TESTING NO 'SILVER BULLET'

It's such a facile solution - drug testing. That's not to deny that drugs -
hard drugs like heroin - are becoming a problem at earlier and earlier ages.
But for White House drug czar John Walters to call random school drug
testing ''a silver bullet'' and ''a tool that will make a difference'' is
simply mindless.

First, of course, there is the cost. An addiction expert interviewed by the
Herald said that a routine urine test for drugs costs about $200. Saliva
testing (which really only works if a person has drugs in his system at that
moment) costs even more. So let's see now, where do we want to put our
scarce resources? Into counseling, treatment and rehab for kids who really
need it or into random testing of kids who may not have ingested anything
more harmful than a Snickers bar?

Second, assuming drug-addicted students actually show up for school - and
that's a really, really big assumption - they are often obvious to a
well-trained teacher. Then what? If, as Walters insists, ''It's not about
finding and punishing children. . . It's about identifying those that have a
problem.''

We repeat, and then. . .?

Student athletes and others involved in extracurricular activities have
often been subjected to random testing for both drugs and alcohol (and, by
the way, does that get a ''pass'' under Walter's proposal?). That makes
sense because the ''carrot'' of being allowed to play or perform is so
obvious.

Walters' ''plan'' - and we use the word loosely - makes for great headlines,
but it's far short of a solution which would require a real investment on
the treatment side. Without that Walters' ''silver bullet'' looks more like
a blank.