BASIC FREEDOMS THE NEXT VICTIM OF THE WAR ON DRUGS

IF the price of liberty is eternal vigilance, now is no time for
Americans to flinch.

In another effort to add firepower to the already substantial federal
arsenal aimed at reducing or eliminating the drug trade, Congress is
seriously considering passage of a law that would deliver a one-two
punch to basic freedom.

This desperate measure is called the Methamphetamine
Anti-Proliferation Act, and it has already passed through the Senate
unscathed. The House Judiciary Committee is already debating the bill,
and a full House vote is expected in June.

One provision of the act would institutionalize censorship when it
comes to any sort of discussion of controlled substances. Books and
magazines about how to, say, grow marijuana or the uses of marijuana
for medicinal purposes would be outlawed.

And, in a provision that goes far beyond anything the government has
yet to propose to control the Internet, the ban would extend to
cyberspace, banning links or pages that relate to substances that are
now illegal.

This provision is rife with problems, not the least of which is its
assault on the First Amendment, which prohibits government from making
any law that would cut off the free debate of issues public and private.

Under the provision, debate would effectively be quelled on the
efficacy of our drug-enforcement policies, along with advice for
drug-users and information that might help them.

In essence, this would throw the baby out with the bath
water.

Another provision, this one camouflaged under another heading in the
measure as written, would greatly expand the power of government
agents by allowing them to enter a private residence to conduct a
search without telling the owner or occupant about the raid until the
government gets good and ready. They would never have to tell the
owner about "intangible" items taken, such as things that had been
photographed or copied off a computer hard drive.

Under present law, federal agents can search a home with a warrant,
but they have to tell the owner what's up and what was taken in the
raid.

While this provision is included in the anti-meth legislation, it
would effectively expand the power of agents in every criminal search.

The new law so expands law-enforcement's authority at the expense of
individual rights that it's hard to fit it into our constitutional
framework at all, unless it is the intention of supporters simply to
do away with constitutional protections for a certain class of citizens.

One supporter of the bill in the House has justified these expanded
powers for law enforcement by saying that "anything we can do to win
the war on drugs is worth doing."

Anything?

Those Americans who value their freedoms might suggest otherwise.