In Our View

SUDAFED CRACKDOWN?

When you can't address the root of a problem, it is said, attack the symptoms.

Sometimes that's all that can be done, but those times are rare, and that
approach should always be the last resort. We are not to that point yet in
the war on methamphetamine, and Missouri lawmakers should reject a plan
that would restrict how retailers can sell over-the-counter decongestants
such as Sudafed.

State Rep. Rob Mayer of Dexter, a Republican, is sponsoring legislation
that would require retailers to put the medicines behind the sales counter
or within six feet of a cashier, or to electronically tag each box so an
alarm is sounded if the box is removed from the store. The proposal would
also limit purchases to two boxes of medicine at a time.

The idea sounds good. Meth labs are notoriously easy to set up, and the
dangerous drug, which induces a high similar to cocaine but is more
addictive, can be made with readily obtainable chemicals.

If law enforcement can't keep up with the producers, the reasoning goes,
snuff out the supplies. A reasonable, if faulty, approach.

The problem is that Mayer's plan, which seems to be gaining some attention
in Jefferson City, amounts to yet another unvoted cost to business, puts
another unfunded burden on law enforcement and punishes the innocent
allergy or cold sufferer.

Who would enforce the display and two-box-only rules? What local agency has
the time or person power to do this? And certainly the state, which is
still trying to come up with more than $1 billion to balance the budget,
can't afford to pick up the tab.

Retailers around the state are justifiably upset. They contend that the
rules would force them to set up their stores differently, and would add
costs in an already bad economic climate for things like training employees
and installing electronic tags.

The El Paso Intelligence Center's National Clandestine Laboratory Seizure
System reported 888 meth-lab seizures in Missouri from January 2002 through
Nov. 30, 2002. Missouri was second only to California, where 1,387 meth-lab
seizures were reported for the same time period.

The center's figures show 151 meth-making operations were seized in the
first 11 months of 2002 in Jasper County, 16 in McDonald County, 50 in
Barry County and three in Lawrence County.

No one needs to argue the depth and breadth of the meth problem. Just
reading the daily crime blotter in the Globe is enough for that.

But this plan will not go to the heart of the problem - users trapped in a
cycle of addiction - and will only add unnecessary burdens to local law
enforcement and small businesses. Lawmakers should reject the idea.