THE CASE OF THE COKEHEAD MAYOR: WHY NOT ONE LAW FOR ALL?

Yesterday Mayor John M. Fabrizi of Bridgeport called a press
conference and cried.

He said he'd used cocaine while mayor.

He apologized to his friends and family, "to all the people of the
city," and maybe Lewis the Cat was on the list too.

Like the Steve Martin character of years ago who confessed he'd shot
his girlfriend, the mayor said he kind of blamed himself.

He also said he would not resign.

He said that, bottom line, he's been a good mayor.

And most observers who know something about it seem to agree that
Fabrizi has been a good mayor.

But is that what we are talking about here?

Say a 10th-grade history teacher gets busted for drugs.

Does he get to keep his job?

Even if he has done a great job at what he does?

You pick the example: Cop. Minister. Short-order cook. Let's say that
one of them used to use illegal drugs, but all along he was able to
do his work and do it well.

Does he get a pass?

How about a single mother?

Let's says she lives in a tough neighborhood in Bridgeport and is
poor and unemployed. She gets swept up in one of those big busts the
authorities like to conduct to show they are fighting the drug war.
(Mayors always applaud them.) And she gets arrested. Does she get
another chance?

No. She loses her kid and goes to jail. Or the UConn student who gets
busted in a raid?

Does he go to jail?

Probably not, but his career is ruined before he begins it.

Even if he says the obvious, which is that he is responsible for his
own stupid choices. Even if he says so on TV and weeps.

Which thing do we believe in? Second chances and treatment? Or the
"war on drugs" and destroying lives and jailing drug users?

Let's decide.

If it is OK for the mayor to be a functional user, why not anyone else?

Suppose a bus driver or airline pilot says, "Hey, man, my record is
impeccable. I have never had an accident. I just happen to use crack
instead of Budweiser on Friday nights."

Do we cut that guy a slackburger?

Well, at least, as one town employee in Bridgeport said, the mayor
brought this revelation out himself. That took guts.

Uh, no, he didn't.

There was an inadvertent release of an FBI document in which an
alleged drug dealer claimed his "associate" had a videotape of the
mayor using cocaine.

And then the Connecticut Post got hold of it.

U.S. Attorney Kevin O'Connor actually apologized to Fabrizi for the
accidental release.

O'Connor said last week that Fabrizi was not a target of the feds'
drug investigation.

Think he would do that for a black kid with a record in Bridgeport?
Sorry to embarrass you. We were actually after someone else. We'll be
moving along now.

The mayor said, "I will do everything, and I mean everything, I can
to redeem the respect and the support of you, the employees of the
city of Bridgeport, and of you, my friends, and of you, the great
people of the city of Bridgeport."

He added that he had put all this behind him.

Certainly he must hope that he has.

Look, Fabrizi seems like a decent guy.

And there but for the grace of whatever higher power protects or
bestows dumb luck go any of us.

But there are two issues here.

No. 1: Do actions have consequences?

We live in a time in which public officials and others of great power
(in the corporations, the media, the church) preach consequences for
those who are young or powerless but accept none for themselves. They
either say that bad things just happen and no one is really to blame
or, "I cried. Can we let this one go?"

The list is long: The head of GM drives the company into the ground
and gets a big bonus. Cardinal Law covers up child abuse and gets a
sweet sinecure in Rome. The head of the CIA and the national security
adviser say there are WMDs in Iraq, both are wrong, and one gets a
medal while the other gets a promotion.

Remember Lord Carrington? He showed us the way.

It's simple. You screw up, you have to pay. At least a little.

It's just too easy to apologize if there is no consequence.

That brings us to issue No 2: If we don't think drug use is criminal
for some people, why is it for others?

And if we don't really think recreational drug use is like theft or
arson, why don't we decriminalize it and stop jailing people for it?

Many of us think we should decriminalize.

The mayor is not on a par with predecessor Joe Ganim, who went to
jail for graft.

But let's have one system for all.

Either prosecute Mayor Fabrizi or let all the potheads, crack users,
and junkies out of the state's prisons and jails.