GOVERNOR'S MIXED-UP MESSAGE

As Gov. Davis ponders vetoing a state OK of local needle exchange programs,
I wish he'd look at his own logic and recognize its obvious flaw.

Fatal flaw.

According to Davis' spokesman, Michael Bustamante, the governor is inclined
toward a veto because he "believes there are other ways to address AIDS
transmission and drug use without sending a mixed message to California
youth with state-sanctioned needle exchanges."

Never mind that every medical and social services expert in the field of
HIV transmission — the people who actually work with intravenous drug users
every day have testified repeatedly to the urgency and efficacy of needle
exchange programs.

Never mind that six separate federally funded studies have found that
needle exchange programs not only decrease HIV transmission, they do it
without causing drug use to rise.

And — strange though it seems for a governor so enamored of public opinion
polls — never mind that a majority of adults in all regions of the state
who were polled by the Field Institute support needle exchange programs to
halt the spread of HIV and some strains of hepatitis.

Even if most Californians approve of the idea, and federal studies say it
works, and the people on the front lines of the war against HIV say it will
save lives, the governor doesn't want to send any "mixed messages" to kids.

If that sort of reasoning is sufficient to ignore the public and the
experts, then why don't we apply it to a whole passel of things that are
sanctioned by the state of California?

Like speed limits.

Aren't we sending mixed messages to our youth by allowing people to drive
70 mph on some freeways and only 50 on others? Or by simply allowing
anybody to drive 70 mph anywhere in the state?

Back when all highways were stuck with a mandated 55 mph maximum speed,
fatalities dropped markedly. By sanctioning the higher limit, isn't the
state telling youth that it doesn't care if more people die, so long as we
can all drive faster?

What about liquor laws?

The state says it's bad and wrong for a person who is 20 years, 11 months
and 3 weeks old to buy or consume alcohol. But add another week and let the
person turn 21, and the state says it's okey-dokey.

If that isn't a mixed and confusing message, what is?

Maybe the state shouldn't sanction alcohol consumption for anyone. All you
have to imbibe is enough to get a blood alcohol reading of .08 percent, and
you're considered legally drunk and unfit to operate a motor vehicle.

Depending on people's size, weight, age and metabolism, it might take
anywhere from one lite beer to three martinis to reach .08. Isn't that a
mixed and confusing message? Why don't we make it illegal to drive with any
alcohol in your blood?

It's a scary thought, but maybe Gov. Davis actually believes that millions
of kids and teens would look at San Rafael Assemblywoman Kerry Mazzoni's
needle exchange bill and conclude: "Gosh, I wasn't going to take drugs, but
the state says it's fine, so I'm going to shoot illegal, addictive
substances into my veins as soon as I can."

From what I know of kids, as soon as they think adults approve of a taboo
behavior — let alone the stodgy old state — the behavior suddenly doesn't
seem like such a cool idea.

More compelling, my experience also tells me that most kids aren't remotely
stupid enough to confuse a program that provides clean needles to people
already addicted to drugs with a state-sanctioned carte blanche for illegal
drug use.

Clean needles help prevent intravenous drug users from contracting HIV and
dying. That is an indisputable fact whose message is about as mixed and
confusing as tap water