A WORTHY INCONVENIENCE

No one likes to be inconvenienced. But sometimes inconvenience is
necessary to deal with a serious societal problem, and the scourge of
methamphetamine certainly counts as one of those.

The highly addictive drug, often manufactured in crude home labs, has
become a growing problem in rural America and recently in western
Wisconsin. Some studies show the drug, which produces an intense high,
can lead to irreversible brain damage and can make its users paranoid
and prone to violence.

One of the principal ingredients is pseudoephedrine, found in many
over-the-counter cold and allergy medications. So it makes sense to
put some reasonable restrictions on their sale, such as requiring that
they be kept behind the counter. The state Legislature did that
Tuesday, and Gov. Jim Doyle said he would sign the bill.

The measure passed unanimously in the Senate and 92-6 in the Assembly.
And that, of course, means that Republicans and Democrats alike from
rural and urban areas - who usually have trouble agreeing on anything
these days - realized that trying to keep pseudoephedrine out of the
hands of criminals who would misuse it is worth inconveniencing the
majority of law-abiding people with cold and allergy symptoms who would not.

The Legislature obviously believes, and we agree, that the new
restrictions are not out of line.

For instance, the requirement that medications containing
pseudoephedrine would have to be kept behind a pharmacist's counter
would not apply to products that contain pseudoephedrine in liquid
form, such as cough syrups or gel caps, because they are not as easily
used to make meth.

The other restrictions also seem reasonable, including restricting the
amount sold to one person in a 30-day period; requiring pharmacists to
keep a log book of sales and preventing retailers from selling
products with the substance to those younger than 18.

Admittedly, one requirement is controversial because it would require
buyers to show a photo ID. Why, some people legitimately ask, should a
person have to show a photo ID to get cold medication in Wisconsin but
not to vote?

Well, there is a fundamental difference. While Americans have a
constitutional right to vote, they do not have a constitutional right
to certain medications, such as those containing pseudoephedrine. The
access to that and other medications is carefully regulated by the
Food and Drug Administration, while states regulate pharmacies.

No one is being denied the right to these medications; their access is
simply being regulated for what is being seen as the larger public
good.

Since Oklahoma adopted similar restrictions, it saw a huge drop in meth
labs. As a spokesman for the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous
Drugs told the Journal Sentinel: "The only people who are really
inconvenienced are meth cooks who need 600 to 1,000 pills to cook an
ounce."

The restrictions are not a cure-all. Law enforcement also must be
given the resources to track down those who produce and market meth
and prosecute them vigorously.