JUST TWO QUESTIONS

If your child became an adolescent or teenager in the past two years,
you can thank the Supreme Court and George W. Bush for the fact that
your child has now taken thousands of more tests than ever before.
Kids aren't just taking more written tests, although they are doing
that (from Kindergarten on up, "No Child Left Behind" means every
child tested within an inch of its life), they're also more than four
times as likely as they were two years ago to take a drug test.
(http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20060712/1a-lede12.art.htm)

In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that random testing of student
athletes and others in competitive extracurricular activities did not
violate the students' privacy rights, the Bush administration has
made testing middle- and high-school students a priority. In the
2005-06 school year, 373 public secondary schools got federal money
for testing, up from 79 schools two years ago. And Bush has asked
Congress to further increase the amount for drug testing, up to $15
million dollars in 2007. Some schools just test those involved in
athletics, or school clubs. Others, such as the Nettle Creek School
District in Indiana, want to randomly test all students.

Is any of this causing teenagers to uses less drugs? The results are
confidential, and it seems like a lot of money to spend for something
that no one knows if it works at all. Besides, even if teenagers are
using less drugs during school hours, testing kids, and then
"failing" those who test positive, is a pretty dumb way to get kids
to engage in less risky behavior.

Risky behavior, according to the New York Times and the Department of
Homeland Security, includes such things as going to the petting zoo
in Woodland, Alabama and attending the Apple and Pork Festival in
Clinton, Illinois. I could see how anything with the words Clinton
and Pork in it could get some people riled up, but the petting zoo
seems rather tame and the Mule Day Parade in Tennessee looks very
charming. I guess I'm confused by the logic. If the Times leaking the
story that the Feds are collecting bank records could get the Bush
administration all up in arms that we're giving something away to
terrorists, wouldn't leaking the location of the Apple and Pork
Festival be just as harmful, if not more so? The stories, point, of
course, is that the list needs to be updated and that, based on the
current target list, those red and amber alerts mean as little as you
suspected they did. Still, I think the real problem is that the Mule
Day Parade could get a lot more crowded this coming year. After all,
who wouldn't drive a ways for a chance to look at a genuine terrorist
target? Perhaps they can institute random drug testing at the
entrance to keep us all safe.

Rachel Neumann is Rights & Liberties (http://www.alternet.org/rights/
Editor at AlterNet.