EDITORIAL FLAWED

As a longtime reader, I'm continually surprised at the paper's
unquestioning acceptance of DEA claims, and especially the El Paso Times'
gung-ho editorial support of our failed drug war.

According to a recent article/press release, the DEA wants more resources
for drug interdiction, and the Times heartily endorsed the idea.

The fact is that all government bureaucracies want additional resources,
all the time, but it's a newspaper's job to ask questions and critically
examine the facts. How about asking what these resources would be used for?
How much would they cost?

With more law enforcement now devoted (properly) to prevent and combat
terrorism, is it reasonable to expect more resources for the drug war?

How do we increase law enforcement at the border even more, without further
disrupting the flow of honest people and legitimate commerce?

El Paso merchants are reeling from the drop in cross-border shopping. And
most importantly, since many expensive years of drug interdiction have
barely changed the price and availability of illegal drugs here, why should
we throw even more money down this same rat hole?

The Times and its editorial board owe readers and this community a more
serious examination of these issues.

Mark Mainwaring

West El Paso