THE 'RUSH' TO A SANE DRUG POLICY

Memo to Rush Limbaugh: Hey, Rush. We're counting on you, pal. Now that
you feel the hot breath of drug prosecutors on your neck, perhaps you
might speak out for enlightened treatment of nonviolent drug offenders.

News reports say you face an investigation for allegedly buying
thousands of tablets of the powerful painkiller OxyContin and other
highly addictive prescription drugs from an illegal ring in Florida
between 1998 and 2002.

You issued a three-sentence statement on your Web site saying that you
were ''unaware of any investigation by any authorities involving me''
and you promised to cooperate fully ''if my assistance is required in
the future.''

Well, you certainly deserve the same presumption of innocence as
anyone else and I wish you the best. The news accounts have said that
you're being investigated for the sort of nonviolent offense in which
thousands of addicts are caught, sometimes by accident, getting hooked
on painkillers they were taking for treatment of an ailment like that
which almost cost you your hearing.

Drug addiction is a disease. It respects no particular race, gender or
political leaning. For those who have addiction problems and haven't
hurt anybody else as a result, I think treatment will do them and the
rest of society a lot more good than throwing them into the slammer.

I'm not alone. Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the nonprofit
Drug Policy Alliance, said in a sympathetic news release regarding
reports of your drug troubles that ''drug misuse should be addressed
in a doctor's office, not a prison cell.''

The alliance, it is worth noting, showed the same sympathy to former
Drug Czar William J. Bennett, when he announced in May that he was
swearing off gambling. Bennett has always called for tough punitive
measures, even against low-level marijuana users. But as for his own
favorite addiction, he points out rather meekly that he never said
anything in public about gambling.

The alliance also supported Florida Gov. Jeb Bush's call for respect
and privacy regarding the arrest of his daughter, Noelle, for trying
to buy Xanax without a prescription in 2002.

Happily, the 26-year-old completed treatment in August this year and a
judge allowed her to go home. Unhappily, the same cannot be said for a
lot of nonviolent Florida drug offenders who have less money or
political power. Instead, the governor has cut drug treatment and drug
court budgets.

But, however your case turns out, I can't help but hope this
experience has a chastening effect on your drug views. On-line
searches reveal a Limbaugh who seems, uncharacteristically, to have
wavered on the drug issue between the libertarian and authoritarian
wings of the conservative movement.

Back on Oct. 5, 1995, you insisted ''if people are violating the law
by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be
convicted and they ought to be sent up.''

You also said, with tongue at least partly in cheek, that the
statistics which show blacks go to prison far more often than whites
for the same drug offenses only show that ''too many whites are
getting away with drug use.''

''The answer to this disparity,'' you said, ''is not to start letting
people out of jail . . . The answer is to go out and find the ones who
are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river,
too.''

Ah, yes. Those words may come back to haunt you.

However, Newsday columnist Ellis Henican and the pro-drug reform Media
Awareness Project's Web site (MAPinc.org.) cite a March 1998 radio
show in which you advocated legalization of addictive drugs the way we
regulate cigarettes and alcohol. ''License the Cali cartel,'' you
reportedly said. ''Make them taxpayers and then sue them. Sue them
left and right and then get control of the price and generate tax
revenue from it. Raise the price sky high and fund all sorts of other
wonderful social programs.''

Rush, if ever there was a time for you to speak out more (and I never
thought I would ever be saying that about you!), this could be it.