S.

And, that's no laughing matter.